Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Does Security work give off a false vibe?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Does Security work give off a false vibe?

    Police work is needed to investigate crimes, find and apprehend suspects, among other purposes, and some security work seems vital - for example, if a body is needed to watch over a vacant area to ensure nothing is stolen while everyone is away, etc.

    But do you feel that other "security" type of work gives other citizens that they don't need to take responsibility for their own safety and security? Or am I wrong in thinking this?

    I use to work for a security contractor, and I was primarily posted at grocery stores for late shifts, to ensure the "safety" of the customers and employees. I'd always get complimented by random passer-by's, thanking me for being present, because it makes them feel better about their safety. While I appreciated it, I feel I may have been raised differently. I was always taught to be responsible for my own safety. If you're going to be feeling at potential risk by going grocery shopping at night, then why don't you carry protection, rather than hope that the on site security officer will be present to provide you with your safety?

    If all of the store employees, and customers shopping were proactive, then there would be no need for security.

    Does anyone else agree with this? Or am I alone?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705
    I've been one of those folks who has thanked an obviously alert and attentive security person for being there - but that has never meant that I was unarmed.

    Having the security person already aware of me - and hopefully having noticed my smile and nod - if something DOES go down we will watch each other's back if necessary.

    Just 'cause I smile and nod, and maybe say something about glad to see 'em, doesn't mean I am not armed.

    I'm just checking in.

    (Too bad there is no really good way to let them know if I am CC...)
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    • • • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Faciémus!• • •

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    20
    I have been Doing security mostly 3rd shift since 1991.

    Generally security allows for companies to have cheaper insurance. But for instance unarmed security at a mall does really what nothing.

    Glorified baby sitter with no personal protection to protect yourself or anyone else.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    Police work is needed to investigate crimes, find and apprehend suspects, among other purposes, and some security work seems vital - for example, if a body is needed to watch over a vacant area to ensure nothing is stolen while everyone is away, etc.

    But do you feel that other "security" type of work gives other citizens that they don't need to take responsibility for their own safety and security? Or am I wrong in thinking this?

    I use to work for a security contractor, and I was primarily posted at grocery stores for late shifts, to ensure the "safety" of the customers and employees. I'd always get complimented by random passer-by's, thanking me for being present, because it makes them feel better about their safety. While I appreciated it, I feel I may have been raised differently. I was always taught to be responsible for my own safety. If you're going to be feeling at potential risk by going grocery shopping at night, then why don't you carry protection, rather than hope that the on site security officer will be present to provide you with your safety?

    If all of the store employees, and customers shopping were proactive, then there would be no need for security.

    Does anyone else agree with this? Or am I alone?
    I don't think it gives them the felling that they don't need to tak responsibility, they have that already. The fact that there is a police force provides that for most people. Just like the solution for crime is certain neighborhoods is having police ride through more often eases the mind of many people whether or not it does any good. Everyone feels safer when they are not alone and having a security guard there does that even if they may already be armed. I would much rather face a robber with a backup than alone so to you comment about if everyone were proactive then there would be no need for security guards, maybe we could expand that and say no need for police or armies.

    I thank a lot of people for their work. I always try to say thank you to those doing work that I would not want to do such as janitors and maids. Watch the show "Dirty Jobs" and tell me how many of those you would want to do. Someone has to do those jobs and I am glad that it is not me in most cases. When I see someone doing it I thank them for doing what I would not want to do instead of looking down on them such as the people of India actualy shuuning the "Untouchables".

    As some say, the most important thing about any security plan is to have a backup.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    I have done armed security for a few years now and the large majority of guards you have there have ZERO training on handling the majority of issue that can accouter. Much less they have only fired their gun only when they where qualifying for their OPOTA.
    Last edited by zack991; 11-24-2010 at 10:18 AM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by zack991 View Post
    I have done armed security for a few years now and the large majority of guards you have there have ZERO training on handling the majority of issue that can accouter. Much less they have only fired their gun only when they where qualifying for their OPOTA.
    I have had more training in my personal life than I had working security. I had absolutely zero training for my security work. I had a six hour orientation, and then they gave me my uniform and said "Here ya go", along with a manual to study.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    I have had more training in my personal life than I had working security. I had absolutely zero training for my security work. I had a six hour orientation, and then they gave me my uniform and said "Here ya go", along with a manual to study.
    Granted there's not much to it but so many new guys have no weapon experience and are a risk to more than just themselves.
    Last edited by zack991; 11-24-2010 at 01:29 PM.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Forget what armed security has or does not have in the way of training or equipment. Look at what the contract and post orders are.

