71:
53:
81:
22:
667:
632:
This article has bothered me for years. I’ve re-written the intro, although it’s still essentially pure WP:OR. In the meantime, I at least tried to write it so it’s a bit more concise and encyclopedic-sounding. Any assistance with writing or — more importantly — gathering sources, would be immensely
539:
who are civilian security officers that are armed and attested as special constables within
Northern Ireland. Even in this case the term 'police' is stretched to its thinest point of definition as the personnel of the Northern Ireland Security Guard Service are not employed to 'police' things, they
193:
Needs some headings or something to make it more reader friendly and wiki. QUESTION: Does this include "company police"? For example Henry Ford's strikebreaking thugs? Is this term in common usage in the US? I watch a lot of Yankee TV and movies, and its not a familiar term. Seems to be a catch all
477:
My first reaction was that this was a nonsensical attempt at creating a classification that wasn't necessary. The more I read into it, I realized that this article seems to be a misguided attempt to take a UK local term and somehow give it world-wide meaning by bootstrapping other agency roles to
473:
I worked in one of the law enforcement agencies named for over 25 years (U.S.). Not once did we ever refer to ourselves as "Security Police." Not once did anyone else in law enforcement refer to us as "Security Police." Not once were we referred to by media, politicians or the public as "Security
293:
IMO, a rewrite would make more sense to me because it appears that the problems have to do with the topic not being conceived with much thought in the first place, and now it lacks clarity and structure. Defining security police is the first place to start, but that would be hard to do with what's
260:
The article goes into obscure details, such as the structure and training of specific agencies' officers, yet does not clearly define what "Security Police" refers to. They are, for example, "usually" employed by government. So what makes them different from any other policing body? Why is the MTA
172:
I decided to 'be bold' and do a complete rewrite to separate legal authority from anatomy. The distinction between security police and other police agencies is 1) their focus on protecting a specific chunk of property and 2) the differences in their legal authority, which have prompted some of the
567:
This article is full of irrelevant POV forks about what may or may not be considered "security police" it should confine itself to describing only organisations that describe themselves as security police, as an exact phrase, or to a history of the term. At the moment this is basically a rambling
642:
believe that this article should be deleted. However, apart from the WP:OR issues — which I believe can be overcome — the other big issue — and the reason this article was discussed to be deleted years back — is the fact that “security police” can be divided into two groups; Sworn LEOs whom
240:
Although the length of this entry suggests it is an article rather than a stub, I have given it that tag because this needs a complete overhaul. At present, it is little more than scattered bits of information that are not clearly connected to the topic. Some specific problems:
256:
Two full paragraphs are devoted to the MTA police, which "is a defunct agency" according to the article. If it's defunct, why is it even here (and what does RTD stand for)? Perhaps if there were a general history section, its mention might be warranted, but not in the current
568:
treatise, overly padded with irrelevant trivia about police organisations that in some cases are missing even the most tenuous link to the subject at hand. In any case its claims should be backed up by reliable sources rather than the author's own personal narrative.
265:
There are other problem areas, but the above suggestions could serve as a starting point for making this article comprehensible. The absence of sources to me suggests that finding sources to base this article on should be the first step in making it an acceptable
502:
of Saudi Arabia and other countries. The word "police" means "sworn officers of the law". Those that monitor shops and sports venues are "security guards". Security police seems to be an attempt to blend the two, but I'm not really buying it. However,
649:
My contention is that we should keep this article about ‘traditional’ security police, and create a new article of “State security police” or something along those lines. We could outline specific agencies that often use/are referred to by this term.
276:
I'm going to go through this and take a look at it. Since most of us in the LE WikiProject are UK Constable or
Special, and I seem to be the only person who's career security, I'll see if I can figure out what's going on and broaden it a
478:
fit a narrow definition. And, the suggestion that
Wackenhut should be included in this definition not only further complicates things (how can civilian non-police be considered as police of any sort?) simply boggles the mind.
526:
245:
More than half of the article is about Los
Angeles organizations, the contents of which has little to do with the topic "Security Police." E.g., California State law regarding peace officers working off duty as security
609:
I have to agree. I've edited this article a few times and have noticed what a free-for-all it is. Some articles just lend themselves to being big blogs of unsourced half-truths. Not sure how to fix it.
