What is meant by use of force continuum, how can it be problematic, Essay

What is meant by use of force continuum, how can it be problematic, and what is the general structure and function of the dynamic resistance response model - Essay Example ce continuum helps both law enforcement officials and the people to know about the extent to which law provides permission to the authorities to use force as a mean to know the truth in interrogation process. Use of force continuum is different in different countries based on the differences in the functioning of criminal justice system. Use of force continuum may become problematic when the law enforcement officials cross the limits in using this law. Some officials misuse their power in the name of this law to torture the suspect. The dynamic resistance response model helps law enforcement officials to use force judiciously based on the circumstances. The official should not use force if the accused or the criminal is ready to obey his instructions. â€Å"Within the constitutional parameters established by the Court, most agencies require officers to adhere to more restrictive use of force policies, which, in fact, have not entirely eliminated the controversy surrounding officer citizen encounters as evidenced by continued allegations of misuse of force† (FBI Law enforcement bulletin, 2007, p.16). For example, drink driving is common in many of the countries. When the police stop such cars, some drivers may not come out automatically. The police can use force if the driver continues to stick with his decision to stay inside the car. To conclude, use of force continuum & dynamic resistance response model provide guidelines to the law enforcement officials and the people with respect to the use of force by the law enforcement officers in certain

Research Project Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words - 1

Research Project - Essay Example This was a consideration since the human tendency to judge others work and performance created a lot of problems related to the motivation, ethics, legal ruling etc. at workplaces (Cannell and Wood, 1992). To ensure that the appraisal systems were just, lawful, fair and accurate, performance appraisal was introduced. The process was linked to the material outcomes, i.e. if an employee’s performance is to less than ideal then there would be a cut in pay, however if the performance was better than the ideal level set by the supervisor, then there would be a rise in pay. In 1950’s United States observed the usefulness of appraisal as a tool for motivation and development. This model was now being gradually recognised and the general model of performance appraisal started on from that time (Strebler, M. T., Thompson, M. and Heron, P., 1997). The birth of performance related pay was somewhere in 1980s, when many employers felt it was a great solution to improve performance and enthusiastically embraced the idea. It was then that businesses wanted to move from the service related pay progression to a more result oriented form of pay. Businesses wanted to ensure that the business objectives were met by setting performance goals for employees (Dervon, M. G., 1990). This however did not last for a very long time. In 1990s, employers felt the need to have a more improvised form of the theory as the efficiency of the theory was now being challenged by a lot of scholars and businesses. It was noted during the 90s that the scheme had failed to deliver the expected results and businesses were now looking to develop a better revised approach of performance related pay (Dowling, B. and Richardson, R., 1997). However in the current situation the definition of employee contribution is not only dependent on the output i.e. the end results achieved but also depends on the inputs by the employee i.e. what the employee is willing to contribute to the business. In