What would be different if there was no police

[Husar]

Fragony, ask a small shopkeeper in town whose shop is not in a big mall what he thinks about paying a security guard 2000€ a month to guard his little shop. Even if they hired one guy for 5 shops it would be 400 a month, now how much of his tax currently goes towards funding the police? The police are also not nearly as useless as you make them out to be, you're completely exaggerating that, you sound like it was safer in the middle ages.

[Fragony]

Fragony, ask a small shopkeeper in town whose shop is not in a big mall what he thinks about paying a security guard 2000€ a month to guard his little shop. Even if they hired one guy for 5 shops it would be 400 a month, now how much of his tax currently goes towards funding the police? The police are also not nearly as useless as you make them out to be, you're completely exaggerating that, you sound like it was safer in the middle ages.

They can hire collectively, so can entire neighbourhoods. Taxes can lower if we dismantle the police so that shouldn't be a problem. Another advantage, the most dangerous criminal is a corrupt cop, who's going to protect the small shopkeeper abuse from them?

[Husar]

They can hire collectively, so can entire neighbourhoods. Taxes can lower if we dismantle the police so that shouldn't be a problem.

Great, so now he pays 200€ for security and gets a tax cut of 30€, where exactly was the advantage again?

Another advantage, the most dangerous criminal is a corrupt cop, who's going to protect the small shopkeeper abuse from them?

How many cops do abuse small shopkeepers?
Who is going to protect the shopkeepers from abuse by their own security guard mafia which has 100% control over their area?

[rory_20_uk]

Great, so now he pays 200€ for security and gets a tax cut of 30€, where exactly was the advantage again?


How many cops do abuse small shopkeepers?
Who is going to protect the shopkeepers from abuse by their own security guard mafia which has 100% control over their area?

Oh, so you've plucked the numbers out of thin air.

There is currently not one officer per 10 shops. If there's one per 60 shops the cost is the same.

Who protects the shopkeepers? That would be the national oversight. The same thing that stops the police from doing exactly that at the moment. Or are all current police instinctively honest (as a public service) and all future ones instinctively corrupt (as private)? Beginning to sound like a cracked record.

[Husar]

Oh, so you've plucked the numbers out of thin air.

Fragony plucked his whole argument out of thin air, he keeps saying police are useless without any proof at all.

There is currently not one officer per 10 shops. If there's one per 60 shops the cost is the same.

Then his argument that it would be cheaper is simply not true and you'd have to wonder what exactly the benefits of the private security would be again?
Fragony seems to say police are never there when you need them and/because there are not enough of them.

Who protects the shopkeepers? That would be the national oversight. The same thing that stops the police from doing exactly that at the moment. Or are all current police instinctively honest (as a public service) and all future ones instinctively corrupt (as private)? Beginning to sound like a cracked record.

So the national oversight would also tell them how they have to conduct their training, what they can and what they cannot do and in the end you'd have the same thing as the police except it's all a for-profit thing that is paid by the communities instead of, well, the community? Where is the advantage of that, especially if they have to satisfy shareholder interests as well?

[Slyspy]

They can hire collectively, so can entire neighbourhoods. Taxes can lower if we dismantle the police so that shouldn't be a problem. Another advantage, the most dangerous criminal is a corrupt cop, who's going to protect the small shopkeeper abuse from them?

Yes, we could hire collectively. But who should organise it? Maybe everyone in the parish (borough, county, postcode?) should vote to form a Policing Committee. And maybe some of that Committee should also attend a regional organisation, so as to ensure that information is shared and cooperation effective. And then members of that organisation could form a national body to coordinate the whole thing. And then after a few years the whole thing would become an institution, thus defeating the whole purpose of the exercise. Except that now the police presence would have "Group 4" instead of a Crown. Not very reassuring.

[Fragony]

Yes, we could hire collectively. But who should organise it? Maybe everyone in the parish (borough, county, postcode?) should vote to form a Policing Committee. And maybe some of that Committee should also attend a regional organisation, so as to ensure that information is shared and cooperation effective. And then members of that organisation could form a national body to coordinate the whole thing. And then after a few years the whole thing would become an institution, thus defeating the whole purpose of the exercise. Except that now the police presence would have "Group 4" instead of a Crown. Not very reassuring.

Yes it takes a lot of direct community effort and restructuring, but people can organise that. There is a lot that can go completely wrong of course, but when done right it's the scalpel not the axe.

@Jolt, you can take anything to the extreme, you would make it very easy for me. Sorry about your bleeding eyes, hope nobody quarantaines you

[Jolt]

@Jolt, you can take anything to the extreme, you would make it very easy for me. Sorry about your bleeding eyes, hope nobody quarantaines you

Well at least I'm glad you see that the options you are proposing are extreme. Private companies weren't and aren't the example of ethic and moral values, and it isn't competition which will suddenly force them to be nice or operate in an ethical way. Just take the example of Blackwater. Or the security groups that already do what you proposed, in Joannesburg (Patrol the streets rather than guard buildings). They beat anyone up they dislike or is standing in their way, regardless if they are criminals or innocents. They have zero to little accountability to any public authority because they hold much more power and influence than those they protect. There was quite a good BBC documentary on those private security groups, a few years ago.

All in all, a terrible proposal which practically never existed throughout history, and with good reason.

[Slyspy]

Yes it takes a lot of direct community effort and restructuring, but people can organise that. There is a lot that can go completely wrong of course, but when done right it's the scalpel not the axe.

@Jolt, you can take anything to the extreme, you would make it very easy for me. Sorry about your bleeding eyes, hope nobody quarantaines you

But why? I don't see how it would help. It strikes me that you would be gaining local accountability at the cost of effciency and increased chances of corruption. The chances are that whatever happened to you to start this rant off would still have happened. Unless you were head of the Policing Committee.

[Fragony]

But why? I don't see how it would help. It strikes me that you would be gaining local accountability at the cost of effciency and increased chances of corruption. The chances are that whatever happened to you to start this rant off would still have happened. Unless you were head of the Policing Committee.

Why not? More interesting a question to start with imho, why such trust into a single entity. Nobody asks why in the shopping mall, having a set of eyes and ears isn't all that hard, outsourcing makes total sense. Cheaper, less prone to corruption, and an incentive to do a good job because you can always do business with someone else. Quik easy and painless.

[Slyspy]

Why not? More interesting a question to start with imho, why such trust into a single entity. Nobody asks why in the shopping mall, having a set of eyes and ears isn't all that hard, outsourcing makes total sense. Cheaper, less prone to corruption, and an incentive to do a good job because you can always do business with someone else. Quik easy and painless.

Currently shopping mall security staff here in the UK are largly powerless, so there is no point corrupting them. I fail to see how local law enforcement of the type you suggest could be anything other than corrupt. Local councils are bad enough. I also fail to see how subject policing to market forces is going to automatically be A Good Thing (tm).