Abstract The purpose of this argumentative essay is to demonstrate that police brutality and corruption are correlated. Most discussions of police brutality link it to racism/racial bias. This argument further builds on the understanding of police brutality, demonstrating that it has a reciprocal relationship with police corruption. Specific areas of discussion include the concept of “noble cause” corruption, extortion, sexual gratification, intimidation, firearms, investigative processes, officer encouragement, politics and scapegoating. The document identifies important implications for key stakeholders. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Police Brutality and Police Corruption The recurrence of police brutality has attracted the attention of numerous stakeholders including legislators, politicians, and other key players in the criminal justice system. Such attention is warranted because police brutality is linked to numerous adverse outcomes, including death. Specifically, 1,147 people were killed by the police in 2017 (Mapping Police Violence, 2019). This number rose to 1,164 people in 2018. These statistics demonstrate that it is crucial for different stakeholders to develop a deeper understanding of the phenomenon to address it comprehensively. Undoubtedly, police brutality has been widely studied, but most of the research concerns the racial dimension. Most discussions of police brutality show that black men are victimized by police officers at higher rates than members of other races. For example, although blacks make up only 13% of the total population in America, they are three times more likely to be killed by police officers than members of other races, implying that the racial dimension of police brutality is justified. However, there is minimal focus on the correlation between police brutality and corruption. Therefore, the purpose of this argument is to demonstrate that police brutality goes beyond racial dynamics. Police brutality is practiced by individuals who are also involved in police corruption. In the context of this analysis, police brutality is defined as when a police officer unlawfully uses excessive force against civilians, while police corruption is when police officers break protocol for personal gain. By supporting the correlation between these two phenomena, stakeholders will be in a better position to develop and implement interventions aimed at mitigating both ills successfully. Police brutality is linked to police corruption in relation to concepts such as "noble cause" corruption, extortion, personal gain through sexual gratification, intimidation, firearms, investigations, encouragement of dishonest agents, politics and scapegoating. First, police brutality is linked to police corruption. corruption because the first is characterized as corruption for a "noble cause". Corruption for noble causes is corruption associated with noble causes and one of these causes is public safety. In many cases, police officers who commit brutal acts claim that their actions were noble because they aimed to protect members of the public. Whitehead (2018) states that police officers are required to protect members of the public from harm, as required by law. However, police officers can abuse this provisionand, in turn, engage in unjustified brutality that can be justified as a noble cause. Even in cases where victims pose no threat to the public, they may be brutalized as a manifestation of police corruption. Police officers may act under the assumption that individuals are dangerous or are handling weapons. In such cases, they may kill or brutalize victims without evidence of any danger to the public. In these cases, police officers can defend themselves by citing their noble acts of protecting the public. A related perspective is police officers' arguments regarding their own safety. Police officers may resort to brutality and claim that they were protecting themselves from harm, even though that may not be the case. In this case, “noble cause” corruption is characterized by deception regarding the perceived danger. Furthermore, Kleinig (2002) refers to the war on drugs and notes that police brutality is often associated with the war on drugs, although this may not be the case. In some contexts, drugs are planted on individuals who are brutalized by police officers. A good example is provided by Herman (2017) who presents a video of a police officer who is seen planting drugs and then finding them. In such a case, a police officer may resort to brutality and claim that he acted in such a way as to protect the public or contribute to the noble fight against drugs. Clearly, police brutality is partially supported by “noble cause” corruption among police officers. A closer look at corruption for “noble causes” reveals that perhaps some police officers want to be recognized as “heroes” even in situations where there are no heroic deeds to perform. Furthermore, police brutality and corruption are linked to each other because the former is used to promote extortion as a form of corruption. Police brutality undoubtedly inflicts pain on victims. On some occasions, police officers resort to brutality for the purpose of extortion. People may be forced to give money to police officers to prevent them from using excessive force on them. This is supported by Aras (2001) who recognizes that although police officers must fight crime, they may choose to participate in various forms of crime through extortion. For example, there are cases where police officers know drug traffickers. Instead of arresting them, police officers may use violence to commit extortion. In these representative cases, police brutality amounts to a form of corruption intended to facilitate the achievement of monetary gain. In addition to the above concepts, sexual violence is a unique form of police brutality associated with the corrupt attainment of sexual gratification for a personal purpose. I earn. It is noted that "a New York case proves to be a perfect example of how some police officers abuse the power given to them for their own sexual gratification." Two police officers were charged last week with sexually assaulting a young girl during a traffic stop for pills and cannabis.” This case illustrates how police corruption is used to facilitate police brutality in the form of sexual violence. Specifically, police officers have been mandated to serve members of the public, but they use their position to commit sexual violence. Interestingly, such officials further extend corruption by using the law to protect themselves from prosecution. In the current case, police officers denied the allegations of sexual