Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Utah Legislators, Police, FOP, decry Private Security in Hearing

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
    So, should SOs have more training, or should they simply not be deployed to those areas? This is a big question. Many would say that SOs do not belong on those "bad" areas, that its a law enforcement problem.
    S/Os here in Texas have a good level of "authority" representing the client/property owner. Yes, Texas S/Os for sure should have more training to go with this Authority. Texas is one of the more liberal states when it comes to Private Security (Assaulting a S/O on duty is the same as assaulting a cop or fireman, S/Os and all citizens can make citizen's arrest ect).

    When I look back on my time in Private security, I actually get the shakes. Some of the people I worked with who carried firearms shouldn't have been allowed carry scissors. One guy (and this was when I took the Lvl 3 class with Wackenhut) answered EVERY "shoot/don't shoot" question "SHOOT" and still got his commision. He got his gun taken from him in a fight at a truck stop in Oak Cliff (southern Dallas area) and almost got himself killed. He was Ex-army too. I've got a couple dozen like stories too.

    If I ever went back to private security, it would be unarmed in a highrise building again wearing a soft suit and tie uniform, for sure.
    Last edited by Black Caesar; 06-29-2006, 04:36 AM.
    ~Black Caesar~
    Corbier's Commandos

    " "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." ~Margaret Thatcher

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by histfan71
      Salve, Caesar!

      I, too, am a police corporal! I just got promoted two weeks ago, after a whole 6 weeks on the department. How's that for advancement opportunity!
      Congrats!

      It took me 7 years , and I been here for 8 now . In my defense, my Department evolved from Campus Security to Police 20 years ago, but we only got a "real" rank structure last year. Before that all we had was "Officer", "Lieutenant" and "Chief". Our Campus Chief could make "Temporary ranks" like Corporal, Sgt ect, but you didn't get paid more for it. I was promoted the 1st day of the new rank structure, and i turned down a Sgt spot because I would have had to go to another shift.

      The rank structure for KPD is:

      Resident Manager
      Chief of Police
      Deputy Chief of Police (who wears captain bars as insignia of rank and is addressed as "captain")
      Lieutenant
      Sergeant
      Corporal
      Police Officer
      Same as ours is now with minor differances. Our Chief (formally "Director of Police") answers to a College Vice President, and we call our captains "Captain", but the rank is officially "Captain/Assistant Director". Otherwise it's the same. Me, i think we could have done with out the captain rank and just had a senior Lt., but the powers that be wanted Lt's to have something to work towards.

      I also worked for a WBS company with a full military rank structure. I often had to bite my tongue to keep from laughing when some pimply-faced 19 year old with 90 days of security experience introduced himself as "Sergeant Major XXXXXX!" If you joined the company as an armed guard you were hired as a "staff sergeant"; if an armed patrol officer you were a "sergeant first class" and promoted to "master sergeant" after your 90-day probation; unarmed guards with some sort of prior security experience were hired at least as a "corporal" and sometimes as a "staff sergeant."
      I thought it was just me lol. It was painful one day when on post I walked up on a "Major" talking to a guy who turned out to be an Air Force Master Sergeant. He was trying not to laugh but he was looking straight at the Major's "clover" the whole time....

      It didn't help with me walking up with Sergeant Major insignia on.....

      The owner of the company also wore "colonel" eagles and wore them everywhere! On his collar points, on his epaulettes, and on his hat! His name tag actually read "Col. XXXXX" I believe he was a PFC when he was in the Army. It is people like this owner and companies like this one and one you worked for why so many people think the security industry is a pathetic joke!
      The owner of the company I worked for had been a Marine Lance Corporal when he got out......
      ~Black Caesar~
      Corbier's Commandos

      " "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." ~Margaret Thatcher

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by histfan71
        As to the poster who wanted the authority to write city parking tickets, I think he wanted to write parking tickets to any vehicle he saw illegally parked, whether the illegally parked car was on his client's property or not. That is why I made the "get a meter maid job" comment. I do not think he was talking about enforcing his client's parking rules and regulations.
        Most Law Enforcement Officers I know would barely use their time to write parking tickets.
        "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


        • #34
          Originally posted by Black Caesar
          ...Lvl 1 and Lvl 2 S/O Combined is 4 hours. Lvl 3 S/O (armed) is another 30 hours, and Lvl 4 (Personal Protection Officer) is another 16 hours (now, i did it back in 95-96 it was less).

          For 50 hours of training you become a fully loaded S/O who can even carry concealed weapons (if working as a PPO). That 50 hours is EVERYTHING about Being an S/O, not just firearms. Role, authority, history, everything...

