Working in a police department takes special people; exceptional persons who are willing to be held to a higher standard than society places on the police profession. Police enter the lives of other people, sometimes welcome and sometimes not, and have, by virtue of their profession, considerable power and influence over the lives of others.

The actions we take may save a life, may mean someone's confinement and loss of freedom, may affect a person's financial status, may ease someone's pain, or may increase someone's anxiety. Police employees routinely process confidential information about people that could be shocking, embarrassing, or ruinous to personal reputation. The public trusts this information will be handled legally and with sensitivity. In addition, unlike other professions, the police are empowered to carry firearms and use force in necessary situations as interpreted by officers. We can enter people's homes, search their belongings, even take their children if we think the circumstances warrant.

No other occupation can so immediately and directly impact a person's life. Clearly, the breadth of police responsibility is enormous. But what about off-duty conduct? Do the same expectations of responsible conduct exist? Some might contend that what a person does with his or her own time is entirely the individual's business and should never be the concern of the department. This is essentially correct with one exception: that is, when the employee's conduct adversely affects the public's confidence in the department or the individual's capability of performing the job.

To that extent that individual's action betrays the public's confidence, the department loses credibility. A loss of credibility means a loss of effectiveness, and effectiveness is essential to the department's existence. Department reputation and credibility therefore become inextricably linked with individual reputation and credibility. We are all seen as police employees worthy of high respect and are committed to equally high standards.

For most of society, the administration of justice remains largely a mystery. Public "education" is left to movies, television, and newspapers. What influence the media has can only be balanced against the reality of those few contacts that individuals have with "real life" police. The extent to which these contacts conform to people's preconceptions serves to solidify or change their perspective. Therefore, it is imperative that we act in a manner consistent with those high standards the public has a right to expect.