Favorite coffee

[1stWatch]

A lot of folks in uniform tirelessly drink copious amounts of coffee. If you are one of these people, what is your favorite kind? Are you allowed coffee breaks on your job?

For me, three words come to mind right now: spiced pumpkin latte.

[N. A. Corbier]

We had "working lunches," in other words, find food when you were working. I've even heard that when your thirsty or hungry, patrol a bit, and then include the vending machine on your patrol - nobody's going to detect a pattern of when your hungry or thirsty in your regular patrol schedule, it keeps it very random indeed.

I rather like Starbucks Mint Mocha Frappachino, and for hot coffee, I like the flavored millstone coffees. Your coffee interests me, as well. :) I usually would bring, and drink, instant cappachino mixed with hot chocolate, in a 25 percent hot chocolate, 75 percent cappachino blend to a static site if I were there for more than a week. On road, 7-11 was awesome. :) Non Junk Food (Sandwiches) flavored coffees, cheap.

[CAR54]

I like to treat myself to a "Starbucks" White Chocolate Frappachino, or maybe a cappachino, at any rate ones hot and ones cold, and boy are they tasty. Then I'll order a pastry, like a cheese danish, and buy a newspaper. This is probably my favorite way to start off the day, assuming I have time to enjoy it all. Unfortunately it can also get expensive, so most days I'll just drink the coffee at the site I'm at, loaded up with cream and sugar, and maybe add some hot chocolate mix.

[IrishGuard]

A lot of folks in uniform tirelessly drink copious amounts of coffee. If you are one of these people, what is your favorite kind? Are you allowed coffee breaks on your job?

Yes, I drink lots of Coffee, probably too much. On a Static Guard Post, we don't have Coffee Breaks, we just have a brew going 24/7. It's no wonder I can't sleep. :eek:

Maybe I should switch to Tea, say Tetley's Irish Breakfast? ;)

[Mr. Security]

Dunkin Donuts coffee for me. It's the only inexpensive coffee that doesn't have a bitter after-taste. Love it, love it, love it! :D

PS - We can take a coffee break anytime we want. Whatever it takes to remain sharp and alert. :)

[The_Mayor]

I like Pete's Coffee..I like mochas with a shot of Irish cream. :)

[EMTGuard]

Community Coffee Medium roast.

[1stWatch]

I love how 7 Eleven hands out free coffee to anybody in a uniform here :D

[S/O245]

I dont like coffee but i have had a capichino once in a while when im pretty tired. That costs like a dollar 12 lol.

Now not trying to cause anything but on the msg board we should discuss many issues that surround us as S/O's. In my comp rules we have a policy that you should not take a discount or anything free if they offer it to u etc. I dont think this is right. I mean I can see if its big money value. But a 50 cent or so cup of coffee or pop if they wanna give free is fine with me. I mean think about it. When you are at a gas station if you see something goin on u can call it in. I go to the same gas station every night for the rest room and a drink. So i know the clerks they know me. I even know some of the reg customers. And i have had the chance to scare away a susp customer. They keep doggin me and the clerk watchin us just sitting in the lot. It was makin the female clerk nervous so when i walked out of the store i acted like i had use my cell phone. They left in a hurry. So i say why not give us a free drink once in a while LOL. What do u all think on it ?

Stay Safe All :)
Ok now it is offical bed time for me lol.

[N. A. Corbier]

I dont like coffee but i have had a capichino once in a while when im pretty tired. That costs like a dollar 12 lol.

Now not trying to cause anything but on the msg board we should discuss many issues that surround us as S/O's. In my comp rules we have a policy that you should not take a discount or anything free if they offer it to u etc. I dont think this is right. I mean I can see if its big money value. But a 50 cent or so cup of coffee or pop if they wanna give free is fine with me. I mean think about it. When you are at a gas station if you see something goin on u can call it in. I go to the same gas station every night for the rest room and a drink. So i know the clerks they know me. I even know some of the reg customers. And i have had the chance to scare away a susp customer. They keep doggin me and the clerk watchin us just sitting in the lot. It was makin the female clerk nervous so when i walked out of the store i acted like i had use my cell phone. They left in a hurry. So i say why not give us a free drink once in a while LOL. What do u all think on it ?

Stay Safe All :)
Ok now it is offical bed time for me lol.

The issue stems from "bribery," which doesn't technically apply, as you cannot bribe a private citizen - they have no official office to influence. This is yet another concept borrowed from public law enforcement.

