MoonShadow
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
 |
July 08, 2012, 03:57:45 PM |
|
How many security firms do you want to choose from? Five? Let's say five. So to equal the density of a municipal police force, that would mean five times as many officers employed at those security firms. That's five times as many officers being paid.
Wanna try making sense? If you replaced the current police force with 5 private agencies, that doesn't mean there are five times as many officers. What kind of dumbass logic is that?!?! It just means that each firm will be one fifth the size of the former monopoly. People aren't going to change careers just because there are more companies to choose from. So you want a security firm that has only one fifth the number of feet on the ground than what has presumably been determined to be an adequate number? Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Due to the random nature of crime, there will be times when your call for help will result in a much longer response time than occurs now. There's no way around it. From a logical point of view, all you need to do is take the notion to the extreme to see the problem. First of all, just because a publicly funded police force has a certain number of cops, does not imply that that number is optimum. Second, in every city that I've lived in there were always the city cops, the county sherriffs (and contables), the state cops and the city cops of the surrounding suburban cities. All of these different units communicated fine and seemed to manage the distribution of workload without significant problems. There is no reason to assume that several private security units working in an overlapping geographical area couldn't manage to do the same. The 911 operators generally have to choose which unit to call, and have radios that can switch frequencies to do exactly that (or call the different units' own dispatchers to do it). |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
|
|
|
"With e-currency based on cryptographic proof, without the need to
trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions
effortless." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FirstAscent (OP)
|
|
July 08, 2012, 04:09:31 PM |
|
How many security firms do you want to choose from? Five? Let's say five. So to equal the density of a municipal police force, that would mean five times as many officers employed at those security firms. That's five times as many officers being paid.
Wanna try making sense? If you replaced the current police force with 5 private agencies, that doesn't mean there are five times as many officers. What kind of dumbass logic is that?!?! It just means that each firm will be one fifth the size of the former monopoly. People aren't going to change careers just because there are more companies to choose from. So you want a security firm that has only one fifth the number of feet on the ground than what has presumably been determined to be an adequate number? Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Due to the random nature of crime, there will be times when your call for help will result in a much longer response time than occurs now. There's no way around it. From a logical point of view, all you need to do is take the notion to the extreme to see the problem. First of all, just because a publicly funded police force has a certain number of cops, does not imply that that number is optimum. Second, in every city that I've lived in there were always the city cops, the county sherriffs (and contables), the state cops and the city cops of the surrounding suburban cities. All of these different units communicated fine and seemed to manage the distribution of workload without significant problems. There is no reason to assume that several private security units working in an overlapping geographical area couldn't manage to do the same. The 911 operators generally have to choose which unit to call, and have radios that can switch frequencies to do exactly that (or call the different units' own dispatchers to do it). Understood, assuming we're not talking about NAP, which might be the case. This forum has so much NAPsterism material in it that I often forget that sometimes we're not talking about NAP. |
|
|
|
|
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
|
|
July 08, 2012, 04:22:57 PM |
|
How many security firms do you want to choose from? Five? Let's say five. So to equal the density of a municipal police force, that would mean five times as many officers employed at those security firms. That's five times as many officers being paid.
Wanna try making sense? If you replaced the current police force with 5 private agencies, that doesn't mean there are five times as many officers. What kind of dumbass logic is that?!?! It just means that each firm will be one fifth the size of the former monopoly. People aren't going to change careers just because there are more companies to choose from. So you want a security firm that has only one fifth the number of feet on the ground than what has presumably been determined to be an adequate number? Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Due to the random nature of crime, there will be times when your call for help will result in a much longer response time than occurs now. There's no way around it. From a logical point of view, all you need to do is take the notion to the extreme to see the problem. That's the dumbest thing I've heard today. Of course the government cops are WAY over funded and have WAY more personnel than what is needed. I don't even want to pay for ANY of them - and of course they aren't necessary- you're making ASSumptions. Better to stay quiet and let people just think you're stupid, then to start typing and remove all doubt. |
I'm grumpy!!
|
|
|
|
myrkul
|
|
July 08, 2012, 06:06:30 PM |
|
Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Each. They will each have 1/5 the density. Real quick, now, what's 1/5 times 5? |
|
|
|
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003
|
|
July 08, 2012, 06:36:02 PM |
|
Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Each. They will each have 1/5 the density. Real quick, now, what's 1/5 times 5? +1 derp! |
I'm grumpy!!
|
|
|
|
FirstAscent (OP)
|
|
July 09, 2012, 03:49:33 AM |
|
Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Each. They will each have 1/5 the density. Real quick, now, what's 1/5 times 5? Are you unable to read my last post? |
|
|
|
|
|