540:
are employed to provide security and by way of an addendum have the privileges of a special constable almost entirely for the purpose of avoiding issues of legality surrounding the carrie of firearms.
141:
680:
486:
178:
111:
107:
646:
In the past, the general sentiment was to either delete this article completely or to make it solely about the aforementioned intelligence-security apparatuses.
699:
135:
557:
311:
I did another pass on this and it hurts my head. I'll take at it soon enough, though. Ow, whoever wrote this just mangled things together, it looks like.
465:
164:
103:
498:– The term "security policy" brings to my mind "secret police", like the kind a repressive government uses to suppress its citizens. Or perhaps the
490:
521:
704:
694:
627:
93:
619:
604:
470:
This is an incredibly confusing article that wends its way through personal opinion to bias, taking a short detour through nonsense.
346:
on reading this seems to more idiomatic and coloquial than anything formal. There is as far as I am aware no general type of LEA of
392:
229:
213:
325:
315:
298:
668:
Should "The number of sworn police officers in Sweden were" be replaced with "The number of sworn police officers in Sweden was"?
662:
536:
98:
58:
320:
I hear ya. It looks like it was excess that was carved off from other articles - someone's delinquent daughter article : -->
482:
174:
261:
police included and not the LAPD? Conversely, what makes security police different from run of the mill security guards?
460:
413:
585:
438:
182:
167:
285:
270:
198:
429:
33:
456:
281:
I can either start a rewrite or write the answers to the questions posed above here... Suggestions?
481:
Can we just close this down as being too ambitious a definition stretch and simply not needed?
253:
are not complete sentences. Numerous other technical writing errors make this a confusing read.
21:
615:
576:
548:
515:
39:
532:
531:"Security Police" is a term that has no legal basis in United Kingdom law or nomenclature.
452:
421:
8:
600:
535:
does, but we already have an article on that. The only possible exception to this is the
398:
562:
474:
Police." There was no law that declared us to be or set us apart as "Security Police."
388:
235:
225:
209:
188:
173:
chunky rewrites by serving security police which are incomprehensible to everyone else
507:. The right editor, with knowledge of the subject, can still make something of this.
676:
658:
643:
essentially function as security guards and state intelligence-security apparatuses.
443:
163:
Wow, was this a complete page rewrite. AND it lost out on the original definition.--
611:
569:
541:
509:
499:
404:
158:
596:
70:
52:
688:
384:
338:
It still looks like a mangle. In my opinion it is bad enough to be labelled
221:
205:
672:
654:
592:
322:
312:
295:
282:
267:
195:
86:
448:
220:
PS - Some in line references to where the term is used might help.
80:
350:. There are public safety and by-law enforcement agencies such as
403:
How do you know that security police do not exist elsewhere? →
377:
articles about LEAs which might have been referred to as
365:
might be to turn the article into a history of the term
527:
Which is exactly what I've done to the UK section...
76:
358:agencies providing close personal protection, etc.
140:This article has not yet received a rating on the
686:
700:Unknown-importance Law enforcement articles
19:
628:Attempting Re-Write/Splitting the Article
204:I agree - see my further comments below.
466:Doesn't need a re-write; needs a DELETE!
537:Northern Ireland Security Guard Service
451:is also an example of security police.
687:
120:Knowledge:WikiProject Law Enforcement
705:WikiProject Law Enforcement articles
123:Template:WikiProject Law Enforcement
15:
695:Stub-Class Law enforcement articles
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
14:
716:
505:the article should not be deleted
79:
69:
51:
20:
595:and should be deleted. Period.
1:
663:02:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
522:00:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
586:23:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
558:23:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
439:23:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
326:03:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
316:21:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
299:17:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
286:15:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
271:17:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
251:By 1993 when RTD became MTA.
7:
681:11:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
199:08:14, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
168:17:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
99:WikiProject Law Enforcement
92:This article is within the
10:
721:
491:23:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
620:03:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
605:21:56, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
461:01:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
294:currently in the article.
183:00:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
139:
64:
46:
393:04:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
230:05:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
214:05:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
126:Law enforcement articles
340:negatively encylcopedic
591:This article is total
28:This article is rated
194:for non-regular cops.
