MLB - Private Police Force

Economics, Politics, Philosophy, History and Culture
Forum rules
Always add something of value to the discussion and have fun. Mind your language, no porn, no libel, no trolling and no personal attacks.

Please note, views expressed on the forum do not necessarily represent the views of Mises UK.
Post Reply
Anarcho-Conservative
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 7:50 pm

MLB - Private Police Force

Post by Anarcho-Conservative » Tue May 08, 2018 6:42 pm

What do you all think? A step in the right direction towards a stateless country?

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/brit ... 32321.html

User avatar
FvS
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:03 am

Re: MLB - Private Police Force

Post by FvS » Wed May 09, 2018 12:48 am

Hopefully it works out well so libertarians can have another real world example to point to. Of course, they'll probably be held to much higher standards than state police would be.
"Most whites do not have a racial identity, but they would do well to understand what race means for others. They should also ponder the consequences of being the only group for whom such an identity is forbidden and who are permitted no aspirations as a group." - Jared Taylor

User avatar
Tom Rogers
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:55 pm
Location: The Atheistic Pagan Avatars' Own County
Contact:

Re: MLB - Private Police Force

Post by Tom Rogers » Wed May 09, 2018 6:07 am

Actually, British policing is already mostly a non-state service, as is generally the case in the United States, I believe.

Strictly speaking, most police forces in Britain are not part of the state, they are in fact independent public bodies under civic supervision, either police authorities or elected commissioners, depending on the area.

What sometimes causes confusion is the phrase 'Home Office police forces', which was used traditionally in reference to territorial police forces (i.e. those that cover discrete areas), except the Metropolitan Police, and is maybe the reason people assume the police are state-run. But the phrase is a misnomer, it being based on the erroneous belief that most police forces were established by Act of Parliament, whereas in fact the relevant statutes did not establish territorial police forces, they merely compelled local authorities to do so - in most cases, the new forces set up in the mid-19th. century were simply an amalgamation of existing local and borough police services.

Having said all that, police services are paid for mostly through taxes collected by the state, which are then disbursed to the relevant bodies. Only about 30% of police funding is via local government. There is also some funding of police forces from private sources - businesses, councils, residents' associations, etc. - to pay for local patrols and other neighbourhood-based policing, but it must be a small amount in the scheme of things. You may say that this state-dominated funding structure means that police in Britain are a state service, but I would disagree. The only factor that associates police forces with the state at all is the funding structure, which is politically-controlled and could, and in my view should, easily be inversed so that the bulk of funding is paid for locally. The move in recent years to centralise and 'statise' British police forces goes entirely against traditions of local control. This localist tradition is very important to policing in Britain. When territorial police forces were originally mandated by Act of Parliament, there was considerable public suspicion and distrust about uniformed police officers, as there might be in a relatively free society, and probably what helped allay these suspicions was a great assurance that the police were not a state-run body but in fact under democratic supervision and control, something that can only be achieved locally. It was also made clear that police officers were civilians themselves, albeit with special powers in specific situations, an important distinction that remains the case today.

Against that background, I personally would have great reservations about private policing as the norm. Private healthcare and even private fire services, which we used to have in England, are one thing, but policing is a whole different matter, especially when it evolves into the realm of criminal investigations, which are by their nature complex and sensitive, and if they go wrong, can have disastrous implications for liberty and property. We in England have already learned this lesson the hard way, which is why we have possibly the most highly-regulated policing environment in the world with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and its regulations. Private security patrols paid for by residents - which is what MyLocalBobby really is - are fine as long as they only exist on a limited basis in specific communities that want them, but I would strongly disagree with the expansion of such services generally or into more complex police work, as what you would have then is simply another private arm of the state and statism by another name, but without the accountability and safeguards. We have already seen this happen with other 'private-ised' public services, run by Capita and G4S, etc., where private companies take over the running of public services under marketisation initiatives and as a result there is no accountability when things go wrong.

User avatar
FvS
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:03 am

Re: MLB - Private Police Force

Post by FvS » Thu May 10, 2018 4:25 am

Well, when you put it like that... :)
"Most whites do not have a racial identity, but they would do well to understand what race means for others. They should also ponder the consequences of being the only group for whom such an identity is forbidden and who are permitted no aspirations as a group." - Jared Taylor

User avatar
Physiocrat
Site Admin
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:25 am

Re: MLB - Private Police Force

Post by Physiocrat » Thu May 10, 2018 2:29 pm

Tom Rogers wrote:
Wed May 09, 2018 6:07 am
Against that background, I personally would have great reservations about private policing as the norm. Private healthcare and even private fire services, which we used to have in England, are one thing, but policing is a whole different matter, especially when it evolves into the realm of criminal investigations, which are by their nature complex and sensitive, and if they go wrong, can have disastrous implications for liberty and property. We in England have already learned this lesson the hard way, which is why we have possibly the most highly-regulated policing environment in the world with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and its regulations. Private security patrols paid for by residents - which is what MyLocalBobby really is - are fine as long as they only exist on a limited basis in specific communities that want them, but I would strongly disagree with the expansion of such services generally or into more complex police work, as what you would have then is simply another private arm of the state and statism by another name, but without the accountability and safeguards. We have already seen this happen with other 'private-ised' public services, run by Capita and G4S, etc., where private companies take over the running of public services under marketisation initiatives and as a result there is no accountability when things go wrong.
The key thing to keep in mind is who is the customer. With "marketisation" all you are getting is what the government wants but hopefully at less cost to it (at least in principle) they are nothing however to do with the market proper, so yes I would be apprehensive of further similar public private partnerships. My Local Bobby does genuinely seem to be a market phenomenon as the customers are private individuals. As such I welcome the extension of organisations like MLB - they at least don't police Twitter or Facebook because no-one will pay them to do so. If they do break the law/and or contract however, you do need legal recourse. The main problem at present is the huge restriction on the supply of lawyers plus absurd statute which can unilaterally make unenforceable aspects of a contract. Delicense lawyers to make courts significantly cheaper and have a bonfire of statutes so the judge can make a genuinely equitable opinion on the case in question.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.

Yours sincerely,

Physiocrat

Anarcho-Conservative
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 7:50 pm

Re: MLB - Private Police Force

Post by Anarcho-Conservative » Sun May 13, 2018 9:04 pm

I will be honest, I think the prices are a little too high but the idea behind this is brilliant.

We have had our first seed planted which is cryptocurrency and that will grow to something of an attractive alternative to how we trade and spend our money without taxation.

This topic is the second of many seeds to be planted as it shows people that private policing and other forms of security is definitely possible. Of course, it is in it's infant stage but it will give people ideas about private policing and how they can go about protecting their communities without the need for the state.

But I am glad that the use of contracts is becoming more common between people and private organisations. I hope more and more people will support this.

Post Reply