          ...So still, 9 months (to learn everything I needed bookwise as a LEO) vs 50 hours for being a S/O is a bad joke. What's worse is As a S/O I was posted in worse places than I ever had when I was a reserve, or now as a Campus Cop. Heck, some of those Apt. Complexes were worse than the Jail I worked out as a Detention officer.......
          That last section you posted is the main reason I agree with the notion the training is a complete joke. The state's training doesn't encompass any of the skills we use on the field and many of the classes I've seen have the instructor misquoting the law anyway. What many of these people with no additional training or study believe when they "graduate" from this 30 hour course and receive their little card to carry a weapon is shocking in its inaccuracy.

          Most of the skills I learned were on the field working in high crime apartment complexes in northeast Dallas. Most of those relevant skills were learned through experience. That basically means learned from others who were ex-leo's I worked with or learned by errors I happened to be fortunate enough to live through or through textbook or video material. It was not learned from the basic commission course.

          One great resource we do have here though is the internet. Go to the state website and you can do research on any criminal statute or legal guideline there is. I believe that is motivating more security officers to educate themselves about the law and about skills they need on the job. We are tired of mediocrity and are tired of the constant abuse and negativity from government leaders, politicians, and law enforcement.
          "We appreciate all the hard work you've done, the dedicated hours you have worked, and the lives you have saved. However, since this is your third time being late to work, we are terminating your employment here."

          Comment


          • #35
            You know, this whole hard core prejudiced reaction to private security reminds me of a big defamatory essay I saw a few years ago. I could only find a web page with part of it.

            http://www.delta-1.net/texas.html
            "We appreciate all the hard work you've done, the dedicated hours you have worked, and the lives you have saved. However, since this is your third time being late to work, we are terminating your employment here."

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by histfan71
              I'm not going to flame you, Bull! Your post was well thought-out and eloquently written. I wish more security guards would write as well as you do and express their ideas as clearly.

              As to the prisoner transport issue, the impression I got from reading the article is that this Tallent guy wants private security to have the authority to transport suspects the security guard has arrested to the police station, instead of calling the cops and waiting for the cops to show up at the scene of the arrest.

              I am not in favor of having security guards do this. It is a totally separate issue from a prisoner transport business, which I am in favor of. I think that when a security guard makes a citizen's arrest, the police should be called out to the scene of the arrest to investigate the incident that caused the suspect to be arrested. Since the police are already at the scene, the police can just take custody of the suspect and take him to jail themselves. If the security guard is allowed to transport the suspect directly to the police station, and the police find the security guard did not have sufficient probable cause to arrest said suspect, what happens then? I think that the security guard can be held liable for kidnapping charges in addition to false arrest and imprisonment charges.

              As to the poster who wanted the authority to write city parking tickets, I think he wanted to write parking tickets to any vehicle he saw illegally parked, whether the illegally parked car was on his client's property or not. That is why I made the "get a meter maid job" comment. I do not think he was talking about enforcing his client's parking rules and regulations.
              Thank you histfan71, I appreciate the compliment.

              I agree that if they are looking for the authority to transport arrestees to the police station or the county jail then this function needs to be denied to them. You’re right in that it is a waste considering the police will already be on hand at some point dealing with the offender. Also I would wonder how a client would feel knowing that he/she is paying for the reduction in coverage of his property while the security officer is gone to the police station or jail. I know, as a client, I wouldn’t be happy spending my money on these types of activity.

              If an officer wants to write traffic code citations, this is fine provided that the officer isn’t taking action off of the client’s property. That includes letting the offender go if they successfully get off the property before being stopped/contacted by the security officer. The liability of anything happening, like a traffic accident that could occur as a result of the security unit being on a traffic stop on a public roadway, would not be a risk the client would, or should, find acceptable. Also I would, as both an officer and as a client, want the violations that the officer could cite for specifically spelled out. No free reign of the whole state traffic code – there is no reason for a security officer to write tickets for expired tags, that’s not a violation detrimental to the client’s business. Plus security officers shouldn’t be deciding on citations that are determined to have been the results of a traffic accident, since security officers are not trained in traffic accident investigation, though I could find an exception to this if the security officer witnessed the violation that resulted in an accident (and it was an enumerated violation he/she was authorized to enforce).

              This is just an example of the depth of the considerations that must be given when dealing with what needs to be examined in changing/improving the world of private security to take a field up towards the level of a profession.
              Last edited by aka Bull; 06-29-2006, 01:13 PM.
              "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

