Where ever the Government has a monopoly on a service, the Free Market can do better

[Makalakumu]

http://freepatriot.org/2013/10/26/houston-neighborhood-goes-private-security-cuts-crime/

He looks like a cop, he dresses like a cop, but he is actual a member of S.E.A.L. security. A Houston neighborhood decided to go with private security and cuts crime in half.
When Sharpstown, a small suburb in Houston, Texas, received their last bill from Harris County sheriff department, they thought they could go cheaper. Harris County told them to put their money where their mouth is. So they did. Not only have they gained a presence of three patrol cars at any given hour, but saved the suburb about $200,000 a year.
They don’t pull people over, they don’t stop traffic, but they do stop crime. The city said crime is down in fact by over 50%. Not bad from just increasing visibility of law enforcement. The private security company is armed and does have the power to make arrests. The funny aspect is that they take them to Harris County lock up.
The S.E.A.L. company has its own academy. All patrol officers are licensed. They have K-9 units trained and at their disposal. While they specialize in business and residential security in the state of Texas, when they were contacted by the suburb in need of help, they were all too happy to provide them with the best package deal for the town. The suburb is happy with the arrangement along with the S.E.A.L. Security Solutions Firm.
So one must ask what is the downside to this? So far the only people saying anything negative is Harris County that lost out on the contract due to over charging the suburb. Even the news finds this strange but seems interested in the arrangement.

Private police! Say it ain't so, socialists!

Seriously though, what do you all think of this? I just had a discussion with a forum member about how this arrangement would never work and that it would basically suck and probably be the end of the world. Well?

 

[granfire]

http://freepatriot.org/2013/10/26/houston-neighborhood-goes-private-security-cuts-crime/



Private police! Say it ain't so, socialists!

Seriously though, what do you all think of this? I just had a discussion with a forum member about how this arrangement would never work and that it would basically suck and probably be the end of the world. Well?

If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

it starts off with 'small suburb' and ends with 'taking the suspects to Harris County Lockup'

 

[Makalakumu]

If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.

it starts off with 'small suburb' and ends with 'taking the suspects to Harris County Lockup'

I'd like to know more of the details as well, but I suspect the reason why the private security is more effective is because they aren't enforcing laws against non-violent and peaceful activities.

 

[granfire]

I'd like to know more of the details as well, but I suspect the reason why the private security is more effective is because they aren't enforcing laws against non-violent and peaceful activities.

They leave those to the regular cops, and they don't run a jail, that's savings right there.
But you can't pick and chose what you want to enforce as police.

 

[Makalakumu]

They leave those to the regular cops, and they don't run a jail, that's savings right there.
But you can't pick and chose what you want to enforce as police.

The sort of the point of private police. People pay directly for what they want protected. The way society works now, people make a law against something they don't like and then expect other people to pay for it. It doesn't work very well because you eventually run out of other people's money...and lose your freedom.

 

[granfire]

The sort of the point of private police. People pay directly for what they want protected. The way society works now, people make a law against something they don't like and then expect other people to pay for it. It doesn't work very well because you eventually run out of other people's money...and lose your freedom.

But that is cherry picking.
Sure, sounds good on paper, but when the manure hits the fan, you can bet your bottom dollar, the good citizens of said suburb will be screaming at the top of their lungs.
But then again, nothing probably ever happened there to begin with.

I wonder if the real police will just shrug and keep eating doughnuts when those other laws are broken and the private force won't touch it....

 

[Makalakumu]

But that is cherry picking.
Sure, sounds good on paper, but when the manure hits the fan, you can bet your bottom dollar, the good citizens of said suburb will be screaming at the top of their lungs.
But then again, nothing probably ever happened there to begin with.

I wonder if the real police will just shrug and keep eating doughnuts when those other laws are broken and the private force won't touch it....

A couple of questions.

1. What do you mean when you say "Manure hitting the fans"?
2. What exactly will the citizens of said suburb be screaming over?
3. Which other laws will the police not enforce that the private security company won't touch?

