As far as people calling for nonsense, LEO's have a responsibility to investigate every call for service regardless of what it is. So basically what would happen in the case you gave is that the cop would tell everyone it's a civil matter and leave. And as long as it pertains to their investigation I don't see how a question a cop asks crosses the line. Even so you have the right to not answer them anyway.  

 

I didn't say it wasn't, I explained to the dispatcher the car wasn't mine & wasn't sure what to do about insurance, so he sent an officer out anyway to answer my questions, they can be very informative about that stuff.

My example of a cop crossing the line is, if I haven't committed a crime or suspected of any criminal activity, yet if I'm there and they are still asking me for my ID then that's crossing the line, even though I have a right to not answer, I shouldn't have to worry about it.

 

This question depends on what you mean by "police", if you mean a tax-payer funded public service then no you don't need the "police" as there are other private services and contractors available, but even this can be looked at depending on the society you are in.

 

For instance, if you were to pay for "police" services like you paid for insurance, then this would not work in countries like the UK or the USA, where personal indebtedness is very high (as well as income inequality) and people own very little "wealth" with which to make a market work better than current state services, which are politically (with political capital accessible to us all) accountable rather than financially accountable (capital which is not readily available), and therefore a state service is really the only fair way to ensure people's security (which is the need strand in this debate).

 

I base this on the idea that for the freedom of the insurance markets to work properly then people both need choices of products and the option to "opt out" as they can fall back on "rainy day" cash, as well as the ideas of Thomas Picketty who has observed that wealth generate wealth faster than income does.

 

Having "private" police contractors would therefore only work in places like Luxembourg or the city of London where people can afford to participate in the market and "opt out" when there is not a product for their needs/wants.

 

How the systems supporting this sort of "market" system would work is a different issue, and does not necessarily support the case "for" or "against" this particular quandary, rather they can be made to work for either.  

 

So I answer "no" but only on the basis that it is possible to go without the "police" as we know them currently, but recognise that to get to that point, western societies would have to change drastically.

 

Regards,

Hench.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 11, 201411 yr by Hench

This question depends on what you mean by "police", if you mean a tax-payer funded public service then no you don't need the "police" as there are other private services and contractors available, but even this can be looked at depending on the society you are in.

 

For instance, if you were to pay for "police" services like you paid for insurance, then this would not work in countries like the UK or the USA, where personal indebtedness is very high (as well as income inequality) and people own very little "wealth" with which to make a market work better than current state services, which are politically (with political capital accessible to us all) accountable rather than financially accountable (capital which is not readily available), and therefore a state service is really the only fair way to ensure people's security (which is the need strand in this debate).

 

I base this on the idea that for the freedom of the insurance markets to work properly then people both need choices of products and the option to "opt out" as they can fall back on "rainy day" cash, as well as the ideas of Thomas Picketty who has observed that wealth generate wealth faster than income does.

 

Having "private" police contractors would therefore only work in places like Luxembourg or the city of London where people can afford to participate in the market and "opt out" when there is not a product for their needs/wants.

 

How the systems supporting this sort of "market" system would work is a different issue, and does not necessarily support the case "for" or "against" this particular quandary, rather they can be made to work for either.  

 

So I answer "no" but only on the basis that it is possible to go without the "police" as we know them currently, but recognise that to get to that point, western societies would have to change drastically.

 

Regards,

Hench.

There isnt private police contracters in the US, as far as I know. The police in the US is good enough to not require assistance. I dont think a private police service is even legal, dont quote me on it though. Although in the middle east, with all the war, there is private contractors.They deliver medical supplies, and help fight off terrorists. Not that its relevant, but private contractors also make really good money.

 

Edit: Also, in the US - Yes we need police. Since you are in the UK, it's different i'd assume. As you said there is private contractors. I believe this thread pertains mostly to the USA though.

