SOCIOLOGISTS TEND TO ASSUME THAT POLICE ROUTINELY VIOLATE THE LAW AND CITIZEN'S CIVIL RIGHTS. THEY CLAIM THAT CIVIL RIGHTS WOULD BE PRESERVED IF POLICE WOULD FOLLOW EXISTING LAW. HOWEVER, THOSE MAKING POLICE POLICY CLAIM MUCH OF THE LAW ACTUALLY HINDERS LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SEEK TO WIDEN POLICE POWERS. ALTHOUGH ARREST IS THEORETICALLY PERMISSIBLE ONLY FOR A SPECIFIED OFFENSE AND WITH A SPECIFIC CHARGE, VARIOUS EXISTING LAWS (SUCH AS BREACH OF THE PEACE) AND COURT SUPPORT ALLOW POLICE TO MAKE ARRESTS ALMOST AT WILL; THE LAW DOES NOT ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO STAND ON THEIR RIGHTS AGAINST ARBITRARY ARREST. FURTHER, SINCE COURT OFFICIALS TEND TO AUTOMATICALLY GIVE ARREST WARRANTS TO POLICE, THE SAFEGUARD OF WARRANTS IS EMPTY. MOREOVER, THE POOR OR HOMELESS ARE MORE OFTEN UNFAIRLY ARRESTED FOR TRIVIAL CAUSES AND DETAINED AFTER ARREST THAN RESPECTABLE CITIZENS. ARRESTING AND HOLDING PERSONS FOR TRIVIAL OFFENSES OR TO ENFORCE VAGUE LAWS ALSO GIVE POLICE WIDE POWERS TO ESTABLISH EVIDENCE FOR OTHER SUSPECTED OFFENSES OR TO INTERROGATE PERSONS UNTIL A CONFESSION IS FORCED. EXISTING LEGAL PROCEDURES ARE BIASED FOR PUBLIC INTEREST OVER PRIVATE INTEREST AND SUPPORT MANY QUESTIONABLE POLICE PRACTICES. BECAUSE LAWFUL ARREST AND DETENTION ARE DEFINED MORE BROADLY BY LEGAL PROCEDURE THAN THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGALITY SUGGESTS FURTHER RESEARCH IS NEEDED INTO THE RHETORIC AND PRACTICE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT TO CLARIFY FOR POLICE THE DUTIES THEY ARE EXPECTED TO PERFORM. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (PAP)