Only the rich can afford private security to replace defended cops in California.

Categories: Criminals


ChuckInBama · December 24, 2021 at 10:23 am

If the local political environment does not support a safe environment for business, then why do the business owners remain ? No businesses, no revenue, no more stupid politicians (for a while).

Jonathan · December 24, 2021 at 10:27 am

I’m surprised the city hasn’t defanged private security as well as cops.
In mob smash and grab situations, what can private security legally do?

D · December 24, 2021 at 11:34 am

“the price tag just isn’t “feasible” amid the obstacles already in place for business owners in the city”

Duh. Remove the ‘obstacles’. Stop paying taxes and put that money towards the services you actually want that the government just can’t seem to do with all the money they’re stealing from you, your friends, your enemies, your neighbors, and your future children.

Big Ruckus D · December 24, 2021 at 4:02 pm

Don’t see how private security will be a panacea, even for those who can afford it. First, said private security may be able to maintain a limited bubble of protection around these damnable whores, but their ability to project force is limited by both their ability to be overwhelmed by large numhers of determined bad guys, and the fact that they face legal culpability for having to forcibly detain – or God forbid – kill some vibrant diversity in the course of protecting whoever is paying them.

You can figure most private security officers of the calibre involved here are white (likely many ex-MIL or related contract mercenaries) and even if they are black (or some other non-white), if they shoot and kill, or even restrain, some miscrant in a peceptibly problematic way – especially on a gaggle of cell phone cameras – they will be made a burnt offering.

First, they lack the qualified immunity given to official state sanctioned cops. Secondly, qualified immunity can be summarily discarded whenever politically expedient; just ask Derek Chauvin about that. Both they and the company they are working for will be subject to legal repercussions for actions that non-private cops are given much more lattitude on; except for when they suddenly aren’t either. We’ve seen enough examples of this to know all the kings horses and all the kings men are expendable if the cathedral decides such a public sacrifice is neccessary and appropropriate. And I don’t believe for a moment that these pricks retaining private security will protect their hired agents in the event they do something that “looks bad”. These people are masters of having it both ways and concerning themselves not a whit over the quaint noitons of hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance. Loylaty is a non-existent concept to them.

So really, the big question is this: knowing all the above to be true by repeated real world demonstrations of same, what abject fucking moron agrees to take such an assignment, knowing they will eventually end up thrown to the wolves the moment their usefulness turns to liability? Sure, the money is good. Up until it isn’t. But most of these guys seem to have foresight shorter than their ‘roid shriveled dicks anyway, so I’m not surprised.

If they didn’t we wouldn’t keep seeing cops get strung up like Chauvin and so many others before him did; they would have abandoned en masse an occupation that is so cavalier about pulling the rug out from under them the moment the commit a public relations sin against a protected class member.

They have, in effect, left themselves wide open for ruination at the hands of their masters, just to keep collecting the precious shackles, while deluding themselves into a false confidence that they won’t ever end up in that type of no-win situation.

Under the circumstances, I can find no fucks to give for either the cops – be they public or private – nor those they are charged with protecting. As I see it, both sides are sellouts, and neither have my interests as a priority, or even a passing considerstion. Note that I don’t expect them to, ether. But I do demand they stop expecting my respect and deference (as well as monetary support via taxation) when they have none towards me.

Comments are closed.