Difference Between Police And Armed Forces

The main aim of security activities is to preserve the values of society against external and internal threats, preserve the peace and freedom of the people and to ensure the existence and smooth development of society (Bebler et al., 1999). Perception of threats is crucial since threats generate the functions of the two most important actors of the security system – the police and the armed forces. Traditionally, the police are expected to play the central role in policing that has a narrow law enforcement and crime control or crime repression focus (Greene, 2000). Police are therefore traditionally responsible for public order and safety maintenance, for law enforcement, for intervention in a variety of situations, for preventing, detecting,
Enloe (1990) also describes the main raison d’être of the armed forces as the defence of a nation-state from external threats. Other characteristics of the armed forces are the following:
• military personnel may not be concentrated in just one or two bases but they are unlikely to be scattered throughout the national territory;
• military units are relatively large, numbering in hundreds, not dozens of men;
• armed forces face adversaries who are likely to operate in large units as well and often at some distance which increases dependence on weaponry and makes suppression via “arrest” less likely;
• internally, armed forces are subject to organisational differentiation according to mission and technical orientation with the major boundaries being those between army, navy and air
It means that citizens will support both organisations as long as they met their needs, expectations, values and wishes (Jelušič, 1997). Functional imperative refers to the functional necessities of a society that ought to be met for its survival (Subberwal, 2009). In this regard, it is expected from the police to provide security, maintain public order, tackle crimes and help the citizens while armed forces must be successful in carrying out deterrence and combat tasks, if necessary. Successful execution of the functions of the police and armed forces (e.g. fulfilment of functional imperative) is not enough. Social imperative, which is all about the similar values, cultural norms and ideologies, must also be fulfilled (Jelušič, 1997). In other words, the more similar values and norms are shared among the society, the police and the armed forces, the more legitimate are the roles of both organisations in citizens’ eyes. Put it simply – functional imperative defines the scope of tasks and responsibilities and social imperative defines the more general role of both organisations in society. This requires from the citizens to (re)consider what they want and expect from these organisations and what are they prepared to allow them, especially when implementation of “legitimate violence” is in