Let's privatise the police! Page 6

  • Page

    of 30 First / Last

  • LeoliansBro 7 Jun 2012 15:29:03 41,903 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Ha! Beat me to it Load, was about to caveat about defining 'success' in this case.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • LeoliansBro 7 Jun 2012 15:30:27 41,903 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    And also, the only problem I have with privatisation of the police is that it could lead to varying approaches / practices based on where you live.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Load_2.0 7 Jun 2012 15:32:00 18,234 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I find it weird that Canary Wharf had its own security force!
  • glaeken 7 Jun 2012 15:35:02 10,978 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    That took me a while to realise as their uniform is very close to a real police uniform at a brief glance. Which I guess is the intension.

    I would guess how they perform won't be a good indication of anything though in regard to privatisation as Canary Wharf must be a very low crime area.

    Edited by glaeken at 15:35:50 07-06-2012
  • Deleted user 7 June 2012 15:35:51
    Surely there are different approaches and practices based on where you live anyway? You don't have armed police walking down the high street in Southampton, but you do down Oxford Street in London, for example. Hampshire Constabulary had a big drive to heavily clamp down on speeding, whereas other constabularies didn't. So you're more likely to be prosecuted, rather than ticketed, for speeding in Hampshire, if caught. Unless you meant something else.
  • glaeken 7 Jun 2012 15:41:14 10,978 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The approach to policing in my area is once or twice a year I see a police car. There is a small police station in the local town but it closes at night. In fact I am not even sure its open every day. I have a feeling its only staffed a couple of days a week.

    I believe the main form of crime in my area is lawn mower theft. That is one crime I think a private force would be able to handle easily given all they have to do is send someone to listen to the victim and tell them of course they will make finding their missing mower a top priority. Which of course is a joke as I am sure by that time it will have been resprayed and will have been shipped out to the middle east.

    Edited by glaeken at 15:42:52 07-06-2012
  • mcmonkeyplc 7 Jun 2012 15:41:53 38,927 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Aargh. wrote:
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    Telecoms, Gas, Rail are not directly related to morality or justice.

    The police are. We will need to have air tight incentives for private firms not to fuck us over for profit. Cause if they fuck up lives are ruined.
    So they need to be run by a Government to have any sense of morals and there's no way of regulating them as a private company?
    "We will need to have air tight incetives for private firms not to fuck us over for profit"
    Let me translate that for you.

    It's possible but the regulations will have to very strict and very well thought out.

    The government as a body acting in the interest of it's population has the incentives nailed to make it work. A private company that exists to make profit does not need to take into consideration the population at large.

    The geeky term is they need to internalise externalaties and I don't trust private firms with morals. Profits don't give a fuck about morals or justice.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • LeoliansBro 7 Jun 2012 15:52:05 41,903 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    meme wrote:
    Surely there are different approaches and practices based on where you live anyway? You don't have armed police walking down the high street in Southampton, but you do down Oxford Street in London, for example. Hampshire Constabulary had a big drive to heavily clamp down on speeding, whereas other constabularies didn't. So you're more likely to be prosecuted, rather than ticketed, for speeding in Hampshire, if caught. Unless you meant something else.
    It's the idea that more individualism will be permitted that I was driving at. But you are right.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • MetalDog 7 Jun 2012 16:17:15 23,706 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I think less individualism will be permitted, in the real sense of the word. The current police constables have a lot of self-discretion available in how they approach things. I suspect private officers will be held to a much more manager-led 'business' system - more letter of the law and less spirit of the law.

    The police are there to protect lives and protect property - in that order. They're not there to turn a buck, please politicians or please shareholders.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 16:21:26 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    mcmonkeyplc wrote:
    The government as a body acting in the interest of it's population has the incentives nailed to make it work. A private company that exists to make profit does not need to take into consideration the population at large.
    Really? What about things like the expenses scandal?

    There is nothing inherently moral about the public sector, far from it. Anyone that has worked in the public sector in fact (as I have) will know that the comparative lack of accountability breeds immoral behaviour. People get away with stuff in the public sector that you'd never get away with in the private one. People have far less respect for tax payer's money than they do for money that if it were not wasted, could be going into their bonus or their wages.
  • Deleted user 7 June 2012 16:24:43
    I think it'd end up being less individualism and more elitism. I really can't remember the context or discussion that well, but several months back there was a discussion about something where private companies could effectively break the law by paying the fine they'd get in advance, or something. I may be totally misremembering that and talking shit, though.

    But yeah, privatisation of the police would lead more to a plutocracy than anything.
  • Deleted user 7 June 2012 16:27:21
    The argument that the public sector is some sort of bastion of morality and efficient at running anything is wholly baseless.

    Regulation for a private company need be no different to a public company, the only difference needs to be in how their performance, and success, is identified.
  • MetalDog 7 Jun 2012 16:45:42 23,706 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue that the public sector is free from corruption and stupidity. Neither is the private sector - there's no advantage either way with that argument.