Edited July 11, 201411 yr by iiKonrad

There isnt private police contracters in the US, as far as I know. The police in the US is good enough to not require assistance. I dont think a private police service is even legal, dont quote me on it though. Although in the middle east, with all the war, there is private contractors.They deliver medical supplies, and help fight off terrorists. Not that its relevant, but private contractors also make really good money.

 

Edit: Also, in the US - Yes we need police. Since you are in the UK, it's different i'd assume. As you said there is private contractors. I believe this thread pertains mostly to the USA though.

 

There aren't "police contractors" per se in the USA as of yet. However, the foundation work of monitored alarm systems like ADT are available, where they then call the police on your behalf. It isn't a massive leap for that alarm monitor to create a security division to respond to triggered alarms. If you look on Google, ADT own a fleet of impalas with light bars marked "Patrol and response" - pretty police-like.

 

As to your point about the UK police, a few years ago I would have argued the toss, but I am no longer as sure that the police can cope. As a taxpayer I would look at the service (less officers, people discouraged from reporting crimes) and ask whether I would pay for it with the option.

 

Edited July 11, 201411 yr by Hench

There isnt private police contracters in the US, as far as I know. The police in the US is good enough to not require assistance. I dont think a private police service is even legal, dont quote me on it though. Although in the middle east, with all the war, there is private contractors.They deliver medical supplies, and help fight off terrorists. Not that its relevant, but private contractors also make really good money.

 

Edit: Also, in the US - Yes we need police. Since you are in the UK, it's different i'd assume. As you said there is private contractors. I believe this thread pertains mostly to the USA though.

 

http://www.alliedbarton.com/companypolice/Home.aspx It's rare but it police contractors do happen. But they're required by law to have the same certifications and training and public sector police. 

No not at all, We don't need the police. i'm sure people would be perfectly safe with criminals being able to kill, rape, rob whoever they want at any given time...

 

^That was sarcasim by the way.^

 

Saying "we don't need the police" is like saying "we can survive without oxygen" it's just not possible.. the only reason people can feel safe and there is no mass riots is because we have the police to step in and bring order from chaos. If we didn't have police, then there would be nobody to enforce the law.. thus making people do whatever the hell they want. your house? that'll be robbed in minutes, Your car? That'll be stolen and burnt in 24 hours, Your family? Possibly murdered in a few days, Your city you live in? Completely ruined and riddled with crime within a year.

yes but they need to be controlled by the people and work for the people the system is broken the way it is now

 

How exactly is the system broken? I live in the US, and I believe our policing system is not broken. Sure it has it's flaws, but what doesn't? The only thing in our policing system that may seem broken would be the amount of force used at certain incidents/events, which IMO isn't a flaw of the system, but rather a flaw of the LEO (law enforcement officer) involved in the incident(s). The system itself, wasn't/isn't what allows these excessive force incidents, it's not like one of the state statutes says beat the shit out of this guy, it simply says this is illegal and this was should be done. The LEO himself is responsible for giving this punishment out, and if he steps out of line, it is his fault. Not the system's.

 

--

 

In reply to the OP, I believe that you will always need some sort of authoritarian force capable of looking after societies members. If you go back to how the police force first came about and reasons why, it was not only found necessary but very rapidly was adopted across world ! Elderly, young and defenceless rely very much on some form of protection elements of society that would seek to harm, defraud or otherwise depress society as a whole. Do we further replace these with army? Let everybody fend for themselves? (I.e. the purge). Without police we would very easily, and quickly fall back to medieval times. In which tribal and regional forces group together for self protection and advancement. IMO hatred towards police stems from a personal negative experience with law enforcement, but my reply to the nay sayers is this - 

 

The police are not here to create disorder, they're here to preserve disorder.

