Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

minnesotareformer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 606 posts

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#141

Post by NickC25 »

nradov wrote: post #92
brightball wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's not prosecuted, it's defacto legal. What we really need in this country is a way to prosecute which bypasses the DA since this type of thing seems to be becoming more common.

We have a way. In most states the Attorney General can assign a prosecutor to pursue local corruption cases. The AG is an elected office accountable to voters.

However, the prosecutor often is beholden to local police departments to prosecute other unrelated crime. Most DAs don't have the ability to bite the hand that feeds them.

If a DA comes out and says "hey, I'm investigating a racket that is put on by local cops" those local cops (and their union) will fight tooth and nail to remove that DA, no matter how effective their other investigations are. If that AG or DA is out of a job, and try to spill the beans, they can be threatened, or ignored outright by local media or other prosecutors who have legitimate reasons to not rock the boat.

Organized corruption begets more organized corruption.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#142

Post by Ajedi32 »

nanidin wrote: post #137
Ajedi32 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and that's where the crime angle to this comes into play. Are the businesses really the "source of rowdy behavior", or is it actually the people who frequent those particular establishments? And if the latter, shouldn't that be the city's responsibility to deal with those people to make sure they aren't able to continue to repeatedly act in a disruptive manner requiring a police response? Why are they making th…

There is a Walmart in my metro area that is responsible for like 80% of all police calls within their municipality. This is the same Walmart that leeches off society in other ways like paying sub-living wages so that employees need to rely on social safety nets to survive. I'm not sure if they have to hire private security, but this is a prime example of a business that should be securing itself or changing location.

To me that actually sounds like a clear example of a business that shouldn't have to hire private security. At least with bars you can claim that the bar is indirectly responsible for instigating the distributive behavior by serving people alcohol. I don't know how you make that argument for a Walmart.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#143

Post by NickC25 »

nanidin wrote: post #137
Ajedi32 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and that's where the crime angle to this comes into play. Are the businesses really the "source of rowdy behavior", or is it actually the people who frequent those particular establishments? And if the latter, shouldn't that be the city's responsibility to deal with those people to make sure they aren't able to continue to repeatedly act in a disruptive manner requiring a police response? Why are they making th…

There is a Walmart in my metro area that is responsible for like 80% of all police calls within their municipality. This is the same Walmart that leeches off society in other ways like paying sub-living wages so that employees need to rely on social safety nets to survive. I'm not sure if they have to hire private security, but this is a prime example of a business that should be securing itself or changing location.

They should be mandated to hire private security. If they are utilizing the majority of the resources available but aren't willing to pay the real costs of that, well, they need to suck it up and pay.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#144

Post by wolverine876 »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #7
shipscode wrote: post #5

Why not just train staff and carry guns?

Even with guns, minimum wage people aren't gonna want to be heroes and risk their lives protecting the money of their boss, when threatened at gunpoint. Even if they're willing to pull the trigger, your average 7-Eleven employee is no Navy Seal and won't react well under gunpoint pressure and might end up shooting some innocent bystander or himself. Just giving guns to everyone is bad idea on so many levels.

Also, people don't want to shoot other people or kill them.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#145

Post by JTbane »

DonnyV wrote: post #57
MattGaiser wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the shortage of cops, I am not sure there is the appetite for this. Politically, cops shaking down businesses people associate with trouble seems more palatable than exacerbating the police shortage.

Here one solution that could fix shortage and quality in police departments. I see a lot of college educated people that can't find jobs. Raise the requirement for being a cop to need 2 to 4 years of college and hire all the college people looking for work. That will also fix most of the corruption problems. I bet a lot of college graduates would kill for a pension right about now.

I honestly think this is a great idea, I'd go even further to require a minimum 2-year criminal justice degree.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#146

Post by Daviey »

I'm constantly surprised that the US allows off-duty police to "moonlight" as security.

What is worse, many states seem to allow them to wear both their uniform and retain their police powers, whilst being paid in a private capacity.

Which other countries allow this?

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#147

Post by stronglikedan »

bombcar wrote: post #138
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not envisioning any society in particular. Instead, I would ask you a question. It's a little contrived, so bear with me. Imagine a situation that you could plausibly find yourself in where you would feel the need to contact the police. It need not be a 911 call, though those are fine too. Imagine how that would go down... the time of day you contact them. Where you would be when it happened. How you would descr…

If that's all they do, who is arresting the murders?

Detectives, or tactical teams at the direction of detectives. Street cops are as bad as the parent describes in most areas.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#148

Post by wolverine876 »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #40
hnlmorg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think this point gets plastered everywhere in the entirety of the world enough. That’s because most of the rest of the world doesnt respond to gun crime with arguments that the solution is to issue more guns.

Sadly, that ship has long sailed for the US. Second amendment and all.

The Second Amendment is centuries old. The current interpretation of it is only a decade or two old. For centuries before that, other interpretations prevailed - the oddball is the current radical one.

If one more person tells me 'the ship has sailed' or some other hopeless cliche of the moment - yes, the smart trend of the moment is despair! - about anything .... The radical gun people sure don't think that way, and their positions are obvious, absurd horsecrap. The only problem is you (and many like you) quitting.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#149

Post by rjmunro »

slipperlobster wrote: post #96

We have a bunch of off-duty police here in the southeast US that do traffic control for churches, HOAs, etc. Not the same as security, I guess, but tangentially related. I always wonder how this is legally allowed. The idea of using taxpayer vehicles, training, equipment, etc. to control traffic while also leveraging the power of the badge to hold authority seems legally questionable, but IANAL.

In the UK, I believe that if you organise a large event that needs police coverage, you pay the Police force to provide on-duty officers. This seems a lot less open to corruption because it would be based on a standard price list that was public, and the officers received the same as they would doing any other duties.

I know that's how it worked at some events my Dad organised in the 90s. I can't find anything about this on any Police force website, so it might be that it doesn't work like that any more.

Re: Small business owners say they're pressured to hire off-duty cops for security

#150

Post by kyleee »

avgcorrection wrote: post #127
shadowgovt wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's dangerous to extrapolate too much from the early 1900s because the US not being ground zero for two World Wars, therefore able to serve as an industrial core to help rebuild the destruction, created economic opportunity the likes of which one hopes we never see again. Lacking that destruction creating a huge market for American business, it's hard to predict what happens if America lets its domestic capitalism g…

> created economic opportunity the likes of which one hopes we never see again. What?

Poster is hoping for no more large wars
Post reply on HN