This thesis demonstrates how Sweden is increasingly outsourcing security provisions in favor of security structures characterized by constellations of public and private security alternatives. This development, however, is occurring on the premise of perceived regulatory control and oversight. The state is therefore not withdrawing from the security field, but rather retains a central role within dynamic relationships between various different security actors. As a corollary, the state is gradually altering its perception of how modern security governance is enacted, and consequently, what type of security services should be understood as fundamental public goods. While the public/private dichotomy is increasingly blurred and private security alternatives are gaining prevalence, the traditional conceptualization of the Weberian state monopoly over legitimate violence seems continuously rearticulated. To explore this transition, this thesis conducts a case study of Swedish security outsourcing through an analysis of the public policy process that produced a legal framework to allow Swedish shipping companies to contract armed private security companies to protect themselves against the rising threat of maritime piracy. Through a structural application of the Multiple Streams Framework upon the policy process, the thesis endeavors to empirically investigate the assessments of security alternatives made by the Swedish government. As a result, the analytical insights gained prove telling of how the Swedish government perceives an emerging security challenge, appraises their alternatives, and rationalizes a departure from the traditional understanding of the monopoly over violence in favor of regulated security outsourcing.