How to Write a Summary of an Article? Public Policing vs Private Security Comparison What are differences and similarities between the two roles?
Remodeling It is not just that the policing functions are changing, nor is it just that the relationship between public and private police are changing; the forces of supply and demand are creating new services and new types of service delivery. Essentially, Australia, like other Western countries, is experiencing a remodeling of the policing services.
In this context of change, various models have been proposed to define the relationship of the public and private police Sarrep. Models of partnership, competition, duality and cooperation all seem possible.
Yet, no one model, Sarre suggests, fits well with what is happening between the services. At the same time, it is just as difficult to find one model that adequately describes the range of functions and roles carried out within the private security industry.
For example, a computer company is likely to give priority to the protection of information stored on computer while a hospital, open 24 hours a day, would need to give priority to the control of pedestrian traffic and who has the right of passage.
In contrast, a hotel with many guests, would predominantly face issues of stolen property, lost property and even noise complaints. A unidimensional view of private policing is not possible and, indeed, models may be more applicable to clusters of business and service types within the industry.
Mead Niblop. Policing in Australia is dramatically evolving. Further, it is likely to follow the trends presently occurring in the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States.
In the United Kingdom, this remodeling, and, indeed a re-evaluation of the nature of private policing, has brought about the sale of whole police forces to private enterprise Judgep. In Harwick, Flexstowe and Tilsbury, the constabularies have been sold to the local port companies and include all the jurisdictional powers.
Traditional functions included such activities as parking control, airport security, crowd control and court security. The most common reason given for the response was that people believed it would lead to improved service.
The point is that developments in private security services are not only causing a remodeling of the nature of policing but that public attitudes and acceptance of these changes are also occurring.
Yet, we would argue that the change is essentially more fundamental than even these changes would suggest. These countries, including Australia, are witnessing a change in paradigm of the policing and judicial systems. This paradigm change is a fundamental shift in the way society perceives and understands the nature and function of the policing and judicial services.
It is more than a change in function, it is a change in the ethic and public perspective of policing and justice in society. This change in model and theme is a moving from power invested in a few and dispersed by the state, to a personal empowerment, self interest, and private servicing, where economic cost benefit plays a determining role in the nature and quality of service.
Indeed, it is a change in the politics of power. The paradigm change is at the same time a change in the ethics of power. With the advent of private justice, there arises an opportunity for a situational ethic where economic outcome is the determining factor to any given situation.
For example, a private company may chose to dismiss an employee for a misdemeanor for purely personal and economic benefit factors rather than calling in the police. In this situation, it would be immaterial whether the employer has broken the law, the issue would be one of damage control and corporate advantage.
The change in paradigm is also having an effect upon the public police system.
Not only is there a changing public expectation of the quality of police service, but also a redefining, and a narrowing or specialisation of public police services toward crime investigation and criminal apprehension as other services are provided for sale.
In comparison to private policing, public policing is commonly perceived by the general public to be over bureaucratic, under financed and less capable than in years gone by to intervene or give the public help. Yet, how far can private policing and private justice evolve?
In the United States, the Federal Trademark and Counterfeiting Act ofgave business extended powers to protect their property including the ability to investigate, seize evidence and pursue private criminal justice prosecutions Hindsp. Litigants, Hinds explains, can now bypass the public courts and hire a judge, jury and court to settle their civil suits.
However, private and situational ethics will never be an adequate means of social control and regulation. Private interest can not determine the public good. The economically empowered can not determine the life and opportunities of the economically deprived- at least, no more than they already do.
Private power must always be subject to social scrutiny and social accountability Wilsonp. As the paradigm of policing in Australia changes it is important that the changes are not left unchecked.
It is important that the changes are confronted head-on and appropriate parameters put into place to allow private industry growth in a context of social accountability. Accountability and Responsibility The authority and power of private police cannot be explained by reference and contrast to the powers of public policing.
Private police do not enforce public law nor do they act as public police privately Sarre, p. In addition to the difference of ethos and function between the two forces, there is also a difference in the statutes and laws which regulate their operations.Page 59 Roles of police and private security officers in urban social control The police and security officer data used less empirical scrutiny, with the exception in the analyses were obtained from the US of D’Alessio, Eitle, & Stolzenberg’s () Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Public policing and private security agencies do offer the same services and duties to achieve some of the same goals. Public policing and private security agencies serve as leaders in their line of work. Two different standards regulate the leadership requirements.
Check Out Our Comparing Public and Private Prisons Essay A public prison is a place where individuals are physically confined and deprived of a number of personal freedoms by the government. This is a legal penalty that is imposed by the government to the . Private policing is proactive, and preventative, in comparison to public policing, which is reactive.
Meaning in private police aim to prevent crimes through surveillance, and public police respond once a crime has been committed (Wilson ). Cite this paper as Sparrow Malcol Ph.D Managing the Boundary Between Public and Private Policing New Perspectives in Policing Bulletin.
Washington C.S epartment o ustice National nstitute o ustice. Guide to Critical Issues in Policing page 2 Policies A number of departments have begun to build their use-of-force policies around statements of principle, emphasizing the sanctity of all human life.
The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department was a leader in order to reduce the risks to the public. Show of Force/Reportable Force.