However, on the other side of the coin, there are the twin evils of public perception and expectation of favors by the compensator. First, the public generally gets pissy when they find out a uniform gets free "something." Most chock it up to them being police, and it either being a "necessary evil," or some sort of crime prevention thing - or they don't care. When citizens who DO care that the police get free things find out that the uniform recieving free items is NOT a sworn police officer, they get even more pissy - after all, they're just a security guard. They will usually go on and on about bribery, etc.

The realistic side is much more dangerous, however. This is expectation of favors or other compensation by the person giving free food. From a logistical standpoint, your standing there in uniform at 7-11 is providing security services to a client we don't have. In other words, your giving out free protection. The company is paying for your liability insurance in case something bad happens to you while your "off your property," or "out of your patrol vehicle," and they don't like the idea. If your getting free stuff, your staying longer, making the company - I mean you - a target.

Eventually, 7-11 argues that your employee was giving out de facto protective services, at specific times, and they failed to perform those de facto protective services, and the place got Xed. I don't know if anyone's won a cupability suit based on that argument, but its bandied about as one reason why you don't.

From another standpoint, if your recieving compensation from the employees of the client, they may expect the employee to be derelict in his duties, and use the threat of "bribery" as a leverage in their expectations.

HOWEVER, unless you have a specific public office, such as Police Officer, you cannot be bribed under most statutes. It comes back to "the public gets pissy, your providing free services, we're paying the bill if your hurt playing cop at the donut shoppe, and the employees feeding you free soda expect you to remain silent about the hooker they bought."

[1stWatch]

Actually the bribery statute would not apply here, at least in this state, since it defines "gift to public servant" as "being on account of such employment". A security officer is considered a "public servant" in Texas now that the Department of Public Safety assumed regulation, licensing, and enforcement of private security in 2003 and the penal code refers to "public servant" as "one who performs a governmental function."
The stores I have gone to that decide to give out coffee do so for pretty much any worker in a uniform, including road crew and emt's. Whether they are supposed to according to store policy, I wouldn't really know.

[S/O245]

Its cool of a store who wants to do that. I see no problem in it at all. Unless a Officer is taking advantage of such offerings then i would find a problem a little with that. Ohio has done the same thing with Security Officers and Private Investigators. We use to be under the Dept of Commerce somethin like that. Then after 9/11 they moved security and investigators to ohio homeland security. We are licensed under the Ohio Dept of Public Safety. From what i hear and read on the site it seems like they are trying to change Security in Ohio for the better. They are working on better training and making it more easy to run background checks etc. And many other things.

When i was a Police Explorer we had the same rule in our policy rules and regs that said you can use badge uniform etc or anything else to obtain something free or a discount. But on duty when we rode with a PO once in a while the store gave us a free pop etc. I think if a place wants to do this for you on duty its all fine. I dont think anyone should obtain a discount or free thing off duty by using you badge etc. Unless the people know you and want to give it free.

Stay Safe All :)

[Mr. Security]

When citizens who DO care that the police get free things find out that the uniform recieving free items is NOT a sworn police officer, they get even more pissy - after all, they're just a security guard. They will usually go on and on about bribery, etc.

I think it's fine for the police to get free coffee and discounts at restaurants. Their presence at these establishments is good for the business and bad for the 'crooks.' As a S/O, I do not accept free or discounted coffee. I am careful to make sure that I am charged the regular price because I have been offered discounted coffee on a couple of occasions. After all, I am still a private citizen.

N.A. Corbier's remarks about the liability issue should make any S/O think twice about accepting free food/drink or anything else.

[Mr. Security]

A security officer is considered a "public servant" in Texas now that the Department of Public Safety assumed regulation, licensing, and enforcement of private security in 2003 and the penal code refers to "public servant" as "one who performs a governmental function."


Are you certain that a S/O is performing a "governmental function?" How can that be if your client is in the private sector?

[N. A. Corbier]

Are you certain that a S/O is performing a "governmental function?" How can that be if your client is in the private sector?

Texas is orientating their Commissioned State Security Officer program towards limited peace officer status. Its already a felony to batter or assault a Commissioned State Security Officer in uniform, or displaying a badge and clothing plainly marked "SECURITY" on it. The state subcommittees are already pushing limited police powers for CSSOs through the legislature.

This is one of the states that believes in public regulation of all private policing functions, including giving public authority to demand public responsibility.