    For the most part they are "to observe and report" only. Contracting for armed (or unarmed) security to arrest - even for shoplifting, which seems to be the limit of the extent of their authority in many states - adds, rather than detracts, from the business's liability. Some places hire security to keep out folks who have previously been issued "no trespass" papers, but again trying to enforce that via the laying on of hands can expose both the security officer, his agency, and the business to great liability issues. Thus the kabuki theater of "security drama".

    The difficult part is getting a peek at the actual contract. Sometimes you can get the security officer to show you the post orders - helps if you have a friendly relationship with them. Generally speaking, contracts and post orders are not considered public information.

    So - does it give off a false vibe? Depends on how much you either know or imagine about the contract and post orders.

    Now, if you really want to get me started let's talk about off-duty cops who are hired as security guards. Are they still cops? Are they security officers bound by a contract and post orders? Do they even know, let alone care, about the distinction?

    stay safe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Forget what armed security has or does not have in the way of training or equipment. Look at what the contract and post orders are.

    For the most part they are "to observe and report" only. Contracting for armed (or unarmed) security to arrest - even for shoplifting, which seems to be the limit of the extent of their authority in many states - adds, rather than detracts, from the business's liability. Some places hire security to keep out folks who have previously been issued "no trespass" papers, but again trying to enforce that via the laying on of hands can expose both the security officer, his agency, and the business to great liability issues. Thus the kabuki theater of "security drama".

    The difficult part is getting a peek at the actual contract. Sometimes you can get the security officer to show you the post orders - helps if you have a friendly relationship with them. Generally speaking, contracts and post orders are not considered public information.

    So - does it give off a false vibe? Depends on how much you either know or imagine about the contract and post orders.

    Now, if you really want to get me started let's talk about off-duty cops who are hired as security guards. Are they still cops? Are they security officers bound by a contract and post orders? Do they even know, let alone care, about the distinction?

    stay safe.
    When I worked for the contractor, I had post orders on site. Note that my job was not to stop shoplifters. The store hired undercover loss prevention for that duty. My job was to remain posted outside of the store, and to provide as "a physical presence to deter potential crime" as described in my post orders. I was also ordered to "Only use force is there is physical violence being displayed." My job was primarily to ensure that people made it safely to and from the store, and to make sure that no one vandalized the vehicles or the exterior of the store property.

    As far as off duty cops working as security, that will also depend on their contract. I know in Washington State, an off duty cop still has full police powers across the state, 24/7. Although, when they are employed as security, they have to follow the contract. So if the contract tells them they cannot be armed while on duty, they cannot be armed while on duty. They can by LAW (and quite frankly, they should be, because it may be a direct violation to their department policies), but it would also be in violation of their contract with the private business.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958
    If a sworn LEO is required by their LEA to be armed 24/7 (Normally IAW State/Municipal statute), a contractor may not legally disarm them. If they do disarm, they are in violation of Dept regs. If they are killed or injured in that sort of employ... they (or their family) may not recieve any benefits and they may be terminated from the LEA for cause. 'Course if they're dead, it won't matter (to them).

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonora Rebel View Post
    If a sworn LEO is required by their LEA to be armed 24/7 (Normally IAW State/Municipal statute), a contractor may not legally disarm them. If they do disarm, they are in violation of Dept regs. If they are killed or injured in that sort of employ... they (or their family) may not recieve any benefits and they may be terminated from the LEA for cause. 'Course if they're dead, it won't matter (to them).
    Which is why they conflict with them so many times. I also worked as a contractor for Walmart for a while, and the regulations at Walmart stated something along the lines of "No employee, or contracted employee for Walmart may have in his or her possession, at any time, while performing the duties of their employment, any firearm, ammunition, or other weapon deemed "dangerous" by Walmart's Loss Prevention unit. If you are a police officer that is required to be armed, then you may not provide security services for Walmart."

    So, in others words, they wouldn't allow police officers to do their security work, because they would have to be armed. To me, that seems quite ridiculous. For liability reasons, you're not allowing a police officer to do your security work, because he has to be armed?

