Introduction
The general image of the police offers an overview of the public‟s perception of the police. Particular characteristics of the people, organization, or institution remain undifferentiated. Measures of the general image are useful because they provide a summary measure of the level of overall favorableness or support that the public holds for the police. The public image of the police is complex, making generalizations difficult. There is no single best measure of the police image. Many people in the 18–24 year age bracket were considerably more likely than older people to express negative views of police and to report dissatisfaction with their treatment by police. It is possible that their views will moderate as they get older. However, there is also a risk that public support for police might weaken over the longer term unless definite steps are taken to improve the relations between police and young people. Researchers examine general public perceptions of police behaviour and the complaints process. It deals with the public’s general perceptions of police behaviour and changes in the police ‘image’ in recent years, and then with issues relating to dissatisfaction with the respondents’ perceptions of, and experiences with, the complaints process. They explore the differences in the way particular demographic groups responded to the questions concerning police behavior and police ‘image’. The demographic factors reported on are age, gender and education. People were asked some questions designed to measure their tolerance of police misconduct. Most people agreed that ‘you will always get some corruption in the police service’. Many people agreed that ‘sometimes police need to break the rules to get the job done’.

Youngers were found to be less tolerant of police misconduct. * People aged 18–24 were one and a half times more likely than older people to disagree with the statement that police will sometimes need to break the rules in order to get their job done. * People aged 18–24 were over three times more likely than older respondents to disagree with the statement that there will always be some corruption in the police service.

The age of the respondent was found to be the most significant factor in determining public attitudes both to police behaviour and to the complaints process. In general, younger respondents (aged 18–24) had a more negative view of the police than did respondents aged 25 years and over. While respondents generally agree that most police behave well, this view was found to be less widely held among younger respondents. Expressed as an odds ratio, younger respondents were more than twice as likely as older respondents to report that they thought most police behave badly.8 Younger respondents were also almost three times more likely than older respondents to say they thought police behaviour had changed for the worse in the last few years.9 This is illustrated in figure 4. The figure also shows that respondents aged over 55 years were the group most likely to believe that police behaviour had changed for the better.

Figure 7 shows that the proportion of respondents who believed that police behaviour had changed for the better increased as the level of education of the respondent increased. Expressed as an odds ratio, the data show that respondents with tertiary education were just over one and a half times more likely than respondents without tertiary education to report that they thought police behaviour had changed for the better in the last few years. students with a tertiary education were around one and a half times more likely than respondents with no tertiary education to disagree with the proposition that police will sometimes need to break the rules in order to get the job done.

There were no significant differences between respondents of different educational backgrounds in relation to their dissatisfaction with the police in the last 12 months or in their perceptions of the complaints process. There was, however, some evidence that respondents with tertiary education had greater confidence in the complaints process.

The public image of the police is measured a number of different ways. Sometimes surveys ask about “local” police, police in “your neighborhood” or police in “your area,” while other surveys ask about the police as a general institution. The terminology used to gauge public support also varies widely, with questions asking about whether respondents “approve of” or “trust” the police, have “confidence in” or “respect for” the police, or whether they “support” or have “favorable” views of the police. What makes these terms “general” is that the criteria or standards of performance remain unspecified. They do not ask the public to focus on either police processes or outcomes. The person answering this question could in good conscience choose both, neither, or perhaps something else entirely. And without additional information, we are unable to determine how much weight the survey respondent gives to specific aspects of police performance. Such questions are like those that ask the public to indicate whether they approve of the job that the president of the United States is doing – without specifying any particular aspect of that job. Such questions are useful, however, in that they give the survey respondent an opportunity to offer a summary that takes all of those aspects that are relevant to his or her view into account, weighting each, at least implicitly, as he or she prefers.
Not surprisingly, the terminology used in public opinion polls seems to make a difference in measuring the general image of the police. Another important element to consider in public opinion polls is whether citizens are voicing an opinion about their own previous experiences with the police, those of their neighbors, friends or family members, or simply general impressions based on a number of sources, from television and the media to opinions shared within the subcultures in which they are immersed. With all these questions in mind, it is difficult to come to terms with what constitutes the “general image” of police.
Why is the “general image” of police worth measuring? There are a number of important reasons. First, an understanding of the general image of the police among citizens provides an important indicator of support for the institution among its constituents. Understanding how the public views the police is a crucial first step in improving relationships between the police and communities. This is why community surveys are a prominent component of the community policing movement. Similarly, measurements of the public image of the police can be compared. By producing such measures, agencies can learn whether their image is improving or declining over time, or whether they are held in higher or lower esteem by their citizens than police in other communities.
Second, the general image of the police may affect the sorts of behaviors by the public that greatly interest the police. These include supporting tax initiatives or referenda designed to enhance the resources of local police agencies, to participate in co-production activities like neighborhood watch, providing the police with information useful to solving crime or improving the quality of life in neighborhoods. Communities with a poor image of the police will be less likely to support and help the police do their jobs, and more likely to file complaints, launch civil suits, rebel against the police, and produce media problems. Whether there is indeed a strong relationship between these public behaviors and the overall image of the police is an untested, but certainly plausible, thesis.
Finally, there is a small but growing body of evidence that those who view the authority exercised against them as illegitimate are more likely to rebel against authority, or in the case of the police, violate the law. For instance, research has shown that while arrest deters spouse assault among some offenders, it leads others to become even more angry and defiant, which actually increases their recidivism rates. Other research has found that domestic violence arrestees who thought they were treated fairly by police were least likely to reoffend (Paternoster, et al., 1997). While much research remains to be done on the link between the perceived legitimacy of the police and crime rates, there is some evidence to suggest that as institutions like the police lose legitimacy, an increase in crime and rebellion against the police and other legal and political institutions might result (LaFree, 1998; Tyler, 1990).

