Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

casion security

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by histfan71
    ..Most security guards are and most do exactly that...
    In your opinion. If you have a credible source that verifies that, then by all means post it.
    Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by EMTFirefighter
      I'm sorry, but he's right. For every high-paid, background checked, licensed, QUALITY security officer, there's 100 working for some crappy contract agency sleeping in a parking garage booth.
      I do not agree.
      Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

      Comment


      • #48
        IMO, I agree, I see a lot of bumbleweed security trolling around much more often than I see someone who is professional and seems to know what they are doing.
        "Alright guys listen up, ya'll have probably heard this before, Jackson vs. Securiplex corporation; I am a private security officer, I have no State or governmental authority. I stand as an ordinary citizen. I have no right to; detain, interrogate or otherwise interfere with your personal property-... basically all that means is I'm a cop."-Officer Ernie
        "The Curve" 1998

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Mr. Security
          I do not agree.
          I agree with him to an extent. It could be a regional reason on why you don't see it.

          From what I understand, Michigan (?) requires a college degree or 2 years working in security in another state to have a security guard license.

          Its things like that make for less idiots, or a different breed of idiot.

          Today, I noticed on Officer.com that someone from Illinois asked "who is Kenosha Private Police, and why can they call themselves that?" Some EMT guy is like, "Oh, they're a bunch of wannabes and can'thackits." I got to explain what a "private policeman" is, and why WI law is screwed up.
          Some Kind of Commando Leader

          "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

          Comment


          • #50
            Michael, I have greatly enjoyed this debate with you. Seriously, I strongly believe that you should always listen closely to those who disagree with you. They often have valid points to make. It forces me to look at a situation from a different perspective and hopefully I will learn something from it. Keep your responses coming, all of you, not just Michael.

            Take care and always work safe.[/QUOTE]

            Histfan, First off let me say I have enjoyed debating this issue with you. It is nice to have a discussion with a person or a group of persons who will sit down and listen to both sides instead of turning it into a heated argument. Now, I will admit that I do agree with you up to a point. There are several crappy security officers as well as security companies. But, at least in my neck of the woods, these seem to be far and few between. The reason I have noticed is that the good security companies have a wonderful relationship with police. I stand by my statement that our jobs are the same. The ultimate goal of both security and police is and should be to protect and serve. I do witness some security companies that could care less about protecting their clients and just care about the dollar which is wrong in my book. Security should be treated like private police, but only to a point. I agree security is not the police but here in WA and elsewhere I imagine, security has more privelages than the police on private property. Unless an officer has a search warrant, or witnessed a crime being comitted security can deny entry to said cop. In this post 9/11 era, the focus should be on training and communication, not on ignoring security. In my opinion, if law enforcement sees a security company acting in a wrong manner then they should offer to sit down and train the company and its officers. There is nothing accomplished when a cop car drives by and the officer assumes the guard is an idiot. I personally think that if the guard proves himself as an idiot then thats one thing but if not why not give them the benefit of the doubt. Our country would be a lot safer if 1 the security industry was held to a higher standard like police. 2 security and police communicated back and forth and worked together. 3 security had training and tools to make them more effective. I agree Histfan, there are problems in the security industry and I think the whole law enforcement profession (including security) needs a wake up call. Cops seem to forget they are still private citizens just doing a job and guards seem to forget they aren't cops. I am sorry you had bad expieriences with security in the past but I hope that does not force you to prejudge other guards. You said you work in the security field now so I am assuming at least that you have found a few good guards to work with. Take care,

            Mike

            Comment


            • #51
              I don't think its in the best interest of the police to train security. At all. The job class has too many differences, and public police officers have been inset in specific method and doctrines that only apply to them.

              Two things everyone needs to keep in mind.

              (1) States regulate security industries. They do not train them, that is up to the industry itself. Some states regulate by requiring minimum training, or if they give police powers to private citizens, they require training as agents of the state itself. Rarely do states train as a function of itself a private enterprise to do anything.

              (2) histfan71 was acting as a duly appointed agent of the state, with a legal duty to enforce California State Law as well as the ordinances of the City of Los Angeles. It is his job to regulate, and regulate alone, by citing persons he found to be in violation of those laws and ordinances. The duty to understand the uniform you wear and devices on it falls to the individual, with a vicarious liability to the company. Just as you can't say, "My company ordered me to gun down those men," you can't say, "My company ordered me to wear a state seal."

              We are authorized to wear state seals in Wisconsin, because we are not a public agency, and the seal of Wisconsin does not infer official authority alone. In some states, you are not authorized to wear the seal of the state, as it does infer official authority.

              One thing, though. Blackinton as well as Smith and Warren illustrate several "security" badges with California State Seals. For small companies making a start, you'll see folks go with what the manufacturer and rep from Galls says, not thinking to consult a law book or corporate counsel.