abuse,but once the results of the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) test revealed that there had been sexual contact between them and the teenager, they argued that their sexual relationship was consensual. In a different case, two police officers traveled to Seattle to interview a woman who had been raped in New York, and one of the officers also attempted to rape the woman after becoming excessively drunk (Blanks, 2017). This second case also demonstrates police officers' use of the authority given to them to sexually exploit women. Clearly, police corruption serves as a tool that can be exploited by police officers who prey on defenseless victims and sexually assault them. Furthermore, police brutality is used to intimidate victims by limiting their opportunities to report police corruption. Brutality instills fear among individuals and can serve as a tool used to fuel further corruption by intimidating potential witnesses. According to the US Department of Justice (2019) police officers are involved in corruption cases at the investigative level. In such cases, brutality can be used to prevent victims from reporting corrupt agents. In other cases, detained people suffer “significant harm” from police officers during investigations. Corruption arises from police officers' pretense of acting in an official capacity. As a result, victims may not report brutal police officers for fear of further victimization by police officers who act on their “abilities” in a corrupt manner. Additionally, police officers can violate the constitution by obstructing justice with brutal force. Police officers may use guns and other weapons to prevent witnesses and victims from reporting their misconduct, to support the fabrication of information, or to conceal various forms of misconduct. Furthermore, police brutality is linked to police corruption in relation to firearms. In America, firearms play a major role in cases of police brutality. As a result, police brutality is closely associated with corruption related to firearms placed near or on victims of police brutality. Hafner (2019) supports this idea by noting that in some situations, police officers plant weapons near victims of brutality and then tell lies about the extent of danger posed by the victims or the crimes they committed/were about to commit. The specific reference refers to a case in Baltimore in which a police officer hit a man with a police vehicle. Afterwards, the police officer placed a gun near the injured man's body and asked witnesses to lie about what had happened. In this particular case, the police officer purposely ran over the man in question and framed him for gun possession (Hafner, 2019). This case demonstrates that police corruption can be used to facilitate brutality in relation to firearms ownership. In other situations, firearms are concealed. Such situations exemplify the association between corruption and police brutality. Firearms can be used to kill victims, but police officers can obstruct justice by failing to report incidents and simply disassociating themselves from them. It states that in many cases police departments are required to commit to voluntary reporting. This means that police shootings and other cases of brutality may go unreported, even intentionally, due to corruption (Sullivan, et al., 2019). In addition tothe above, police corruption perpetuates police brutality by negatively impacting investigations. Police brutality is a crime to a significant degree. The United States Department of Justice (2019) emphasizes that physical assault by one or more police officers is a crime. When a physical assault takes place, the victim may be subjected to excessive force by police officers. Such assaults may be experienced by victims while in custody, during arrest, or in other contexts (U.S. Department of Justice, 2019). Another form of brutality that is considered a crime is sexual misconduct. Examples of such crime have been listed above. The U.S. Department of Justice (2019) recognizes that police corruption can limit the scope of police brutality investigations. Police officers may interrupt investigations or interfere with evidence. Furthermore, police corruption increases police brutality by encouraging brutal police officers. It is stated that “Unfortunately, policies can work in favor of officers rather than citizens, even those who break the rules and allegedly harm civilians” (Blanks, 2017). This statement shows that police officers may be aware of the advantage they have in cases of brutality. While many approaches to addressing police violence have been suggested, current debates do not fully address an essential element of police violence and the broad barriers to accountability that are the use of force policies. These policies explain what is allowed to be used against civilians classified at different levels and/or types of force such as deadly force. These rules help train police, advise them on how to interact with their community, and help monitor how often force is used, as well as determine whether it is extreme or not. In the quote above, Obasogie and Newman (2017) suggest that laws regulating police behavior pave the way for police corruption and brutality. When police officers are trained to use brutal force, they easily use the law to support their actions and become bolder in doing so. This perspective is further supported by Panwala (2002) who presents a case study demonstrating how police corruption increases the boldness of other officers in the context of police brutality. Panwala (2002) cited the case of New York City police officers who tortured Abner Louima in the bathroom. The officers responded to questions about the brutality case by stating that they were not present or did not know what happened (Panwala, 2002). This particular case was handled in a delayed manner and its assessment revealed that the police officers acted courageously while carrying out their brutality, which suggests that they could have easily got away with the "heinous crime". Clearly, police officers who engage in police brutality are made bolder by their ability to successfully engage in corruption to some extent. An interesting perspective that links police brutality and police corruption is politics. Police brutality and corruption are tools used together to support negative politics. To understand this position in depth, it is critical to explore a brief history of American police brutality and, in turn, police corruption. It is claimed that the brutality was developed decades ago to develop the authoritarian nature of the police force. Eventually police brutality turned into a form of real corruption.