Methodology
The previous three surveys consisted of samples of about 900 respondents. The sample size for the 1999 survey was increased to enable more detailed demographic comparisons to be made. Responses for all four surveys were weighted for age, gender and location to provide the most accurate possible representation of Queensland attitudes. However, initial analyses showed that these weighted responses did not differ significantly from the actual responses and so the unweight responses are provided in this report.

Research design is a blue print of a research where everything should have clear explanation about what to do in research and how it will be terminated. It includes Types of research, Area selection, Sampling selection, and Sample selection, Sources of data, Methods of data collection, Data processing and Analysis to ensure the maximum output of the study.
3.1-Types of Research
This research study should be a Qualitative Research. It has included data based information in it that will ensure more reliability and validity.
3.2-Field Selection:
This is a qualitative research. Dhaka city is selected as the field of the study. Here, there is an Acid Survival Foundation, Ain o Salish Kendra, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Service Trust, Bangladesh women lawyer Association, Bangladesh Rural advancement Committee as well as some other institutions who deal with the acid survivals. So I can easily collect data from these institution and get sufficient information about them. So, I select Dhaka city as my field.

3.3-Population Selection:
The entire set of relevant units of respondents, or data is called population. When the data serving as the basis for generalizations is comprised of a subset of the population is called a sample. Here all the acid victims in our country are my population of the study.

3.4-Sample Selection: Sample selection is the most important task in research. In case of acid throwing, sample is not available. It is very difficult to find out the sample. So I use purposive non-probability sampling. And in this case I take help from ASF to select sample.

3.5-Data Collection Methods and Techniques:
Data collection is pain full in case of acid throwing. Respondent does not want to give the data. They are afraid for various factors. I collect data from both primary and secondary source. I collect my data by using case study method. I also collect my data by using an interview schedule through questionnaire and from secondary source.

3.6-Data Processing:
After the collection of data I edit the data. In the time of data collection I use questionnaire in interview schedule questionnaire. After collection the data, all finding data convert to coding. And through this coding I make this questionnaire as close-ended questionnaire.

3.7-Data Analysis:
I analyze my data through SPSS Program in computer. Here at first I did analysis my data by frequency distribution. To test the data I use Chi-squire test, and Cross tabulation.

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Findings
Most people believed the police behave well, although they also believed that some corruption in the service was inevitable. Compared to previous surveys, fewer people believed the QPS had a bad image.
Fewer people appeared to have confidence in the complaints process (compared to the 1995 survey), although confidence remained fairly high.

This generally favorable attitude towards the police and the complaints process was more widespread among people over 25 than young people (18 to 24). Despite being more dissatisfied with police, younger people were less likely to make an official complaint.

Compared with previous surveys, fewer people who said they felt like making an official complaint actually did so, usually directly to the QPS.

People without a tertiary education were more likely to believe that the chances of a police officer getting caught doing something corrupt were slim and that there was no point reporting corruption because nothing useful would be done about it.

Overall, fewer people believed that making a complaint against a police officer was likely to result in a reprisal.
General attitudes towards the police and the complaints process were much the same for men and women, although more men than women thought the police might need to break the rules to get the job done, and more women than men tended to think that the police did not have enough powers to do their job properly.

Much the same number of people as in the 1995 survey said they were dissatisfied with the behavior of a Queensland police officer within the last 12 months, and gave the same sorts of reasons: arrogance and a rude or unfriendly manner on the part of the police officer.

Many people who did make an official complaint said they were not told the outcome of that complaint. Generally, people were disappointed with how their complaint was handled.

The police consistently rank among the institutions and occupations in which the public expresses the highest confidence and trust. Most citizens are satisfied with police service in their own neighborhood, and this level of satisfaction appears to vary little from one urban jurisdiction to another.

Community policing may have some modest, long-term positive influence on citizens‟ satisfaction with police, but it is unlikely to produce a “quick fix.”