[N. A. Corbier]

I think it's fine for the police to get free coffee and discounts at restaurants. Their presence at these establishments is good for the business and bad for the 'crooks.' As a S/O, I do not accept free or discounted coffee. I am careful to make sure that I am charged the regular price because I have been offered discounted coffee on a couple of occasions. After all, I am still a private citizen.

N.A. Corbier's remarks about the liability issue should make any S/O think twice about accepting free food/drink or anything else.

These are the same reasons that employers give security officers discounted and free items. They want a uniform in the store as a visible deterrance. They don't care if its police, sheriff, state trooper, explorer, or security person. All the bad guy sees is "uniform," and goes, "That guy probally is a cop, lets go down the road and hit the Circle K instead."

Again, there are people who truly dislike the fact that police officers recieve compensation from the public. They use terms such as bribery, etc, to denounce them, and state that "we already pay their salaries, how dare these people pad their pockets to keep them off the road (and guarding my house)." When these types of people find out that the uniform in the store isn't a sworn police officer, they become even more pissed off - now the security guard gets free food, but the upstanding citizen dosen't.

[S/O245]

Well i think its ok for a drink but not nothing more than food drink.

But you can be right about people dont like it that officers get free drink. Im sure those same officers that they gripe about dont like being away from his her family on christmas eve or day or other family events. At the same time the person that makes the gripe is at home with his or her family. And as far as making money i say what money LOL. I make 7.50 an hr some food places pay more. Not saying other jobs are not important. But i belive we should make a little more. I think i heard subway can start at 9an hr. So i know people will say what ever but to any of them if they want to be un armed from 10pm to 6am and make 750 an hr and have to work every holiday almost then i say do it lol. My family is already talking about christmas i dont even know if i will be with them or not. I dont know till that week. I may have to work it even know it falls on one of my normal scheduled off days. My dad was a deputy 11 yrs and just a month ago he got on as a S/O with wackenhut. So he may be working christmas also. When my father was a deputy he was home once out of 11 yrs. He missed all the others on christmas day. it was just me and my mom. So people dont know what they are talking about. We must ask them the freedom you have how do u think u got it. And i have to work christmas day for sure. So i will not be able to see my step neice. So people just dont understand that even us S/O's make alot of sacrifices daily they they will never understand.

Stay Safe All :)

[Mr. Security]

Texas is orientating their Commissioned State Security Officer program towards limited peace officer status. Its already a felony to batter or assault a Commissioned State Security Officer in uniform, or displaying a badge and clothing plainly marked "SECURITY" on it. The state subcommittees are already pushing limited police powers for CSSOs through the legislature.

This is one of the states that believes in public regulation of all private policing functions, including giving public authority to demand public responsibility.

Thanks for clarifying that. What a difference a 'state' makes. :D

[N. A. Corbier]

Thanks for clarifying that. What a difference a 'state' makes. :D

Yep. Even up here, its the wild west. We can do just about anything we want up here, carry whatever we want, have whatever color lights on our cars we want, etc, and nobody's really regulating us.

[1stWatch]

Texas is orientating their Commissioned State Security Officer program towards limited peace officer status. Its already a felony to batter or assault a Commissioned State Security Officer in uniform, or displaying a badge and clothing plainly marked "SECURITY" on it. The state subcommittees are already pushing limited police powers for CSSOs through the legislature.

This is one of the states that believes in public regulation of all private policing functions, including giving public authority to demand public responsibility.


The bill regarding assault was made law in 2003. There are other issues certain legislators are pressing that would clarify certain authority for private security and grant more authority in other areas.

One bill, which was lobbied for on behalf of a security company I used to work with, proposed merging public police and private security in one area to create "special police" or "neighborhood police", fully sworn and trained police officers who would be working for a "private entity". That bill failed dismally since just about every law enforcement association lobbied against the same bill since they unanimously felt it was a slap in the face.

Another that failed in the last legislature was written in three parts. Part one would have founded a statewide joint underwriting association that somehow would have made it where security companies could have affordable health and ad&d insurance for all their employees. This was opposed by the Texas insurance association because of the wording of the proposed law. I don't exactly know what was in it.

Part two would have allowed security to have the public authority to "direct traffic" on public highways. This was designed to clarify the authority of security officers conducting motorcycle escorts for funerals and public parades.

