You'll find that in this book the general term officer is used most often to define a person who enforces the law, but the term agent is also used. The use of these terms is not meant to minimize the work of, or exclude, anyone who is engaged in law enforcement at any level. It is merely used as a convenience here, referring to the broad group of officials who enforce laws, regardless of the moniker that is used to identify them.

Law enforcement organizations come with many names attached to them to help separate them from tax collectors, municipal planning departments, or the county extension service. Whether the agency is called a department, an agency, a division, an office, or a bureau, two common threads exist that define the character of those employed there: the first is that laws are enforced; the second is that members enforcing the law expose themselves to risks that are not associated with any other vocation or profession.

We should also be clear on what constitutes a law enforcement officer or agent. Obviously, enforcement of some portion of the full body of law is an integral part of the job. But what separates a law enforcement official from a bureaucrat who enforces the rules? The primary difference is jeopardy. Officers and agents face risk to their physical well-being when performing their duties, while bureaucrats do not. To combat those elements of risk and to lessen the routine threat posed by them, law enforcement officials are armed with equipment and weapons and trained to use them when the situation justifies the use of force. The weapons can be firearms, nightsticks, Taser® guns, or pepper spray, but they are all designed to reduce the risk that the agent faces while bringing a suspect to justice. So, our definition of a law enforcement officer must also include the provision of being armed or equipped and trained in the use of those arms or equipment.

Under no circumstances should anything contained in the aforementioned definition be perceived as being contingent upon gender. One of the few places where minority rights seem to have made significant inroads is the world of law enforcement. Women have assumed their rightful place alongside men and have performed equally well.

The same holds true for the rich ethnic diversity that is the very fabric of America. Race, national origin, religion, and personal persuasion are no longer the measures by which candidates are judged. Personal performance is the key.