User:Germanf5/Private police in the United States/Bibliography

Brunger. (2012). Private policing: Mark Brunger considers the recent proposals to outsource elements of frontline policing to private providers. Criminal Justice Matters, 89(1), 10–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/09627251.2012.721965

Eagly, & Schwartz, J. C. (2018). Lexipol: The Privatization of Police Policymaking. Texas Law Review, 96(5), 891–976.

Jing. (2010). Prison privatization: a perspective on core governmental functions. Crime, Law, and Social Change, 54(3-4), 263–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-010-9254-5

Legitimacy of private policing boils down to the use of force they are allowed to use on duty and what for. The answer to this shows us what roles security can take and the affect these private officers can have in the field and in security. Studies show that through time even though it has been slow, there has been a positive change to the outlook of private policing. In the beginning, private policing was viewed as more of a separate category then the public security force. Through time though, it has become progressively more visible to reaching the level and looked at as more of a partner to the public security force. Even though private policing is becoming more significant in the field, research shows that the industry still suffers from the traditional shortcomings when compared to public police. These are, “a lack of (legal) power, legitimacy, expertise and professional skills, training, and accountability”. With much progress in the field, the two biggest issues are limited legitimacy and and and the available use of force. These two reasons  are crippling when looking to earn the title of  “legitimate” in the policing industry.

Traditionally, private security isn’t necessarily linked to the use of force or being able to coerce people. With the growth of private security, this is the reason there are concerns on if private security would be able to take the place of public police in situations. The lack of power to coerce people is directly associated to the lack of legal power given to private security. Seeing how private police are usually stripped of any special power that their public counterparts have, they do not hold any special status and are simply regular citizens. This points to the fact that the industry of private policing does not rely on the use of force to achieve their goals. Instead of ordering people to do things they act on the environment and surroundings to get people to conform. When meeting resistance they will look more at bargaining rather then violence. This is why security companies look more for individuals with verbal skills rather then physical ones. There are situations where security can use force if given instruction to from a land or buisness owner. They can give security the power to refuse entry to certain individuals who do not follow the rules of the private property. This means for example, that a mall security guard can expel any person not following the rules, and can use a limited amount of force to do so. This power is interesting because for one it is linked to the owners rights, and because of that, is not something that the police who are maintaining peace of the public sector, can do. It also shows the difference with private and public police and how they handle non conformity. Instead of attempting to arrest or detain a individual, they instead focus on the removal of said person from the premises.

The quest for legitimacy in private policing isn’t to look for a way to become more like police and eventually replace them, it’s more looking to increase visibility in the eyes of the states authority, and from that, gain new contracts for the industry. Private security does not need the title of legitimacy to maintain order and produce security effectively, but to grow the industry. As stated before, the goals of private and public security greatly differ, with one more softer and looking to diffuse and remove a threat, while the other looks to make one suffer a punishment for their actions. This is why private police are considered “legitimate” when staying inside their own realm of expertise. On the other hand, if they started to branch out and attempt to do more police work, then the question of legitimacy would be tougher to prove