Part three would have clarified wording in the penal code regarding when and where an armed security officer would be allowed to carry a duty firearm, club, or illegal knife. Currently, the law here states a security officer may only carry those weapons with a valid commission license card on the person, in plain view, and in a distinct uniform while at his place of assignment or while travelling directly to or from his place of assignment or while conducting duties as a security officer. The proposed law would have eliminated the situation below:

This basically means I can carry my pistol and baton at any property I patrol or while in fresh pursuit of an arrestee or while rendering aid; however, if I go into a restaurant or convenience store to, say, eat or take a poo, I must remove the weapons and walk in with an empty holster. I simply cannot express in words how self conscious I am while doing that. The public asks "where is your gun??" Violent-minded a$$holes walk up and try to start fights. Then there is the issue of keeping an eye on the car because anyone in the know will know I have it locked up in the car and someone may try to steal it. This is the biggest tactical faux-pas I have ever seen, but I have to comply with it since a violation is a third degree felony.

Okay, enough of that tangent. The Texas Retailers' Association and the Combined Law Enforcement Agencies of Texas opposed parts two and three to the bill, citing various "concerns". The laws stayed the same after the last legislature convened. One law regarding regulation actually changed back to the way it was, regarding exemption for security department of private business.

So, although we have status as "public servant", but not status as "peace officer", we still mostly don't have insurance, can't drive emergency vehicles, and have to remove our pistols while going to use the bathroom at a convenience store.

[N. A. Corbier]

As I've said before, the state only lets you carry because the client demands it. Since your not actively protecting your company's client while going to the potty, or eating, or filling up gas, you shouldn't be armed.

This is stock and standard for most security open carry laws.

In Wisconsin, you must be ON SITE to carry. Period. Nobody bothers popping anyone for it, though. After all, open carry is legal for civilians in this state.

[1stWatch]

Considering the great number of illegal weapons carried by people in this state and the fact a chl holder may carry a weapon in such places, I do indeed have a problem with the idea of disarming at those places. This wording of law defining place of assignment was written long before the concealed carry law was ever written. To place us at a disadvantage while at such a place is simply wrong. The legislature has been arguing about this for years.

[N. A. Corbier]

Considering the great number of illegal weapons carried by people in this state and the fact a chl holder may carry a weapon in such places, I do indeed have a problem with the idea of disarming at those places. This wording of law defining place of assignment was written long before the concealed carry law was ever written. To place us at a disadvantage while at such a place is simply wrong. The legislature has been arguing about this for years.

They'll probally continue to argue it till TX Comm. Security are made special peace officers, in which case, the peace officer redefinition will allow you to carry, as you have a responsibility to the public.

I think that's another factor. You carry on site because you have a responsibility to your client (Not the public) to protect your client. You don't have a responsibility to the public to protect them, so you "shouldn't" have a weapon in places that your not performing your duties, since other private citizen's wouldn't be able to either. (Unless you have a CHL, throw a coat over your gun, and then your a private citizen, but that rarely works due to other state laws.)

[1stWatch]

They'll probally continue to argue it till TX Comm. Security are made special peace officers, in which case, the peace officer redefinition will allow you to carry, as you have a responsibility to the public.

I think that's another factor. You carry on site because you have a responsibility to your client (Not the public) to protect your client. You don't have a responsibility to the public to protect them, so you "shouldn't" have a weapon in places that your not performing your duties, since other private citizen's wouldn't be able to either. (Unless you have a CHL, throw a coat over your gun, and then your a private citizen, but that rarely works due to other state laws.)

and it certainly doesn't work because of other state laws. The idea of carrying the weapon in this case would be to retain it properly. I for one feel much safer with the weapon in the holster rather than in the vehicle. Other private citizens here may and do carry. The idea of special police in Texas will never happen. It was defeated twice by a large margin and even warnings not to present the bill to the legislature again. I am of the mentality this does need to change here since I, for one, have been party to and involved in many altercations while on duty. Just like public police, our badge and uniform become a target.

[N. A. Corbier]

I'll put it like this. In Florida, two legislators voted against arming security officers with 9mm handguns. Their reasoning was, "They're very minimally trained, and with the semi-automatic, there are all those bullets, and things can go wrong alot faster."

In other words, "We do not trust security officers to carry the same weapons that the general public may carry on their person with a CCW." On a CCW, a private citizen may carry any weapon that is not prohibited by law. Sword, baton, MK-9 Pepper Spray, throwing knives, .50 Desert Eagle... Anything that dosen't violate 790 and BATF rules. If you can conceal a full auto short barreled shotgun, have the proper tax stamps, go ahead and wear it.