              Comment


              • #37
                Ok, I must admit I think security should have more power sort to speak. Now, lets take it step by step. The definition of a police officer is a governmental security officer. Now over time the police have evolved and security has been forced to take a back seat. This is a wrong approach for people to take. In an ideal world police and security should work hand in hand. I constantly hear police officers whining because they have to take certain calls. This is where I draw the line. You complain and whine because you want more police officers, yet you don't want to take the calls assigned to you because their not "hot". Im sorry but I have lost a lot of respect for police. I see a lot of butt kissing and politics being played out within the departments that are sworn to protect and serve. It does not make me feel safe when I'm treated like crap for calling a cop out on a minor issue. The police have forgotten that they are public servants, they seem to think that they are above the public and security which they aren't. Now, don't take it wrong this isn't a police bashing thread and im not bashing on the police. I understand that like everything else there are good guys and bad guys and the good outnumber the bad. Unfortunately, its the bad that sticks out in your head. I also don't want to see security assuming the role of police, I think that would be a conflict of interest. What I would like to see is secuirty given more authority to deal with situations on their properties. This would include things like issuing city tickets for parking (not unheard of) as well as responding to and handling minor instances yourself. For example, if a kid tags your property but there is no suspect info, why call an officer to take a report? Reports like that security officers should be able to do themselves and fax them into local PD. Security should NOT be arresting people as their is too much liability (detaining is ok). I am of the belief that cooperation between private and government will go further than being competitors. This is NOT a competition, lives are at stake the police have their role and security has theirs. Security is around to stay as well.

                Now, I also agree with increased training, but along with increased training should come increased supervision. I do think if your an armed officer you should be required to complete the Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure portions of the local LE academy first though. 8 hours here in the state of WA is just not enough to train someone to use deadly force. I also think that if they can qualify with it, backup guns should be allowed. Several police officers get killed with their own weapons every year. I also think that the fool who made that statement about rank and uniforms should find a different job. If he wants to get technical, police are impersonating the military by using the rank structure. Having a rank structure and chain of command is a good thing and shows order within your company. In a few years when I start my company I will use a rank structure. I hate to say this but uniforms don't make the man. If that were the case then the police need to stop wearing BDU uniforms as again they are impersonating the military. While were at it, lets stop PT and marching at the academy as well as saluting. Lets take away the 21 gun salute, taps, and the folded flag at officer funerals. All of that was started by military organizations throughout the world and copied by police. I guess we can accuse the police of impersonating the military.

                Our government, state and federal, is making a lot of bone headed decisions. In this day and age of terrorism they are trying to take rights away from citizens. Having security officers have more authority would be a good check and balance for the government. It would benefit everyone and harm noone. Will you have bad apples? Of course. But police depts have bad apples too. Its time the police depts stop whining and start working with security and citizens. It shouldn't be about money, it should be about public safety.

                Comment


                • #38
                  I have never understood why people say "detaining is OK, arresting is wrong." The moment you deprive someone of their freedom of movement, you are arresting them as far as our courts are concerned.

                  You have made a private arrest. There are cases where individuals who have been detained have sued under Section 1983 and/or had their criminal charges dismissed because of false arrest charges. If you are "detaining" for a breach of the peace misdemeanor, then in most cases the law enforcement officer responding cannot make an arrest. They can take over your prisoner and get a sworn statement from you, but legally speaking, you are making the arrest. The officer is taking your sworn statement and attaching it to their arrest affidavit, because the law does not authorize him to arrest a person who does not commit a misdemeanor in his presence.

                  If you are going to go hands on on anyone, and "detain" them, then you should be trained in, at a minimum:
                  - State Criminal Code (Arrest)
                  - State Criminal Code (Crimes)
                  - State Criminal Code (Use of Force)
                  - State Criminal Code (Legal Duties of the Security Officer)
                  - Civil Liability under Federal Law (Section 1983)
                  - Arrest Tactics
                  - Weaponless Defensive Tactics
                  - Intermediate Weapons
                  - Firearms

                  Then, and only then, are you capable of beginning to understand what a "detainment" is (Its an arrest by private person), what behavior or indicators indicate elements of a crime, how to accomplish an arrest, what levels of force may be used to accomplish the arrest, how to overcome resistance to an arrest, how to use intermediate weapons to protect self/others and overcome resistance to an arrest, how to use firearms (and other improvised tools) to terminate an immediate threat of deadly force to oneself or another.
                  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


                  • #39
                    N.A. I agree with you on the training but who is going to pay for it. The security company doesn't want to cut into their profits to give officers more training. A better trained officer would demand higher wages. Unless the security officer pays for his own training, things are not going to change. However the taxpayer will continue to fund training for police officers.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Ssecurity officers here in florida can get all of that training except the tricky part is weaponless defense(defensive tactics). There really arent that many places that will teach a non-leo defensive tactics. Their first question is why do you need it your a security guard? you dont arrest people. if they attack you run away or use your intermediate weapon then run away.
                      "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        [QUOTE=N. A. Corbier]I have never understood why people say "detaining is OK, arresting is wrong." The moment you deprive someone of their freedom of movement, you are arresting them as far as our courts are concerned.

                        This is wrong in the State of Washington. The courts in this state recognize detention and arrest as two seperate factions.

