Origins of the police

Re:Origins of the police by jessaustin on Wednesday December 24, 2014 @02:12PM (#8794119)

The timeline doesn't support this novel historical theory. Wild was executed in 1725, and the McDaniels were convicted in 1756. Metropolitan police forces weren't set up until the 1820s and 1830s. Did the theory you heard have any explanation for the 100-year gap between the scourge of "private security" (pretending for the sake of discussion that the thief-takers were in any sense similar to that) and creation of the police?

One might be tempted to comment on the irony of your chiding "Libertarians" [NB: TFA is of unionist if not Marxist perspective] for their poor history, if one were not distracted by the implication that "entrenched corruption" is a rarity in the current regime.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by HarryHirsch on Wednesday December 24, 2014 @04:41PM (#8794625)

Actually, the timeline does support the theory. The historical nucleus of the Metropolitan Police is the force organized by Henry Fielding, in the 1750s, when the Wild scandal was still on everyone's minds. That provided a template, and the growth of London in the late 18th/early 19th century meant that local forces were unable to keep up. In 1830 or thereabouts the local constabularies were amalgamated into the Met.

As for the corruption bit, with private security forces we know the weakness from the historical example already. With public police, public oversight puts a limit on corruption, at least in theory. Certainly London saw an improvement with the government providing police service.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by jobposter1234 on Thursday December 25, 2014 @12:29AM (#8795519)

I know nothing about this particular topic, but my first reaction was to find this statement highly suspect and at best full of exaggeration: "The historical nucleus of the Metropolitan Police is the force organized by Henry Fielding, in the 1750s, when the Wild scandal was still on everyone's minds"

30 years is a long time. Is Iran-Contra still on everyone's minds when it comes to discussions over geopolitics? I suppose it's still a factor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by hga on Thursday December 25, 2014 @06:00AM (#8796014)

Iran-Contra was a damp squib. What happens if you replace it with e.g. "Nixon"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by danenania on Thursday December 25, 2014 @12:54PM (#8796736)

Seriously? These days, the public consciousness routinely loses track of major issues within days or weeks. We're already forgetting the major lessons of the last decade (re: renewed war fervor and attacks on civil rights over ISIS). 40+ years ago is ancient history politically.

I don't think the timescale was the same in 18th century England, but we're still talking about a generation-level gap here--I don't think you could just automatically assume a connection without some evidence.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by tristanojbacon on Thursday December 25, 2014 @10:32PM (#8797928)

Public consciousness routinely loses track of major issues within days or weeks, as a result of mass media and entertainment. Once the television and radio were invented, people's focus started shifting to the here and now, be it the news or their favourite programme on TV. One can't really say the same for the late 1700's! That's my take on it, at least

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Origins of the police by hga on Wednesday December 24, 2014 @04:48PM (#8794648)

That theory seems to be rather sketchy in practice.

Government police forces are policed by the government.

Private police forces are also policed by the government, but since they're different organizations, perhaps in reality it would be better.

[ Parent | on HN ]