Your going to find that mentality in alot of states. The media, lobbist groups for other professions, large employers who fear liability, and inept idiots perpetuate that mentality.

This is most likely the reason the public (through their legislators) trust your gun in your car more than in your holster. You haven't been trained to the only standard people can think of, police standards, to carry and retain it.

[EH126]

This basically means I can carry my pistol and baton at any property I patrol or while in fresh pursuit of an arrestee or while rendering aid; however, if I go into a restaurant or convenience store to, say, eat or take a poo, I must remove the weapons and walk in with an empty holster. I simply cannot express in words how self conscious I am while doing that. The public asks "where is your gun??" Violent-minded a$$holes walk up and try to start fights. Then there is the issue of keeping an eye on the car because anyone in the know will know I have it locked up in the car and someone may try to steal it. This is the biggest tactical faux-pas I have ever seen, but I have to comply with it since a violation is a third degree felony.
__________________________________________________ ______________

Here in Michigan, the training statndards are low. But since all armed guards here in the Great Lakes state have to qualify for a CCW, they can carry wherever it is appropiate for a CCW to carry. I'm surprised Texas does not do this, seeing how it saves alot of unneeded legislation.

[N. A. Corbier]

This basically means I can carry my pistol and baton at any property I patrol or while in fresh pursuit of an arrestee or while rendering aid; however, if I go into a restaurant or convenience store to, say, eat or take a poo, I must remove the weapons and walk in with an empty holster. I simply cannot express in words how self conscious I am while doing that. The public asks "where is your gun??" Violent-minded a$$holes walk up and try to start fights. Then there is the issue of keeping an eye on the car because anyone in the know will know I have it locked up in the car and someone may try to steal it. This is the biggest tactical faux-pas I have ever seen, but I have to comply with it since a violation is a third degree felony.
__________________________________________________ ______________

Here in Michigan, the training statndards are low. But since all armed guards here in the Great Lakes state have to qualify for a CCW, they can carry wherever it is appropiate for a CCW to carry. I'm surprised Texas does not do this, seeing how it saves alot of unneeded legislation.

Greater legislation is the wave of the future. Here, in Wisconsin, any person may be armed openly, the law dosen't prohibit it, EXCEPT a security officer on duty, or a private investigator. It is against the law for either to be armed openly unless licensed and on their client property (In the case of uniformed security, PIs may never carry a firearm).

It stems from the fact that the states do not trust the security companies to start handing out weapons without "police-like training" for those carrying them. Granted, this is usually a very, very, minimal training as compared to the NRA police firearms course. Just enough that you don't shoot yourself, and know your life is over civilly and/or criminally if you shoot someone till you exonerate yourself.

California, however, is a special case. Generally, citizens may not be armed with batons or firearms. Security Guards must have specific authority from the state to be so licensed. Case in Point: BSIS Security Guards who are citizens of San Fransisco, while employed, are exempt from the city-wide firearms ban.

[1stWatch]

I'll put it like this. In Florida, two legislators voted against arming security officers with 9mm handguns. Their reasoning was, "They're very minimally trained, and with the semi-automatic, there are all those bullets, and things can go wrong alot faster."

In other words, "We do not trust security officers to carry the same weapons that the general public may carry on their person with a CCW." On a CCW, a private citizen may carry any weapon that is not prohibited by law. Sword, baton, MK-9 Pepper Spray, throwing knives, .50 Desert Eagle... Anything that dosen't violate 790 and BATF rules. If you can conceal a full auto short barreled shotgun, have the proper tax stamps, go ahead and wear it.

Your going to find that mentality in alot of states. The media, lobbist groups for other professions, large employers who fear liability, and inept idiots perpetuate that mentality.

This is most likely the reason the public (through their legislators) trust your gun in your car more than in your holster. You haven't been trained to the only standard people can think of, police standards, to carry and retain it.


This seems to be one of our major obstacles with progress - public perception of inadequacy. We keep encountering sloppy security guards: those who sleep on the job, have poor education, can't even spell properly, wear their uniforms in a sloppy manner, and have a pistol that either isn't loaded or hasn't been cleaned in 10+ years (I'm not joking).