              Always keep in mind that the state's job is to regulate the security industry due to the potential of misrepresentation and abuse, and never to train or assist it as a public law enforcement agency. If the state wants security to engage in public law enforcement services, they'll make them Peace Officers. If the state wants security to engage in private law enforcement services, they'll just ignore the situation.
              Some Kind of Commando Leader

              "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

              Comment


              • #52
                Oh, yeah. I need to note that I wrote up, then had a deputy sheriff respond to my location, because a SUPERVISOR was wearing a badge with a five point star and the Great Seal of the State of Florida on it.

                Anyone who wears a Five Point Star and who is not a Sheriff or his Deputy violates FSS 30 - Sheriff Act. Anyone who wears a Great Seal of the State of Florida with a Florida Sillouette on it violates multiple statutes.

                The supervisor was a crazy old bastard who stated that since he was a deputy in the 1950s in Alabama, he can wear a star on his badge.

                The deputy who cited him, seized the badge, and debated arresting him noted that the badge was actually a Deputy Bailiff's badge, which is why it said "Security" instead of Deputy.
                Some Kind of Commando Leader

                "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                  Oh, yeah. I need to note that I wrote up, then had a deputy sheriff respond to my location, because a SUPERVISOR was wearing a badge with a five point star and the Great Seal of the State of Florida on it.

                  Anyone who wears a Five Point Star and who is not a Sheriff or his Deputy violates FSS 30 - Sheriff Act. Anyone who wears a Great Seal of the State of Florida with a Florida Sillouette on it violates multiple statutes.

                  The supervisor was a crazy old bastard who stated that since he was a deputy in the 1950s in Alabama, he can wear a star on his badge.

                  The deputy who cited him, seized the badge, and debated arresting him noted that the badge was actually a Deputy Bailiff's badge, which is why it said "Security" instead of Deputy.
                  My views, opinions and statements are my own. They are not of my company, affiliates or coworkers.

                  -Being bagger at Publix has more respect these days

                  -It's just a job kid deal with it

                  -The industry needs to do one of two things; stop fiddling with the thin line and go forward or go back to that way it was. A flashlight in one hand and your set of keys in the other

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                    I agree with him to an extent. It could be a regional reason on why you don't see it.....
                    There are plenty of knuckleheads in this area to. My problem with his post is more about his use of the word MOST as opposed to MANY. For example:

                    - There are many LEO's who have been arrested.
                    - Most LEO's have been arrested.

                    The second statement is obviously false. Splitting hairs? Perhaps. But I believe people need to say what they mean and mean what they say. If a member frequently uses words such as never, always, all, and none, then the credibility of their statements may be questionable.
                    Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by EMTFirefighter
                      I picked most over many for a reason. I truly believe that most SOs are worthless. Just because we're professionals and care about our jobs, doesn't mean everyone does.
                      I sure you believe that. If you say: "I believe that most s/o's are worthless." you are expressing an opinion and that's fine. If you say: "Most s/o's are worthless." that's a statement of fact and you need to be able to back it up with more than your opinion if it is to be accepted as credible.
                      Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Mr. Security
                        In your opinion. If you have a credible source that verifies that, then by all means post it.
                        My statement comes from my personal observations and experiences during my 18 years in the security industry.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                          That's weird to me. As a non sworn security officer, once I took a DUI suspect into custody to protect him and the public, I could not release him, nor could the police officer who showed up to arrest him. The guy "had" to go, if it was detectable to the police officer, and we "had" to stop them if it was detectable to the security officer. This was due to the liability of allowing a drunk to drive.

                          I can see you have the liability covered by impounding the vehicle, but the state dosen't require you prosecute the offense since you deprived the person of his motor vehicle?
                          Ah yes the detain for breach of peace authority it works great to keep drunk drivers from damaging property or people on the properties we protect. Im curious though how you got the driver to stop did he yield to the amber light bar?
                          Last edited by bigdog; 03-28-2006, 06:41 AM.
                          "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by histfan71
                            My statement comes from my personal observations and experiences during my 18 years in the security industry.
                            No doubt, you have encountered many s/o's who fit that profile. However, you have not worked with MOST s/o's. Do you see the difference in your word choice? People form opinions based on their own experiences in life, which represents a tiny fraction of the whole picture. That's why personal opinions can be so misleading.

                            Like a friend of mine says: Opinions are like belly buttons. Everyone has one and they usually smell.
                            Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by bigdog
                              Ah yes the detain for breach of peace authority it works great to keep drunk drivers from damaging property or people on the properties we protect. Im curious though how you got the driver to stop did he yield to the amber light bar?
                              Stop strip spikes
                              Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by bigdog
                                Ah yes the detain for breach of peace authority it works great to keep drunk drivers from damaging property or people on the properties we protect. Im curious though how you got the driver to stop did he yield to the amber light bar?
                                Wasn't traffic stops. Worked several properties with bars attached under the scope of the contract. Bar hated us, because we'd pop their patrons for DUI if they were falling down drunk and then tried to leave. Hotel told them to pound sand.
                                Some Kind of Commando Leader

                                "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                                Comment

                                Leaderboard

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X