You Can Defund The Police But How Do You Defund Private Security That Replace Them

Private police are accountable to their paymasters. Publicly funded police are accountable to, and part of, the public.

Portland seems to be a flagship experiment in private policing.

Private security firms in Oregon are notoriously underregulated, and their employees are required to receive a fraction of the training and oversight as public law enforcement. They remain accountable primarily to their clients, not the public.

www.opb.org...

While police officers are required to report each use of force to supervisors, state regulators do not require private guards to do any incident reporting.

www.opb.org...

“One of the very concerning things about privatized space and the use of private security is that it is harder to show that constitutional rights apply, even when these private security officers are engaging in the same activities that police would be engaged in,” she said. “They’re not bound by the Constitution.”

www.opb.org...

The security officer not licensed to carry a gun who fatally shot a man in a North Portland parking lot earlier this year is now facing a murder charge . . . it may be difficult or even impossible for the state’s public safety agency to close private security companies that break the rules.

katu.com...

There were several major anti-police psyops carried out in Britain in the eighties. Military dressed as police carried out very violent attacks on miners and Free Festival Travellers. As these atrocities were 'uncovered' in the following decades we were supposed to use the prepared narrative as a weapon against the Office of Constable and prepare the ground for private security to take over. Pre-covid it was often difficult for people to see how they were being played. Now it's obvious the controllers of the covid depopulation operation need private security in charge to make mass murder possible. Supporting the police while holding them fully accountable has never been more urgent.

How do you defund private security. You make sure the government never gives any private security company qualified immunity. They abuse a person rights or destroy private property, they can be held liable, instead of tax payer being on the hook. Let's see how long private security companies keeps bad apples around, when the company is liable for them.

As long as private security is retained by the very politicians and celebrities who rally “Defund the police!”, they’re not going to be defunded.

a reply to: Kester

“They’re not bound by the Constitution.”

Uh..everyone on U.S. soil is bound by the constitution.

With police, fire bad apples, and use the money saved to step up training. As far as qualified immunity is concerned I can see accidental property damage but violation of constitutional rights shouldn't be covered. These guys should know the constitution better than anyone. It should be a requirement for them to be able to recite the entire constitution from memory before they even leave the academy and once a month thereafter.

a reply to: Kester

Yes private security and gated communities will be the norm. Regular police are either going to be more militarised like riot police or just there for show like those NPCO’s.

A pattern I’ve noticed is how police throughout the world look almost indistinguishable from on another, especially riot police, they look like robo cop or something.

you mention free festivals and travellers. Just look how different festivals are today to how they were as an indicator of how much society has changed.

Here is the deal:

The knucklehead "boots on the ground" BLM members lack the fore site and critical thinking skills to realize there's this thing called The Law of Unintended Consequences. They simply can't connect the dots to realize that, should publicly-funded law enforcement be curtailed, an alternative WILL arise to protect life, limb and assets, and I don't think the BLM crowd will be very pleased with the alternatives (i.e. private security).

The folks at the top, politicians, luminaries, etc....they already HAVE private security. The dissolution of police wouldn't phase them one bit, in fact, when/if their security has to take action in a world with diminished policing, there will be less red tape and investigations into what their security is doing.

So a good chunk of society is not bright enough to see how ill-conceived this idea is, and the upper crust of society couldn't care less.

Here is a good video that lays this out, and is a message to those of us "in the middle", i.e. not BLM and not someone important to walk around with their own security contingent.

Rome fell for many reasons but one was due to private security (mercenaries). The mercenaries filled the gap of their depleted military but mercenaries didn't have the loyalty of the Roman legions.

Private security works but once it starts making up a large portion of the state forces the state will fail. The mercenaries band together and realize they can just take power for themselves since they are the real power. They have no loyalty to politicians, people and culture.

We are in the early stages of it right now where politicians that steal and grift money from taxpayers hire their own police force because the real forces tried to hold them accountable hence the "defund" the police.

There will be a push to get loyal police and military back but it will fail. The Federal Government is too corrupt and fights accountability. On a personal note, I've been asked to return to the military several times despite serving 20 years and retiring 8 years ago. Same thing happened in the throws of the Roman Empire. They started begging for their retired military back but they declined.

Do they have G4S chicken # security in the US

Private Security will succeed because unlike the Police and Military they don't care about pro-nouns and diversity quotas, they just want ruthless thugs who will follow orders.

And if you succeed in de fanging private security you will see more Kyles out there. We should be focusing on how to eliminate criminals.....

I'd pitch in for private security for my HOA. If they didn't assist anyone in neighboring communities or the apartment complex just built adjacent to my HOA.

It would be worth it, if and only if they stayed my community around the clock and did not leave our community. That is what the public police are for. So the Apartment complex can either get their own private security or use the public police who won't respond until it is too late, as it is in most places that have drastically cut back on paying for actual police.

If it comes to that, I'd gladly pay, especially if our area went all California on us with laws that protect criminals and punish victims by telling them to get used to having their stuff stolen or getting beat up as the cost of living in such a fantastic area.

NO one can defund the private police but those who won't pay for them. That is the advantage of paying for a private security firm.

originally posted by: Kester


There were several major anti-police psyops carried out in Britain in the eighties. Military dressed as police carried out very violent attacks on miners and Free Festival Travellers. As these atrocities were 'uncovered' in the following decades we were supposed to use the prepared narrative as a weapon against the Office of Constable and prepare the ground for private security to take over.

Seriously? I've seen government files on this kind of stuff and there was nothing anti-police psyops about it.

It was the authoritarian right wing of the Conservative Party pushing to see how much they could get away with,

What has happened since is the liberal backlash.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Kester

“They’re not bound by the Constitution.”

Uh..everyone on U.S. soil is bound by the constitution. .

Wrong. The U.S. constitution limits Government, and restrains it. It does pertain to the citizenry.

The first 10 amendments are not a list of your rights, for an example, nor does it grant those rights. Now before you object, im going to post a sign in your front yard. You touch it you violate my first amendment. Im also going to BBQ in your yard. Dont chase me off, or your violating my right to assemble....

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Kester

“They’re not bound by the Constitution.”

Uh..everyone on U.S. soil is bound by the constitution. .

Wrong. The U.S. constitution limits Government, and restrains it. It does pertain to the citizenry.

The first 10 amendments are not a list of your rights, for an example, nor does it grant those rights. Now before you object, im going to post a sign in your front yard. You touch it you violate my first amendment. Im also going to BBQ in your yard. Dont chase me off, or your violating my right to assemble....

LoL horrible argument. Nvm

Hmm not a bad model for those lawless liberal states. Anyone want to loot a store that has a sniper team watching you while you shop, and a tank parked outside just in case you manage to get outside with that stolen pack of toilet paper? Just saying.

Why does this talk of private security policing the streets remind me of Robocop?

"I'd buy that for a dollar!"

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Kester

“They’re not bound by the Constitution.”

Uh..everyone on U.S. soil is bound by the constitution. .

Wrong. The U.S. constitution limits Government, and restrains it. It does pertain to the citizenry.

The first 10 amendments are not a list of your rights, for an example, nor does it grant those rights. Now before you object, im going to post a sign in your front yard. You touch it you violate my first amendment. Im also going to BBQ in your yard. Dont chase me off, or your violating my right to assemble....

LoL horrible argument. Nvm

Which article tells the citizens how to behave ?