It has been suggested by some people that police officers should work in regions where they have knowledge of the local area. However, other people argue that this is not important or even undesirable. There are strong arguments on both sides, which will now be discussed.
Those who support recruiting officers from local communities argue that they need to understand the minutiae of the local communities. For example, police officers can show greater sensitivity if they are aware of local religious practices. Furthermore, local officers may work with informants to gain useful information, which can lead to stronger evidence at trials and act as a deterrent to crime. Moreover, local officers know the hidden and most dangerous areas, which makes it easier for them to deal with offenders. For example, it might be difficult to chase a robber through the streets unless the police are familiar with the area.
On the other hand, officers from the same community may be biased toward the people they grew up with. For example, in countries such as Mexico, we see a lot of bribery incidents. This may lead to higher corruption rates. In addition, in some cases, police officers may not enforce laws against people they know personally. This is unequitable toward law-abiding citizens.
In conclusion, it seems to me that local knowledge is not absolutely essential for police officials. Indeed, I agree with those who say that the risks of local recruitment outweigh the benefits, because of the danger of corruption and over-familiarity with potential offenders.