Printable View
In yet another episode in the crazy comedy that used to be known as the United Kingdom. I present.......
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...es/6072886.stmQuote:
Security guards protect police HQ
The Surrey police force has been branded as "crazy" for hiring security guards to protect its headquarters.
:wall: :bobby: :bobby2: :stunned: :sweatdrop: :freak: :baby: :disguise: :mad:
Look on the bright side IA , think of the money it saves .
Why bother wasting a highly paid constable who gets a huge benefits package by having them sitting at the side gate signing visitors cars in and out all day and night .
Get some muppet on minimum wage instead .:2thumbsup:
Actually I suspect the muppet gets paid more, by the hour.
Regardless it shows that Surrey Police cannot do their job. The purpose of the Police is to make private security irrelevant.
I see nothing wrong with it, why should the police waste time protecting themselves when they should be doing their job policing in the community - i honestly think its better use of trained police officers time
If it's cheaper, then I think it's a good diea. If it's more expensive, then the system should be scrapped, and the person responsible given duties more fitting to their 40W brain.
~:smoking:
In all honesty it's not a bad idea, alot of US military bases are guarded by private security firms. Even if it's more expensive it's still not a bad idea considering that it takes longer to train a police officer than a security guard and it allows police to focus on their jobs.
We have a similar system in UK bases. In fact the camps themselves are now owned by a third party. This sort of thing should be in-house, always. If the Police need private security to guard the station it means that either:Quote:
Originally Posted by mercian billman
They aren't able to protect themselves, because there aren't enough of them,
They can't be bothered,
Criminals would dare attack a Police station because the Police are useless and broken backed.
In fact all the above are true.
Which is exactly why they should guard their own stations.
Organizations can't be trusted to guard themselves.
Organizations can't be trusted...period.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
Anarchy NOW! Let's get organized.
It does rather admage their credantials: "we here to look after your house and family... but we can't even protect ourselves where there is the highest concentration of us"
~:smoking:
It may seem like that, but just because it appears that way doesn't make it so. Somebody has to guard the police station and normally an ordinary policeman would be required to do so, but if it's possible to hire a security guard and put that policeman out on the streets it allows the department to make better use of it's assets and makes it more efficient.
The only way this is not benificial is that it presents a bad image, but it's only bad if you don't know whats going on, it may also be more expensive but if a department can afford to do it, I don't see why they shouldn't.
I think it's a great idea, more time for the police to do important things.
Why do they not just hire additional policemen?
They have to pay some guy's monthly payment anyway, if they hire another company, they pay for the guy and the company, if they train a new guy, they pay only the guy and they can ensure he is up to the task.
Also here I have never seen any "guards" around police stations, the one guy at the entrance and a few colleagues talking to him or being in their bureaus seem to be more than enough.
They could also turn their police station into a bunker with machine guns and anti tank guns to keep the evil robbers out if they're so afraid.:dizzy2:
they belive that the police officers they have trained are more use policing the streets - very sensilble, why waste valuble skilled manpower when you can hire a seperate company to provide your simple protection.
Police are trained to patrol the streets and investigate crimes - they are not trained to guard buildings
Security guards on the other hand ARE trained to protect buildings
its a good move by the police so long as they dont use it as an excuse to lay off the police who currently guard the buildings
At first I went with the knee-jerk OMG!!11one!!!! reaction.
Then I realised that you don't need a highly trained and well paid police officer to do basic security work at the HQ. In fact to use an officer in this way is to waste resources.
I would prefer that the security guards were employed directly rather than contractors be used, for control and veting purposes more than anything. But as others have said, if it is cheaper to employ security guards than to use police officers and it isn't used as an excuse to lay people off then I see no problem.
I suspect the reasons for private security guards mirror those of the Pentagon going with 'defense contractors' instead of actual military for conducting interrogations. The police have to follow rules and give potential attackers all sorts of warnings and coddle them, respecting their human rights.
Private security are under no such restrictions. You try to screw with them, they only have to explain themselves to their contractor, who's sole interst is task-oriented... no 'respecting the rights of the criminal' crap for them.
Edit: Removed inaccurate representation of British police policy from another thread.
Efficiency should not really be an issue with services, unless it is a real problem. The Police are there to do a job. A large part of that job is image. Currently the Police and Criminal justice in general has a bad image. As a result Crime is actually rising. We have one of the highest crime rates in Europe and though we have the highest prison population per-head we have one of the lowest populations per crime.
Precisely because a Police Officer is a visable symbol of the Police' power and is highly trained they should be the only ones guarding the Police station. If a private security officer is less acountable that is another reason no to have him. The Police are acountable, anyone working with them must also be acountable.
As to those who say this is not a job the Police are trained for, well then who guards all the embassies and public buildings in London?
The Police should be administered, controlled and staffed exclusively by Police. The same should be true of the Army, the Hospitals and the Universities.
Outside managers and contractors usually cost more upfront and they don't understand the system, which creates problems, which further increases costs.
Where I am we have departments closing and Schools being amalgumated, meaning departments moving buildings and general confusion. I have personnally spent upwards of 20 minutes wandering around a building looking for the secretary.
If it wasn't for a bust of Hermes I probably never would have found my sodding department.
I look forward to Nurse Plod. :wink3:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Very funny.
Seriously though, middle management is bad enough before you put it outside the system.
Why waste the hired guys for guarding the bulding if they could just as well police the streets?:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurvy
thats the point :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
the hired guys arent trained to police the streets, while the police are
This i agree with, if the police's image was improved crime would drop - because people feel they are less liely to get away with it. However i think this is irrelevant to the guarding of police stationsQuote:
A large part of that job is image. Currently the Police and Criminal justice in general has a bad image. As a result Crime is actually rising.
- there is a large police presence at these places anyway, even if they arent standing around at the door
- peple like to see the police on the streets, this improves there image far more than guarding
- the police are still seen standing guard at major landmarks anyway (ie. Downing street) which is important aswell as improving their image
the major obstacle to police image is the media- something they really have to sort out (i don't blame the media - the police are yet to work out how to influence the media, and are not helped by the government and all this terrorism fuss.)
:2thumbsup:
To work at a British police station , either as an employee like a typist , cleaner or mechanic , you get vetted , if you enter as a contractor , a builder , decorator or caterer you still get vetted .Quote:
I would prefer that the security guards were employed directly rather than contractors be used, for control and veting purposes more than anything.
Though their home office did screw up recently with their cleaners didn't it .
It got security clearance for the actual company , but was doing the daily temporary security passes for the contractors employees due to a backlog in paperwork , when they finally got round to vetting the cleaners it turned out they were illegal immigrants:oops:
LOOL....good one :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
:2thumbsup:
That sort of makes sense, but if the rules policemen have to work under become unworkable, they should be reformed rather then look for expensive workarounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone