All papers are checked via
|← A Political Satire||Political Satire →|
These two groups of people have a common responsibility. The responsibility delegated to them is to protect the citizens and their property. However, they have legal differences that differentiate these two groups and the differences include; while the public police officers are employed by the government, the security officers perform their duties directly to a company that owns a specific business which has employed them. So the security officers are commissioned by the management of the company while the public police officers are commissioned by the state government or the local government (Fischer, Halibozek & Green, 2008).
In most cases, the public police officers are more qualified in terms of academics as compared to their counter parts security officers. For instance, security firms require at least someone who has completed high school but for the public police officers, they must have acquired college degrees in the related fields like criminal justice and pre-law. These police officers are thoroughly trained in policy academies before being hired to do the job, while the security officers are just interviewed orally and then hired upon qualification to take over the job (Fischer, Halibozek & Green, 2008).
In terms of arresting the law breakers, only the public police officers have the authority to arrest warrants and perform legal arrests. The private security officers can only detain and apprehend non-violent suspects like the shop breakers.
The public police officers are allowed to carry fire arms as part of their work tools and they are licensed and qualified to use the weapons. The private security officers on the other side can only carry the fire arms if the company that has employed them requires so and they are required to abide by the rules and regulations of the company.
Public police officers can enter any building including the private buildings and conduct searches, but the private security officers are limited to patrolling and securing the property of the company that has employed them (Hougan, 1978).