top of page
  • Writer's pictureSam Wilks

The Ethical Dilemma: Balancing Safety and Rights in Crowd Control

The orchestration of crowd control is an intricate ballet, balancing on the fine line between maintaining public safety and upholding the inherent rights of individuals. The principles of free trade, when applied to the realm of security, propose that the individual's autonomy and liberty are paramount, and any system of control must be minimalistic, efficient, and non-intrusive. This approach is not only a matter of economics but of ethics.

In the security field, the psychological insights of Carl Jung emphasise the complexity of individual behaviour, which does not dissipate within the collective. Each member of a crowd possesses a unique set of values and motivations, and their behaviour is a testament to that individuality, even when part of a larger whole.

Environmental cues have a big influence on behaviour. In the context of crowd control, this translates to creating an atmosphere that inherently encourages lawful and orderly conduct without the overt need for force. The anticipation of violence is a skill as crucial as its deterrence. Understanding the precursors to chaos allows security personnel to manage situations proactively rather than reactively.

The best form of control is one that prevents the need for action. The design of public spaces can significantly mitigate the risks inherent in large gatherings. Clear, concise communication in de-escalating potential conflicts, a skill that honors the individual's capacity for reason and self-regulation.

Education must include not only tactical instruction but also a thorough comprehension of the moral significance of their choices in ethical dilemmas. How to use force judiciously and compassionately is the ethical conundrum that crowd control officers face. However, at what point does the need for collective safety outweigh the rights of the individual? And how does one balance the requirement for order with freedom of expression?

Most crowds act lawfully, and it is this fact that should guide the philosophy of crowd control. The use of force must always be the last resort, a point of consensus among most experts. The role of the crowd control officer, then, is not to dominate but to guide; not to suppress but to facilitate; not to provoke but to pacify.

This moral approach to crowd control is consistent with the economic beliefs in free trade, which support a system where self-regulation serves as the driving force rather than strict enforcement. It is a delicate balance, one that requires not just strategic acumen but also a deep moral compass.

Balancing safety and rights in crowd control is an ethical dilemma that necessitates a multidisciplinary approach. It requires a nuanced understanding of economics, psychology, and the human condition. The security personnel trained in this philosophy are not merely enforcers but guardians of a social order that values individual liberty as the highest good. They are the custodians of a peace that is not imposed but naturally emergent, a peace that respects the autonomy of the individual while safeguarding the collective. In this, they embody the true spirit of ethical security, a profession that is as much about protecting the many as it is about respecting the one. From the author.

The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with almost 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.

3 views0 comments


bottom of page