One thing that becomes apparent to me is that all "laws" have a hidden price tag in our socialized system. When people actually have to pay for private security, that price tag is suddenly revealed. Another thing that becomes apparent is that the difference between what people will vote to ban and what they will actually pay for is often quite distinct. People will pay for protection from violence and protection of property, but they probably won't pay for the enforcement of various non-violent and peaceful activities that are against the law.
This looks like the Free Market tailoring itself to exactly what the community wants for security purposes.

 

[Carol]

How about cleaning up the highways?



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[granfire]

A couple of questions.

1. What do you mean when you say "Manure hitting the fans"?
2. What exactly will the citizens of said suburb be screaming over?
3. Which other laws will the police not enforce that the private security company won't touch?

One thing that becomes apparent to me is that all "laws" have a hidden price tag in our socialized system. When people actually have to pay for private security, that price tag is suddenly revealed. Another thing that becomes apparent is that the difference between what people will vote to ban and what they will actually pay for is often quite distinct. People will pay for protection from violence and protection of property, but they probably won't pay for the enforcement of various non-violent and peaceful activities that are against the law.
This looks like the Free Market tailoring itself to exactly what the community wants for security purposes.

'The Price Tag' will be revealed, no doubt when somebody complains about the cherry picked laws the rent-a-cops enforce. the 'non-violent' ones, the ones they didn't know they wanted enforced.
Or the city gets tired of housing their crooks and sends them the bill.
200k is not a whole lot when you toss more than 10 fellows in the brick.


On the other hand, maybe you have a point....our LEOs always tell us we can't pick and choose which laws we follow, they do pick and choose which they enforce. hmm.

 

[ballen0351]

Funny there is a small apartment complex that is gated and has private armed police in my jurisdiction. They had a double shooting and running gun battle last night aabout 50 yards from 3 private armed guards. The guards ran out of the community and called 911 and refused to go back in until we showed up.

 

[Big Don]

[h=2]Where ever the Government has a monopoly on a service, the Free Market can do better[/h]

To wit, the USPS vs UPS and/or FedEx...

 

[granfire]

To wit, the USPS vs UPS and/or FedEx...

Prime example for cherry picking.
The post office does not get to pick and choose where they deliver to, UPS and Fed-Ex do it all the time.
So the private sector gets to skim the gravy, USPS is stuck with the lumps.

 

[Makalakumu]

How about cleaning up the highways?



Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

There might be a few people who volunteer to do that in a free society. LOL

 

[Makalakumu]

Prime example for cherry picking.
The post office does not get to pick and choose where they deliver to, UPS and Fed-Ex do it all the time.
So the private sector gets to skim the gravy, USPS is stuck with the lumps.

Unless you have multiple, specialized companies, that each skim a portion of the market. If they can't compete, another company provides the service.

 

[Makalakumu]

Funny there is a small apartment complex that is gated and has private armed police in my jurisdiction. They had a double shooting and running gun battle last night aabout 50 yards from 3 private armed guards. The guards ran out of the community and called 911 and refused to go back in until we showed up.

Years ago, I had a student from the South Side of Chicago. He told me that the cops wouldn't even come into his neighborhood because they were afraid of getting shot at from the tops of buildings. The difference between this case and the one that you brought up is that the company that refuses to do it's job can be replaced through competition.

 

[ballen0351]

Years ago, I had a student from the South Side of Chicago. He told me that the cops wouldn't even come into his neighborhood because they were afraid of getting shot at from the tops of buildings. The difference between this case and the one that you brought up is that the company that refuses to do it's job can be replaced through competition.

If thats even true which I doubt because I hear that same story about every major city in the US Cops are affraid to go into my neighborhood because its so dangerous, How many security guards do you think would go into that same south side neighborhood?

The difference is mindset. A security guard takes a job for a pay check because he needs a job, a police officer takes a job because they want to help their community. 3 armed guards ran away (ran on foot as fast as they could didnt even take their cars) because they dont care about that community its just a security job. 1 armed cop (me) and a trainee (who had no choice he was just along for the ride) drove right into the mix and started rendering aid to one victim because its not just a job to me.