-Daley 

 

My 2 (and a half) Cents,

McAwesome

bi polar a bit all or none with u how about fixing the problem a few bad cops go to jail do something when people report officers ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE PROBLEM  but u are just 16 what would u no about ACCOUNTABILITY

WOW u  cant handle the truth the police state in this country is out of control and u just dont get it yes police are ok to have but they need to no there limits and place and need to respect the public till that happens they will be THE problem

i am very sad to c it when police get out of hand it makes them all look bad but that can stop with proper training and good syc screening

 

 

IF THE TRUTH IS ANNOYING THEN O WELL ITS WORKS FINE TO GET THE POINT ACROSS

I AM SICK TO HI HELL of paying taxes and getting rude or just plane mean officers when it time to report a crime 

cp702 pointed out that pretty pictures and quotes from other people don't constitute your own thoughts. No where in his post did he say anything relating to police, let alone "not handling" the supposed truth that we're in a police state presented through incredibly simplified political one-liners.

bi polar a bit all or none with u how about fixing the problem a few bad cops go to jail do something when people report officers ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE PROBLEM  but u are just 16 what would u no about ACCOUNTABILITY

While police shouldn't get to investigate their own agency when accounts of wrongdoing arise, they shouldn't be carted off to jail the second "ABUSE" is screamed either.

 

I read a book not too long ago about a sniper in Iraq. He said that one time, he shot a guy wearing a Kalashnikov moving towards a convoy of US vehicles. The wife of the shot man made a complaint, claiming he was unarmed. Not only that, she claimed she saw the sniper, who was hiding in the back of a dark room, shooting out of a peep hole from several hundred yards away, clear enough to identify the type of camouflage he had on.

 

Despite a needless investigation, her story did in fact turn out to be false.

 

• OOOO kids just don't get it u will wake up one day but today is not your day most of u are to young to understand politics and are more interested in insulting a post on a web page then talking about the truth  

 

 

 

bi polar a bit all or none with u how about fixing the problem a few bad cops go to jail do something when people report officers ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE PROBLEM  but u are just 16 what would u no about ACCOUNTABILITY

 

 

WOW u  cant handle the truth the police state in this country is out of control and u just dont get it yes police are ok to have but they need to no there limits and place and need to respect the public till that happens they will be THE problem

i am very sad to c it when police get out of hand it makes them all look bad but that can stop with proper training and good syc screening

 

 

IF THE TRUTH IS ANNOYING THEN O WELL ITS WORKS FINE TO GET THE POINT ACROSS

I AM SICK TO HI HELL of paying taxes and getting rude or just plane mean officers when it time to report a crime 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And with this, most of your posts in this thread are being hidden. This sub-forum is meant for mature discussions on complicated issues, not name calling, memes expressing overly simplified points and not attempting to dispute people with heavily biased "info"graphs.

 

The only reason why one of your posts is staying is because it brings up a point related to the topic at hand, which is your idea on how police can become accountable.

 

Any further attempts by you to post on this thread something that isn't relevant (IE: You should only post a decently thought out comment in your own words on whether police are needed) will result in further sanctions.

here is a question how do we make a police force that is more accountable for what they do?

 

 

 

 

GROW UP KID

 

And with this, most of your posts in this thread are being hidden. This sub-forum is meant for mature discussions on complicated issues, not name calling, memes expressing overly simplified points and not attempting to dispute people with heavily biased "info"graphs.

 

The only reason why one of your posts is staying is because it brings up a point related to the topic at hand, which is your idea on how police can become accountable.

 

Any further attempts by you to post on this thread something that isn't relevant (IE: You should only post a decently thought out comment in your own words on whether police are needed) will result in further sanctions.

 

HERE IS A THOUGHT IF U ARE UNDER 21 DONT ANSWER WHAT U HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH 

You already answered that in your own post right above mine. To quote it:

how about fixing the problem a few bad cops go to jail do something when people report officers ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE PROBLEM

 

GROW UP KID

 

HERE IS A THOUGHT IF U ARE UNDER 21 DONT ANSWER WHAT U HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH 

Maturity has nothing to do with age.

 

Until you are able to contribute something, you are not going to be posting in this thread.