Answer to Question 1
There are two basic arguments against police acceptance of gratuities. First is the slippery slope argument, discussed earlier, which proposes that gratuities are the first step in police corruption. This argument holds that once gratuities are received, police officers' ethics are subverted and they are open to additional breaches of their integrity.
In addition, officers who accept minor gifts or gratuities are then obligated to provide the donors with some special service or accommodation. Furthermore, some propose that receiving a gratuity is wrong because officers are receiving rewards for services that, as a result of their employment, they are obligated to provide.
Withrow and Dailey proposed that the role of the giver and the role of the receiver should be examined. The role of the giver determines the level of corruptibility; in this model, the giver is either taking a position as a presenter, who offers a gift voluntarily without any expectation of a return from the receiver; a contributor, who furnishes something and expects something in return; or a capitulator, who involuntarily responds to the demands of the receiver. The role of the receiver of the gift is obviously very important as well in the model; the receiver can act as an acceptor, who receives the gift humbly and without any residual feelings of reciprocity; an expector, who looks forward to the gift and regards it as likely to be given, and will be annoyed by the absence of the gift; or a conqueror, who assumes total control over the exchange and influence over the giver.
Answer to Question 2
a
A mounted police officer in Poland
Interpreting Social and Emotional Context
A boy walks past a member of the unofficial “community police” in Cruz Grande, Guerrero, Mexico.
Region’s Culture in International Context
Region’s Culture in International Context
A police record search of 250 incoming Grade 10 at a Secondary School shows that 26 had been ...