533:Special police force
369:, if it really is a
356:protective security
381:from time to time.
373:one, and refer to
249:Sentences such as
34:content assessment
437:
156:
155:
152:
151:
148:
147:
712:
583:
574:
555:
546:
520:
500:religious police
434:
426:
418:
411:
409:
142:importance scale
128:
127:
124:
121:
118:
89:
84:
83:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
47:
31:
25:
24:
16:
720:
719:
715:
714:
713:
711:
710:
709:
685:
684:
670:
630:
582:
577:
570:
565:
554:
549:
542:
529:
508:
468:
453:Aldrich Hanssen
446:
430:
422:
414:
405:
401:
379:security police
367:security police
361:An appropriate
348:security police
344:security police
238:
191:
161:
125:
122:
119:
117:Law Enforcement
116:
115:
85:
78:
59:Law Enforcement
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
718:
708:
707:
702:
697:
669:
666:
629:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
578:
564:
561:
550:
528:
525:
467:
464:
445:
442:
400:
397:
396:
395:
382:
359:
352:transit police
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
304:
303:
302:
301:
279:
278:
263:
262:
258:
254:
247:
237:
234:
233:
232:
217:
216:
190:
187:
160:
157:
154:
153:
150:
149:
146:
145:
138:
132:
131:
129:
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
717:
706:
703:
701:
698:
696:
693:
692:
690:
683:
682:
678:
674:
665:
664:
660:
656:
651:
647:
644:
641:
640:
634:
633:appreciated.
621:
617:
613:
608:
607:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
589:
588:
587:
584:
581:
575:
573:
560:
559:
556:
553:
547:
545:
538:
534:
524:
523:
519:
518:
513:
512:
506:
501:
497:
493:
492:
488:
484:
483:68.32.246.239
479:
475:
471:
463:
462:
458:
454:
450:
441:
440:
435:
433:
427:
425:
419:
417:
410:
408:
394:
390:
386:
383:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
360:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
337:
336:
327:
324:
319:
318:
317:
314:
310:
309:
308:
307:
306:
305:
300:
297:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
284:
275:
274:
273:
272:
269:
259:
255:
252:
248:
244:
243:
242:
231:
227:
223:
219:
218:
215:
211:
207:
203:
202:
201:
200:
197:
186:
185:17 July 2009
184:
180:
176:
175:71.141.252.44
170:
169:
166:
143:
137:
134:
133:
130:
113:
109:
105:
101:
100:
95:
88:
82:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
671:
652:
648:
645:
638:
637:
635:
631:
579:
571:
566:
551:
543:
530:
516:
510:
504:
495:
494:
480:
476:
472:
469:
447:
431:
423:
415:
406:
402:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
355:
351:
347:
343:
342:. The term
339:
280:
264:
250:
239:
192:
171:
162:
97:
40:WikiProjects
612:Magnolia677
572:Bellerophon
544:Bellerophon
511:Senator2029
399:Tag removal
165:68.32.11.74
689:Categories
653:Thoughts?
580:talk to me
563:Essay-like
552:talk to me
407:James Kidd
257:structure.
236:Assessment
189:Term/title
87:Law portal
30:Stub-class
597:oknazevad
449:Wackenhut
444:Wackenhut
102:. Please
496:Disagree
385:Peet Ern
222:Peet Ern
206:Peet Ern
673:Apokrif
655:MWFwiki
371:notable
363:dewrite
323:Bobanny
313:Pyrogen
296:Bobanny
283:Pyrogen
268:Bobanny
246:guards.
196:Bobanny
159:Rewrite
96:of the
517:“Talk”
354:, and
266:entry.
112:Assess
110:, and
108:Create
36:scale.
636:I do
593:WP:OR
432:email
416:contr
94:scope
677:talk
659:talk
616:talk
601:talk
487:talk
457:talk
424:talk
389:talk
375:main
277:bit.
226:talk
210:talk
179:talk
104:Join
639:not
321:;)
136:???
691::
679:)
661:)
618:)
603:)
514:➔
489:)
459:)
391:)
228:)
212:)
181:)
106:,
675:(
657:(
614:(
599:(
485:(
455:(
436:)
428:/
420:/
412:(
387:(
224:(
208:(
177:(
144:.
114:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