    One thing we know for certain is that private companies are based on amoral economic factors. Public services - like the police and the NHS - are generally based on sociological principles.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 16:50:55 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    One thing we know for certain is that private companies are based on amoral economic factors.
    Hang on, what?
  • MetalDog 7 Jun 2012 16:54:04 23,706 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    The whole point of a private company is to generate profit, isn't it? Amoral - not immoral.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • disusedgenius 7 Jun 2012 16:54:55 5,147 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Aargh. wrote:
    So they need to be run by a Government to have any sense of morals and there's no way of regulating them as a private company?
    The issue's more with accountability - i.e. to voters rather than shareholders.
  • cianchristopher 7 Jun 2012 16:57:58 6,360 posts
    Seen 2 years ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    The whole point of a private company is to generate profit, isn't it? Amoral - not immoral.
    That's not always the whole point, no. It's one of the biggest factors, but not always the whole point.
  • glaeken 7 Jun 2012 16:59:57 10,978 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yeah the company I work for spends a lot of time feeding hungry dolphins.
  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 17:04:04 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    The whole point of a private company is to generate profit, isn't it? Amoral - not immoral.
    The whole point of both private and public companies is to provide services. Take the Post Office and Federal Express. Essentially the same thing, but one is public and one is private.

    The difference is the way they are funded. One with public money (taxes), the other has to actually function as a business, and that's where the profit generation comes in, but that isn't the point of it. It's just a necessity of how it works.

    And yes. That's where the problem with a nationalised police force is. How can a police force generate money? There may be a good answer to that question btw, I haven't done the reading.
  • mcmonkeyplc 7 Jun 2012 17:05:46 38,927 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    Aargh. wrote:
    So they need to be run by a Government to have any sense of morals and there's no way of regulating them as a private company?
    The issue's more with accountability - i.e. to voters rather than shareholders.
    Bingo!

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • disusedgenius 7 Jun 2012 17:08:34 5,147 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    The difference is the way they are funded. One with public money (taxes), the other has to actually function as a business, and that's where the profit generation comes in, but that isn't the point of it. It's just a necessity of how it works.
    It's a bit of a moot point though, no? If a service isn't profitable then a private company will just stop providing it - we've seen it in rural public transport and the Post Office and a couple more I can't quite think of. It's the way they're funded which can dictate the kinds of services they can provide.

    Edited by disusedgenius at 17:08:49 07-06-2012
  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 17:10:30 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    kalel wrote:
    The difference is the way they are funded. One with public money (taxes), the other has to actually function as a business, and that's where the profit generation comes in, but that isn't the point of it. It's just a necessity of how it works.
    It's a bit of a moot point though, no? If a service isn't profitable then a private company will just stop providing it - we've seen it in rural public transport and the Post Office and a couple more I can't quite think of. It's the way they're funded which can dictate the kinds of services they can provide.
    I'm just arguing against the idea that the public sector is moral whereas the private one is amoral.
  • disusedgenius 7 Jun 2012 17:14:05 5,147 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Ah, fair enough. Was thinking in terms of actions rather than ethics.
  • MetalDog 7 Jun 2012 17:16:01 23,706 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I don't think the public sector is necessarily moral - but I think it has more opportunity to be than the private sector because the basic drive behind a public service does not /have/ to be financially gainful to survive.

    How moral our public services are is largely up to us, I think. We have to fight politically to make them that way and keep them that way and it will be our own damn fault if we lose them because we couldn't be arsed, or we don't see anything wrong with making everything about money.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • mcmonkeyplc 7 Jun 2012 17:17:06 38,927 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Profit is amoral a Vote is not?

    I'm not sure what you're after. I don't know why you think the public sector is amoral. Yes it can be immoral as well but it's not supposed to be are you arguing that because of this the fact that profit is amoral is a moot point?

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • MetalDog 7 Jun 2012 17:22:42 23,706 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    @mcmonkeyplc
    I genuinely don't understand your question the way you've phrased it - sorry.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 17:24:07 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    I don't think the public sector is necessarily moral - but I think it has more opportunity to be than the private sector because the basic drive behind a public service does not /have/ to be financially gainful to survive.
    OK, I agree with that, or at least I agree that itís a good thing that something beneficial that is publically funded can continue to survive even if it isnít profitable. Not sure ďmoralĒ is quite the right word here, and I think thatís a slightly dangerous road to go down tbh. Makes the whole thing a bit emotive.

    I realise this is probably a very stupid question, but how exactly will this privatised police force generate income?

    Edited by kalel at 17:24:30 07-06-2012
  • whatfruit 7 Jun 2012 17:24:44 1,082 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @LeoliansBro U.S Prison privatasion is the number 1 example of how not to implement privatisation. Undertrained staff held, prisons at over 100% occupancy, little to no rehabilative programmes. Active lobbying by prison companies and victim groups to increase prison population to increase labour pool with companies making massive profits. Unedible food removing good time(CCA have done this).

    CCA recently won a contract in California to build a medium secuity facility with a contractual mandate that it remain at least 95% occupancy.
  • Inertia 7 Jun 2012 17:24:54 675 posts
    Seen 36 minutes ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Interestingly would they be allowed to strike if the police were privatized?
  • kalel 7 Jun 2012 17:25:39 84,037 posts
    Seen 51 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I think mcm is attempting to make a point against me btw. Failing abjectly sadly.
  • Page

    of 30 First / Last

Log in or register to reply