  12. #12
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958
    That entire premise could be contested (Class Action Suite) against Wally World or any other. I don't shop Walmart much... maybe in the local one 3x in the past 5 years. Each visit tho was OC as usual. 'No problems. It would appear that they do not trust their employees to be armed.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    Which is why they conflict with them so many times. I also worked as a contractor for Walmart for a while, and the regulations at Walmart stated something along the lines of "No employee, or contracted employee for Walmart may have in his or her possession, at any time, while performing the duties of their employment, any firearm, ammunition, or other weapon deemed "dangerous" by Walmart's Loss Prevention unit. If you are a police officer that is required to be armed, then you may not provide security services for Walmart."
    Well, that's bunk because they are in possession of ammunition and/or firearms when you purchase the same. In the case of a firearms purchase, they usually walk it out to the front of the store -- ergo, in possession.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    For an employee to purchase ammunition or a firearm, he needs to be "off the clock". Then it's OK to be in possession of a firearm or ammunition.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    Maybe I'm not writing this clearly enough. If you purchase a firearm at Wal*Mart, the employee will ring up the purchase in sporting goods, take your money, unlock the case, remove the firearm, relock the case, and request you follow him to the front of the store while he carries the firearm with him. He will then walk out the front door, and hand you your purchased firearm. That has been their policy for the last ten or twenty years. If my information is wrong, please correct me.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    Maybe I'm not writing this clearly enough. If you purchase a firearm at Wal*Mart, the employee will ring up the purchase in sporting goods, take your money, unlock the case, remove the firearm, relock the case, and request you follow him to the front of the store while he carries the firearm with him. He will then walk out the front door, and hand you your purchased firearm. That has been their policy for the last ten or twenty years. If my information is wrong, please correct me.
    You are right. It is their policy. Why? I don't know.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    Maybe I'm not writing this clearly enough. If you purchase a firearm at Wal*Mart, the employee will ring up the purchase in sporting goods, take your money, unlock the case, remove the firearm, relock the case, and request you follow him to the front of the store while he carries the firearm with him. He will then walk out the front door, and hand you your purchased firearm. That has been their policy for the last ten or twenty years. If my information is wrong, please correct me.
    Yup. That way in many retail stores that sell firearms, even Cabela's. In fact, when I bought a 'mouse gun' at Cabela's, they walked it out of the store for me even though I bought it using my CPL and was OC with something much larger (and CCing a BUG).

    No one said rules have to make sense...
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    • • • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Faciémus!• • •

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    I've never had a Wally World minion walk my ammo out the front door for me. I throw the bag with the receipt into my cart and go on with the rest of my shopping. I wave to the nice person at the door on my way out. I put my purchases in the car and drive off.

    Same with purchases at Bass Pro Shops, Dicks, and Gander Mountain. OK, at Gander I had the counter person offer to carry my purchase out for me. I told him I had paid for it at his counter, it was now mine, and I intended to shop for some other stuff before I left, and it fit inside the shopping cart very easily. No hassles, not calling for senior management or the cops.

    Perhaps Cabella's and some of the hoity-toity places want to offer concierge service, or their customers expect bag-boy service. But unless I've got so much stuff I can't manage it by myself (or I'm feeling lazy) I see no need to let them hold onto my stuff on the theory that I might do something "awful" while still inside the store.

    Just for kicks I'm going to ask this" What makes them so sure their employee will not suddenly snap now that they have an actual firearm in their hands - albeit in a box most likely inside a plastic bag?

    stay safe.

  19. #19
    Regular Member CenTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    ,,
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    Maybe I'm not writing this clearly enough. If you purchase a firearm at Wal*Mart, the employee will ring up the purchase in sporting goods, take your money, unlock the case, remove the firearm, relock the case, and request you follow him to the front of the store while he carries the firearm with him. He will then walk out the front door, and hand you your purchased firearm. That has been their policy for the last ten or twenty years. If my information is wrong, please correct me.
    Walmart here in Redding, CA stopped selling firearms about 8 years ago according to the man at the sporting goods counter. They still sell ammo. I don't remember anyone walking a customer out that had bought either. They may have.

    You don't always notice what you are not looking for. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSQJP40PcGI
    Last edited by CenTex; 11-26-2010 at 01:57 PM.
    The words of a tyrant: “I never entertain opposing opinions. I am always right.”

    Socialism is just another dirty word for totalitarianism.

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." -Patrick Henry

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    My point is -- for the brief instant between the "sale" of the firearm and the point where you take possession, the employee completing the sale is in violation of the Wal*Mart policy against firearms. Worse, they are holding your property -- the money is already out of the bank.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247
    The last ammo I bought at Wal-Mart the lady handed it to me and I asked if I needed to pay for it back there. She said if I was through shopping she would ring everything up there or I could just keep it with me and check out up front.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558
    Quote Originally Posted by PT111 View Post
    The last ammo I bought at Wal-Mart the lady handed it to me and I asked if I needed to pay for it back there. She said if I was through shopping she would ring everything up there or I could just keep it with me and check out up front.
    Yea here where I am at, all they did was give them to me and walked away and nothing was said. Yet when I have been to other stores they ask me is it for a pistol or rifle(i bought pistol ammo) yet if i tell them handgun I am escorted out asap. Now depending on how I answered I was either escorted out of the store or was allowed to continue shopping. It seems no one store understands or can answer my question on what the policy is.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •