NCJ Number
94731
Journal
Journal of Security Administration Volume: 7 Issue: 1 Dated: (June 184) Pages: 9-13
Date Published
1984
Length
5 pages
Annotation
This paper examines the impact of the private security industry on individual privacy rights.
Abstract
Two controversial practices used by security personnel are addressed: (1) the visual surveillance of customers changing clothes in fitting rooms and (2) the interrogation of those suspected of proprietary crimes without advising them of their Miranda rights. It is suggested that all questionable private police practices be subject to review and prohibition, regardless of jurisdiction. One approach would be to interpret the fourth amendment as covering private as well as public police practices. It has long been established that the fourth amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to state action and not private conduct. Thus, security guards who have not been deputized, specially commissioned, or otherwise formally charged to protect public interests are routinely equated with private persons by courts. Even full-time peace officers have been treated as private citizens for fourth amendment purposes when they have been employed part-time as private security guards. These distinctions are made largely because legal authorities continue to define state action principally on the basis of status rather than function. As long as this remains the approach, the threats to individual privacy will continue to increase in proportion to the privatization of policing.