This paper examines the distinctions and overlaps between public law enforcement and private security forces in maintaining safety and order. Using a scenario in which both police and contracted private security are present at a public parade during a sniper attack, the paper explores how each force's duties diverge in terms of legal authority, scope, and responsibility. While both groups share the fundamental goal of protecting lives and property, public law enforcement holds broader statutory authority — including the power to investigate, arrest, and prosecute. The paper also addresses the limited circumstances under which private security personnel may perform a citizen's arrest and the subsequent obligation to transfer custody to police.
Private and public security forces have always been integral and critical components of ensuring safety and security in society. Although they share some similarities — particularly with regard to the protection of lives and property — their differences lie in their specific mandates and the extent of their responsibilities. As the U.S. Department of Justice has noted, "private security and public law enforcement share many of the same goals: preventing crime and disorder, identifying criminals, and ensuring the security of people and property" (U.S. Department of Justice, 2007). Public law enforcement, however, carries broader responsibilities under the law, especially with regard to investigating crimes, pursuing criminals, and bringing them to justice.
Consider a scenario in which a parade is being held in a public venue and both public and private security forces are present, albeit for different reasons. The public security forces — particularly the police — are present to maintain law and order as part of their regular duties and responsibilities. The private security forces, on the other hand, have been contracted by various merchants to provide security for their business establishments. The basic segregation of duties and responsibilities between the two groups is apparent in this arrangement.
However, when a sniper begins shooting randomly into the crowd, the police and private security professionals will find themselves with both overlapping and distinct duties — both during the shooting and in its aftermath.
Both forces should and must ensure the safety and security of the public and work to prevent injury or death, meaning both will have to risk their lives to protect bystanders. This represents the core overlap in their responsibilities. There are limitations, however, on the role of private security in this scenario: private security personnel cannot abandon the protection of lives and property in order to pursue and attempt to arrest the sniper. That pursuit is the purview of law enforcement personnel.
"When private security may detain a suspect"
Without a doubt, the delineation between private security and police forces is clear despite certain similarities in their duties and responsibilities. Police forces are agents of government, duly mandated by statute to uphold the law and prosecute criminal elements. Private security forces do not carry this mandate unless specifically authorized — as with some private investigators and detectives. Even then, any criminal investigation or prosecution handled by authorized private security personnel must ultimately be transferred to public law enforcement, as criminal prosecution remains their exclusive responsibility.
You’re 64% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.