Then we encounter psycho security guards: folks who point guns at people for no apparent reason, love to lay hands on people, love to get into fights, and constantly exceed their level of authority by doing these things, making arrests that exceed their lawful level of authority, and violate people's civil rights, sometimes inadvertently, because they love the feeling of "kicking ass and taking names".

The newspapers are very quick to print when some psycho security guard who somehow passed and got a commission shoots a kid in the back of the head who was suspected of shoplifting. We never hear of great things well trained security officers have done, like the time one I worked with rendered aid to people at a burning apartment building by kicking down doors and pulling people out who were asleep.

Some media has perpetuated this strange idea that we are around to replace the police somehow: "this neighborhood hired xyz security. The police used to take 50 minutes to show up. We call the security and they show up in 5, then stick around the rest of the night", blah blah. They do not advertise our value of presence and deterrence working hand in hand with the legal authority of the police. This has been quick to draw ire from police associations here and has widened a rift instead of bridging it. We are, at best, a supplement to the police when given a certain appointment, but never a replacement.

Take a look at occasions when security did team up with police successfully. There was a program founded in Dallas last year where 15 unarmed security officers on bicycles were to patrol the downtown business district, managed by an off-duty police officer working with a city radio and a squad car. This idea was slammed by many people. You can, in fact, read about it somewhere on apbweb.com where somebody in LE was objecting to it. However, the fruits of such labor were recently advertised - a 21% drop in overall crime and public nuisances and a 45% faster response time by police. The numbers speak for themselves.

Security as a whole needs to gain the right kind of public attention by creating its own media, not by trusting the mainstream media to say the right things or by avoiding the public altogether.

But, speaking of the weapons issue, a properly trained security officer here receives 30 hours minimum of training and a thorough criminal history and fbi background check before having a commission granted. A concealed carry holder receives 10 hours.

Many security officers in major cities, at least those who are worth a squat, go out and seek more training than the minimum because they feel the need for excellence, knowledge, and professionalism. Some I know personally have achieved criminal law degrees and law enforcement certifications and, for whatever reason, they are still employed in private security instead of practicing law or police work. The public doesn't know or care about these individuals.

"The media, lobbist groups for other professions, large employers who fear liability, and inept idiots perpetuate that mentality." That just about sums up the opposition to a law allowing security to be able to carry statewide in a "right to carry" state. These people don't realize the mentality people like me have, that the weapon is there for self defense in a life and death situation, not as a decoration for their hire. It is there as a counter for a shooter, not to execute their thieves.

Equating the weapon with performance of the duties themselves is a case of widespread misinformed thinking. These people have never encountered the reality of getting out of the squad car when ready to get gas and then hearing the sound of three bullets hit your windshield as some ass does a driveby on you in retaliation for some duty you did on your property or having that same kind of person try to follow you home. This is a type of danger that can happen to any person in a uniform.

Yet why, why if something like this happens to us do we continue to do the job? Because, well, it's rewarding to do if the job is done properly. If you serve a neighborhood or apartment community the place becomes quiet because you are doing the job. People can walk outside to the car with children without fear of being harassed by drunkards in the open. If you have a more simple job, say, guarding a closed business at night, the boredom may be killer, but the feeling of doing an honest job that doesn't kill the nerves is there. These kinds of things you have to like. If you don't like the job, you should probably find something else to do because it will only get worse for you. However, if you like it, you love it more each time you achieve something. Gee, I should probably start shortening the novels.

[N. A. Corbier]

Your commission dosen't work throughout the state? That's incredible, its a state agency granting it, isn't it, why would it only work in one county or city?

Both Florida and Wisconsin are statewide duty carry permits. Because a security officer working for a company may be called upon to work in differing counties or cities, and because the company may have multiple branches.

I'd have to say that if someone was smart, they'd file suit for unlawful hampering of business practices. Do electrical or construction contractors have to have a city-by-city license?

But then, the divisions for licensing in Fl and WI are bureaus that do more than just security.

[1stWatch]

It is valid through the state, but only at the specific "place of assignment" or while travelling directly to and from the place of assignment.

[Bill Warnock]

N.A. et al. There is nothing more dishearting on a survey to examine weapons and find them so dirty they would appear as growth taking place. The answer you get from supervision cover a range of excuses, never a good reason, there never should be! If a weapon fails to operate or blows up, the owner as well as innocent bystanders could sue the security company for not enforcing their own rules and regulations. Further, if the client has any "official" interaction such as spot inspections, add one more to the liability chain.
Enjoy the day,
Bill