Talk:Security

A Concern about "General Security Procedures"

"Taking Prisoners - Security Officers will rarely have the opportunity to take prisoners. If working on a friendly or UFP member world, Star Fleet personnel should turn the prisoners over to the local authorities. If they are operating on a neutral or hostile world where such criminals may not be prosecuted for their actions, the Officers should transfer them to the nearest Federation installation or world. Because of diplomatic relations, they may need to do this in secret."

I have two issues with this. Starfleet and the United Federation of Planets were founded on the principles of non-interference, respect for all life, and avoiding the use of lethal force wherever possible.

• The last principle is the very reason Starfleet phasers have 16 power settings: so that we can stun people of any species without fatality. This is why I object to the assertion that "Starfleet Officer will rarely have the opportunity to take prisoners." If Security is doing its job according to the founding tenets of Starfleet and the Federation, its officers should almost exclusively be taking prisoners as opposed to killing, maiming or vaporizing them. No matter how aggressive our enemies, no matter how intent on killing us they are, it is our duty not to respond in kind, but to respond with the least destructive amount of force that will still be effective in stopping them.

• Second, I object to the assertion that Starfleet Officers should utterly disregard the sovereignty of the worlds with which we interact and kidnap people in order to force our own style of justice on them rather than giving them the rights granted by their government and the Federations laws regarding our interaction with those governments. If any officer complied with the advice of this section, I would fully expect a reprimand at the very least and quite possibly a Court Martial. This is not the kind of advice we should be giving new recruits to Security.

-Lt. Kolk 20:13, 6 November 2008 (EST)

Sounds sensible Jack... - Lt Cmdr. Salak^Talk 15:18, 16 November 2008 (EST)

- I completely agree and have amended the article to reflect these thoughts. --AlleranTan 23:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite?

Would anyone have any major objections if I started doing a ground-up rewrite of this section? I can do it on a temp page until approved by one or more big cheeses. - Whale 15:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan. This article has some serious issues anyway. --AlleranTan 01:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Preferably, the Security Duty Post area should be similar in layout, function, and content as the other well-developed duty posts, i.e. - Medical (Duty Post) and Engineering (Duty Post). --Wolf /^{talk page} 10:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)