 

[Makalakumu]

'The Price Tag' will be revealed, no doubt when somebody complains about the cherry picked laws the rent-a-cops enforce. the 'non-violent' ones, the ones they didn't know they wanted enforced.
Or the city gets tired of housing their crooks and sends them the bill.
200k is not a whole lot when you toss more than 10 fellows in the brick.


On the other hand, maybe you have a point....our LEOs always tell us we can't pick and choose which laws we follow, they do pick and choose which they enforce. hmm.

On the whole, the private system we see here is definitely propped up by the public system. However, that doesn't need to be the case. It is completely possible for private agencies to band together to run their own jails. They could even contract with companies that run private courts of law. All of this is going to vastly reduce the number of laws that people want enforced.

There are a number of reasons for this.

1. Certain laws are expensive to enforce and they don't really contribute much in terms of public safety.
2. Certain laws that are currently enforced are too expensive to enforce, but could be cheaper if they were taken care of in a different way. Speeding, for example, could easily be dealt with if all roads were private. No cops involved.
3. Certain laws are not just too expensive to enforce, they have too much liability overhead for the private police force to ever want to contract to do that.

All of this points to the fact that our current system is inherently socialist. People can decide they don't like something and then use government to enforce that restriction, but the reality is that the actual price of enforcement isn't being paid by the citizens. They are spending other people's money to get what they want in their communities. In a private system, people only pay for what they want protected in their communities. No more, no less.

 

[Makalakumu]

If thats even true which I doubt because I hear that same story about every major city in the US Cops are affraid to go into my neighborhood because its so dangerous, How many security guards do you think would go into that same south side neighborhood?

The difference is mindset. A security guard takes a job for a pay check because he needs a job, a police officer takes a job because they want to help their community. 3 armed guards ran away (ran on foot as fast as they could didnt even take their cars) because they dont care about that community its just a security job. 1 armed cop (me) and a trainee (who had no choice he was just along for the ride) drove right into the mix and started rendering aid to one victim because its not just a job to me.

Believe it or not, it's good information for a community and a company to have it's employees quit when the going get's tough. It means that the company needs to make a new contract or train it's employees better to face what they will face. This kind of feedback is largely absent from government monopolies because so much of the training is agenda driven from places far away from where the action is.

The mindset part is not going to be a problem when security companies get started in local communities and people see their jobs as an important part of the community.

 

[ballen0351]

On the whole, the private system we see here is definitely propped up by the public system. However, that doesn't need to be the case. It is completely possible for private agencies to band together to run their own jails. They could even contract with companies that run private courts of law.

So get rid of the constitution then since the judicial system is specifically spelled out as a power of the Govt

2. Certain laws that are currently enforced are too expensive to enforce, but could be cheaper if they were taken care of in a different way. Speeding, for example, could easily be dealt with if all roads were private. No cops involved.

How is enforcing speeding laws expensive? and how would private roads and no cops slow people down?

3. Certain laws are not just too expensive to enforce, they have too much liability overhead for the private police force to ever want to contract to do that.

So screw the will of the people that wanted these laws in the first place? Rape is a very expensive law to enforce between medical exams DNA testing and prosecution so we should just stop enforcing that one right?

All of this points to the fact that our current system is inherently socialist. People can decide they don't like something and then use government to enforce that restriction, but the reality is that the actual price of enforcement isn't being paid by the citizens. They are spending other people's money to get what they want in their communities. In a private system, people only pay for what they want protected in their communities. No more, no less.

Its also the way the Constitution was set up.

 

[ballen0351]

Believe it or not, it's good information for a community and a company to have it's employees quit when the going get's tough. It means that the company needs to make a new contract or train it's employees better to face what they will face. This kind of feedback is largely absent from government monopolies because so much of the training is agenda driven from places far away from where the action is.

Oh so in your world its perfectly ok for the guards to run away when the crap hits the fan as Gran said because that means they can renegotiate the contracts to charge more money. In the mean time people are having an shoot out in the street. Cops cant strike, they cant not respond to calls for emergencies. Some jobs just dont get to walk away when crap gets hard.

The mindset part is not going to be a problem when security companies get started in local communities and people see their jobs as an important part of the community.

Id love to see the relationship between a community and its securty force every time they run away and then demand more money to act.