When Government Does It Badly, Don't Just Go Helpless
Gregg just told me a story of how some guy in Detroit called 911, and the operator asked him to call back, as in, later.
Well, Veronique de Rugy, an economist I find wise, blogged a piece about citizens in Oakland who've got "bring your own" security in the face of an understaffed police department:
The one thing almost everyone agrees that the government should provide is police. However, when private citizens in parts of Oakland got tired of the lack of security in their neighborhood, the increase in the crime rates, and the inability of their own police force to protect them, they launched a series of campaigns to hire security forces to patrol their area (see here, here, and here). What are they looking for? Private security officers certified to carry firearms.
De Rugy quotes an SFGate report by Will Kane, noting that even middle-class neighborhoods are getting into the act:
In middle-class Maxwell Park, just northwest of Mills College, 180 residents have banded together to hire a security guard to patrol their neighborhood for four hours a day, five days a week. He started Wednesday."It costs each of us about 50 cents a day," said Jose Durado, chairman of the neighborhood council. "As we get 45 new households to join, we get an additional hour of security."
...The security companies are quick to say they aren't replacement cops -- they're mostly there to scare thugs out of the neighborhood or to report suspicious activity.
More at PJM from Ed Driscoll.
Like a paid George Zimmerman!
Goo at October 9, 2013 4:13 AM
IIRC, 20-25 decades ago quite a few well-to-do New York City neighborhoods hired private security patrols, mostly to discourage purse snatchings and muggings and break-ins by 'thirsty' crackheads.
Andre Friedmann at October 9, 2013 5:27 AM
Just another reason to get the heck out of states with very restrictive gun laws.
When you have to pay a private firm to provide you with what the government is supposed to do, after collecting sky high taxes from the homeowners, for services not rendered,
Eventually, you will be nickel and dimed to death .
I think the recent real estate bubble bust hastened the doom, of the blue cities and suburbs. It made it easy for a lot of people just to walk away from crime ridden neighborhoods, since most of them had no equity anyway.
Isab at October 9, 2013 6:14 AM
When you have to pay a private firm to provide you with what the government is supposed to do
Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?
I R A Darth Aggie at October 9, 2013 7:36 AM
This is the latest symptom of a mental disease: the idea that "someone else" is responsible for your individual safety.
The desire, and in some the NEED to be cared for, rather than be responsible, has led to the industrialization of "security", which never could provide what is routinely promised, and which empties public coffers to pay pensions... yes, to pay retired police, some of whom never left a desk, to sit at home.
And these organizations will DISARM YOU "for your own safety".
Radwaste at October 9, 2013 8:15 AM
When you have to pay a private firm to provide you with what the government is supposed to do
Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at October 9, 2013 7:36 AM
They are not there to protect you as an individual.but they should have enough presence to keep houses from being burgled in broad daylight.
The blue states and cities have a three fold problem. Not enough real patrolling to suppress crime, no duty to protect you, and then they take away your means to protect yourself with strict gun control.
Isab at October 9, 2013 8:58 AM
And then we've got the cops who are bikers on the side.
Swell.
Flynne at October 9, 2013 9:01 AM
Patrol Special private security forces have been active in San Francisco since the Gold Rush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Patrol_Special_Police
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2013 9:58 AM
I dont want to live in a place where I have to pay high taxes for police protection, or any other government services, and then dont get them.
I view this the same as if I paid for water and trash collection in the city that I live in now, but the services were so inadquate, I had to hire a private firm on the side, to pick up my trash or deliver water to my house.
If the city can't deliver basic services for fees and tax payer dollars, they should unincorporate, and call it a day. Other cities have had do do this, and more will be forced to in the future.
Isab at October 9, 2013 10:13 AM
Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?
Since they started charging you money for the service
lujlp at October 9, 2013 10:21 AM
Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?
As an American, since birth - I have an unalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
And when the government takes MY money to provide such rights; they damn well better do their best; or stop taking my money.
Charles at October 9, 2013 11:57 AM
I applaud the citizens of Oakland for taking the initiative. However, if we had a functional government, this sort of thing would not be necessary.
Cousin Dave at October 9, 2013 1:26 PM
Police services should be completely privatized:
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1045386?uid=3739448&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21102742846917
And they will be one day... this is just the first step.
Snoopy at October 9, 2013 3:09 PM
Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?
Since they criminalized doing it yourself.
Sosij at October 9, 2013 6:20 PM
Or reasonable gun laws could substitute:
I live in a state that only requires me to pass the BATF background check to buy or possess any firearm. There is a "shall issue" CCW system. Open carry is legal. And the state has preemption over local laws.
In other words, if a bunch of local citizens wanted to form an armed "neighborhood watch" type system, or just pay a couple of local retirees to play the role they could do it with very little interference by the local LEO.
Jim P. at October 9, 2013 8:28 PM
Did you know that Zimmerman was operating as a private citizen when he saw Martin? He was not on a neighborhood watch when he saw a stranger in a gated community? He actually had his son in his vehicle and was headed to a hardware store when it happened?
But thank you for posting your ignorance for the rest of everybody.
Jim P. at October 9, 2013 8:32 PM
"Since when is the government required to protect you as an individual?"
The correct answer, of course, is that it is not.
Look up Warren v. DC. Police are NOT required to protect your person. This is actually reasonable, because they physically cannot do anything of the sort, and the first lawsuit for failure to do so would bankrupt the police agency, if not the city, county or even state, removing such protection as is actually provided and to which we are accustomed.
There are a lot of people who believe that government is here to care for them. The word for that idea is "delusion".
Radwaste at October 10, 2013 3:12 AM
But thank you for posting your ignorance for the rest of everybody. - Posted by: Jim P. at October 9, 2013 8:32 PM
Are you saying that this neighborhood paying for private security has a different objective than the gated community of George Zimmerman?
Goo at October 10, 2013 4:22 AM
Ask me if I care that George Zimmerman was "operating as a private citizen" when he saved his own life. Maybe he should have let himself be beaten to death.
MarkD at October 10, 2013 5:40 AM
The objective is the same, but throwing out trolling subjects is meant to try and distract from the subject at hand.
Zimmerman was acting on his own when he was attacked by Martin. Most of the community watch programs are setup that if the volunteers have a CCW they are not allowed to carry when they are acting as a watch member.
So bringing it up as a first post means that you are trying to play a troll.
Jim P. at October 10, 2013 7:30 PM
Jim P. The subject I threw out was exactly about the subject at hand. You appear to have a chip on your shoulder.
Goo at October 11, 2013 5:09 AM
Leave a comment