should the government provide police?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by billwald, Apr 10, 2010.

  1. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just read a story in The Economist citing a study in GB that money spent for private police protection was 5 times (?) more efficient than the money spent on public policing. Their observation was that the primary cost savings was in wages and benefits.

    I suspect that in the US the same cost savings would hold true. But Sir Bobby Peel invented the Metro Police because at that time it was an efficient use of public funds. What changed?

    30 years ago I read that in the US more money is spent on private security measures that the total of all government police agencies and I suspect that is still true.

    Say local and county police agencies were cancelled. The real estate tax rate around here would drop maybe 25% if the jail was included. Could the jail be included? How would it effect the operation of the court system? How would the neighborhoods change?
     
  2. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,549
    Likes Received:
    212
    What are you replacing the local and county police with? Or would they simply transfer to a "federal" designation?
     
  3. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Replacing them with Brinks guards et alia whom the local citizens would hire to protect them. The rich would hire the best and the poor people would get the Mafia. Middle class would have their militia.
     
  4. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,549
    Likes Received:
    212
    I need to go find that article. I'm curious about crime rates, especially in those areas where the private security is predominant.
     
  5. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Civilian law enforcement is a very legitimate function of local, state, and federal government. The bulk of it should be local. All able-bodied citizens should participate in the protection of their community under due regulation and oversight. The centralization of our civilian law enforcement should be carefully avoided. There are to many federal law enforcement agencies. The militarization of our law enforcement should also be carefully avoided. Local law enforcement should be part of and close to the community which it serves.
     
  6. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,549
    Likes Received:
    212
    Countries such as France and Italy have a mix: Military, local police, and national police.

    We've set up Afghanistan and Iraq to be similar; i.e., establishment of national police and military.

    Dragoon brings up an excellent caution, one that the founders and authors of the Constitution were exceedingly aware of: If the government controls all the armed forces (be they military, police or other), then the government can do whatever it wants.
     
  7. Nonsequitur

    Nonsequitur
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    637
    Likes Received:
    0
    "A government and it's agents are under no general duty to provide, public services such as police protection, to no individual citizen..."
    Warren vs District of Columbia (D.C. App. 1981)

    Look it up yourself.
    Your own government has declared it will not defend you.
     
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Makes good sense, doesn't it? How can it be otherwise?
     

Share This Page

Loading...