Good Points...... On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 7:24 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 13 July 2016 > > *Why We Get More Policing Than We Need: It's "Free" *Ryan McMaken > > In a press conference Monday, Dallas Police Chief David Brown admitted > that the American propensity for sending the police to deal with every > minor social problem has failed: > > “We’re asking cops to do too much in this country” said Brown. “Every > societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve” said Brown. He listed > mental health, drug addiction, loose dogs, failing schools as problems the > public expects ‘cops to solve.’ > > “Seventy percent of the African American community is being raised by > single women, let’s give it to the cops to solve that as well” said Brown. > “Policing was never meant to solve all those problems.” > > Brown is right. > > In America today, the police are used as a general agency to intervene in > nearly any unpleasant situation that may arise. It has become a sign of the > times to see a headline like this one: "Mom calls 911 over son's video-game > habit." In this case, the police were actually dispatched to solve the > woman's problem free of charge. According to NBC news > <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34516954/ns/technology_and_science-games/t/mom-calls-over-sons-video-game-habit/#.V4QX9_krKUl>: > "Two officers who responded to the house persuaded the child to obey his > mother." > > Then, there was the case of the woman who called 911 > <http://www.wtae.com/news/local/police-customer-calls-911-over-wrong-order-at-burger-king/24607436> > because Burger King got her order wrong. > > Cases like these are extreme, of course, and largely serve as click bait > for readers looking for the outrage of the day. Nevertheless, they are > reminders that very little of what the police do in modern America involves > the prevention and punishment of violent crime or property crime. > > This is a modern innovation, and in the past, the police, the courts, and > armed law enforcement agents in general were designed to address primarily > violent crime and property crime. In their book Introduction to Criminal > Justice, Joseph Senna and Larry Siegel write: > > Police are expected to perform many civic duties that in earlier times > were the responsibility of every citizen: keeping the peace, performing > emergency medical care, and dealing with civil emergencies. Today, we leave > those tasks to the police. Although most of us agree that a neighborhood > brawl must be broken up, that the homeless family must be found shelter, or > the drunk taken safely home, few of us want to jump personally into the > fray: we'd rather "call the cops." > > John Dempsey and Linda Forst agree, noting > <https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Policing-John-S-Dempsey/dp/1133594700/?tag=misesinsti-20> > : > > We might agree with [Senna and Siegel]. They say that the police role has > become that of a social handywoman or handyman called to handle social > problems that citizens wish would just go away. > > The data suggests that they are right. In research on calls to police and > police activities, we find that most of what leads to calls to the police > involves something other than criminal activity. > > Dempsey and Forst continue: > > "[I]n a classic study of patrol activities in a city of 400,000, John > Webster found that providing social service functions and performing > administrative tasks accounted for 55 percent of police officers' time and > 57 percent of their calls. Activities involving crime fighting took only 17 > percent of patrol time and amounted to about 16 percent of the calls to the > police. Robert Lilly found that of 18,000 calls to a Kentucky police > department made during a four-month period, 60 percent were for > information, and 13 percent concerned traffic problems. Less than 3 percent > were about violent crime, and approximately 2 percent were about theft. > > In the Police Services Study (PSS), a survey of 26,000 calls to police in > 24 different police departments in 60 neighborhoods, researchers found that > only 19 percent of calls involved the report of a criminal activity. > > Part of the reason we hear so little about the lack of law enforcement > activities among police is because the police themselves prefer to portray > themselves as spending most of their time hunting down "bad guys." This > isn't the reality, but as George Kirkham observed > <https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Enforcement-George-Kirkham-1980-06-01/dp/B019NE6Z4I>: > > > The police have historically overemphasized their role as crime fighters > and played down their more common work as keepers of the peace and > providers of social services, simply because our society proffers rewards > for the former (crime fighting) but cares little for the latter > (peacekeeping and providing services). > > Nevertheless, as research by Matthew Hickman and Brian Reaves has shown > <http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/lpd03.pdf>, a sizable amount of > police agency time and resources goes to non-crime-related activities > including animal control, search and rescue, school crossing services, > emergency medical services, civil defense, fire services, "crime prevention > education," and underwater recovery operations. Police are also used for > parking enforcement, traffic direction, and commercial vehicle enforcement. > > Police have become a general agency for dealing with minor neighborhood > disputes such as unkempt lawns, and children playing "unsupervised" on > their own property > <http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/06/14/florida-parents-charged-felony-neglect-after-11-year-old-son-plays-backyard-90-minutes>. > One might call the police if a family member refuses > <http://theantimedia.org/mother-calls-police-to-help-her-son-take-his-medicine/> > to > take his medication > <http://theantimedia.org/mother-calls-police-to-help-her-son-take-his-medicine/>, > or if a family member is suicidal > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/04/06/parents-called-911-to-help-suicidal-daughter-and-police-ended-up-putting-a-bullet-in-her/?utm_term=.0afba62383ef> > but no threat to the community. These activities have no connection to > "crime fighting." > > Nevertheless, residents have become acquainted to calling the police on > even the most benign activities, such as the case of a suburban man who > called the police because a neighbor's father was "suspiciously" walking > through the neighborhood. Too lazy (or cowardly) to approach the man a > slow-moving grandfather who gave no indication of being violent and ask > him what he was up to, the "vigilant" citizen called the police instead > <https://www.rt.com/usa/329006-alabama-police-indian-national/>. > > > > *Heavily Armed, Taxpayer-Funded Arbitrators*Given that police services > are generally fully subsidized by taxpayers, this is to be expected. > > Since calling the police requires no financial obligation on the part of > the caller, calling the police on neighbors or others in the community > including non-criminals offers a low-cost means to intimidate or hassle > others at nearly-zero cost to the one calling 911. > > But, as history has shown, this is not the only way to handle disputes. As > recounted by Michael Giuliano here > <https://mises.org/library/problem-government-prosecutors>, the use of > government sanctions against a neighbor once required a demonstration in > court that the offender had inflicted damages against the alleged victim. > Obviously, this sort of due process could be costly and time consuming. So, > why go through all that trouble when numerous calls for the police might > frighten one's adversary enough to obviate the need for court action? The > fact that these police services are "free" contributes to their widespread > over-utilization. As with any subsidized activity, you'll get far more of > it than if the service were not subsidized. > > In all of these cases, though, the problem does not necessarily lie with > wishing to call in a third party that might act as a mediator or > arbitrator. Calling in a third party is often prudent. The problem here > lies with the fact that these services are all expected to be at someone > else's expense, and handled by people with guns as the very first step in > resolving the situation. > > > > *What If Other Industries Were Like Police Services?*Imagine if the same > standards were applied to other industries. In the case of health care, for > example, if the public expected the same model as employed in policing, > people would be regularly calling in to demand house calls from medical > personal for every broken bone or abrasion. In practice, though, rides to > the hospital in an ambulance are costly, and patients are expected to bear > at least some of the cost of medical services. Similar conditions apply in > non-police search and rescue operations in which the victim often receives > a bill in the mail after being rescued from some wilderness misadventure. > > With policing, however, there is no cost at all to demanding armed police > show up to confront an elderly man walking down the street. One can do it > repeatedly at no charge to the one making accusations. > > One can only guess what health care costs would look like were ambulance > services performed on a similar model. Obviously, if these services were > provided for free, the utilization of ambulances and paramedics would > quickly outstrip the supply, thus drawing services away from more serious > injuries and driving up the cost of the response to far more pressing > emergencies. After all, scarcity does not disappear because policymakers > have decided something should be free. > > The same is true of police services. Every minute that a police officer > spends searching someone for marijuana possession is a minute not available > for recovering stolen property or locating violent criminals. > > Moreover, the incessant usage of police for everything from animal control > to medical services means government agents trained in armed confrontations > with criminals will be continually brought into situations that do not > warrant such a response. Often, an unarmed expert with actual training in > dealing with the mentally ill or the homeless is a far wiser approach. When > police are used they way they are, we should not be surprised if these > situations then escalate into violence. > > No matter how poor a fit the police may be for a given situation, though, > the fact that police services are mostly paid for by someone else provides > an incentive for their continued use in a myriad of situations. > > > > *A Modest Proposal: Partial Privatization *The answer to this situation > is privatization. In a world where police can be used to address every > minor complaint, there will be no incentive on the part of the public to > limit the use of police services to true emergencies and criminal behavior. > If those who use police services were expected to pay for the service, > however, we would quickly find a reduction in the habit of calling the > police for services unrelated to crime. Moreover, a reduction in police > services in these cases would also open up markets for private firms to > address these issues at lower cost and with less threat of deadly force. > > Naturally, opponents of privatization will complain that privatization > will lead to only big corporations and rich people being able to benefit > from crime prevention services. As Murray Rothbard and Tate Fegley have > shown (see here <https://mises.org/blog/privatize-police>, here > <https://mises.org/library/tate-fegley-crime-and-punishment-libertarian-society>, > and here <https://mises.org/blog/private-policing-isnt-fantasy>), this is > an unconvincing argument. > > In the spirit of compromise, however, let's begin with baby steps and > limit taxpayer-provided police services to criminal activities only. Even > better, let's limit them to > <https://mises.org/blog/too-many-laws-why-police-encounters-escalate> real > violent crime and property crime > <https://mises.org/blog/too-many-laws-why-police-encounters-escalate>, > and not to non-crimes such as drug offenses and "crimes" such as carrying > knives and selling loose cigarettes. > > For now, "crime prevention" would still remain "free." If, however, you > want to call in people with guns to get your son off the Xbox, you can pay > a private firm for that. > > > http://bit.ly/29xqtPw > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