                        Detention: temporarily preventing person from leaving while investigating. Detentions must not exceed a time to which a reasonable person would believe they are in custody. You cannot be charged with escape if you flee from a detention. Traffic stops and Terry stops are examples of detentions.

                        Arrest: Forcibly denying a persons freedom. A key here is you don't have to make an arrest to arrest someone. If a reasonable person, given the circumstances present, would believe they were under arrest than you have just arrested the person even if you are only detaining them.

                        There are several more components to this which I don't have the time to explain. The basic rule the courts follow in this state is what did the suspect believe at the time. In this case security and private citizens must be careful as they can get charged with wrongful arrest if the suspect believed they were being arrested. I always make a point of telling the suspects that they are not under arrest, that they are only being detained until police arrive and the police will make that decission not me. Bottom line, if you witness a crime then your fine assuming the crime is an arrestable offense to begin with. That is why I think being trained in criminal law is so important even if your security.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          I am going to use the terms “detain” and “arrest” with the understanding that state laws and the courts may well have differing views of these two terms.

                          The discussion over whether or not security personnel should have the power of arrest, or the authority to detain a person, is only dependent upon the rights and authorities set out under the laws of the state. Where there is a clear right to arrest, at whatever level (offenses committed in presence or by probable cause) or detain, the determination as to whether or not those powers can and should be exercised rests not with the security officer, but with the client. After all it is also the client who shoulders potential liability for the actions of the security officer acting as his/her agent. If the client demands no detaining or arresting of offenders then the only action that would be permissible (also spelled out contractually) would be the notification of law enforcement authorities. Yes, simply “observe and report”.

                          At the same time, if security officers are going to be exercising any arrest authority then they should be required to undergo training along the lines laid out by Nathan in his post. Once completed satisfactorily then an officer may exercise those powers as he may be contractually obligated to. It would be extremely important for the security officers to also understand (very clearly) that exercising those powers beyond the premises of the client would mean that they are acting as no more than any private citizen. This would restrict them to the same authority as a citizen once they left the client’s defined property.

                          This definitively provides a clear boundary between private security and police. No matter how you slice the pie, a security officer stops being such at the property line. Beyond that point it is the responsibility of law enforcement to handle the situation. Any laws enacted to increase the authority to detain and arrest should be clearly spelled out to prevent its unlawful use.

                          When it comes to handling minor crimes and incidents and passing those reports to law enforcement agencies, instead of having a police officer respond, that too must clearly be spelled out contractually by the client with the service provider. Before this could even happen however, security companies would need to coordinate with the local law enforcement agencies to implement a workable system. Further, providing there are no conflicts with the laws of the state, security companies would have to put their security officers through a training course agreed upon by the companies and the police agencies to insure that security officers understood basic crime investigation. This would prevent, or serious limit, the filing of useless reports that stand no chance of ever being cleared. Care would have to be taken to insure that security officers also did not violate anyone’s constitutionally protected rights in investigating these incidents. In my mind there would need to be some supporting state law to grant authority to security officers to become involved in the investigation of minor criminal acts. Of course the client would have the last say, it is his/her property. No matter what you do to improve the ability and authority of security officers to act, it is still the client whom we serve.

                          Which brings me to a point Michael Ledgerwood made that, “having security officers have more authority would be a good check and balance for the government.” As private security providers we are not here to provide a check and balance to government authority. We are no more than a contracted agent for the client and are serving their needs.
                          "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            [QUOTE=Michael Ledgerwood]
                            Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                            I have never understood why people say "detaining is OK, arresting is wrong." The moment you deprive someone of their freedom of movement, you are arresting them as far as our courts are concerned.

                            This is wrong in the State of Washington. The courts in this state recognize detention and arrest as two seperate factions.

                            Detention: temporarily preventing person from leaving while investigating. Detentions must not exceed a time to which a reasonable person would believe they are in custody. You cannot be charged with escape if you flee from a detention. Traffic stops and Terry stops are examples of detentions.

                            Arrest: Forcibly denying a persons freedom. A key here is you don't have to make an arrest to arrest someone. If a reasonable person, given the circumstances present, would believe they were under arrest than you have just arrested the person even if you are only detaining them.

                            There are several more components to this which I don't have the time to explain. The basic rule the courts follow in this state is what did the suspect believe at the time. In this case security and private citizens must be careful as they can get charged with wrongful arrest if the suspect believed they were being arrested. I always make a point of telling the suspects that they are not under arrest, that they are only being detained until police arrive and the police will make that decission not me. Bottom line, if you witness a crime then your fine assuming the crime is an arrestable offense to begin with. That is why I think being trained in criminal law is so important even if your security.
                            Right, but you can do an investigative detention or terry stop? This is why I believe that in most cases, Detention = Arrest. If you are not lawfully empowered to conduct investigative detentions (terry stops), then any "detention" you make is an arrest as far as the court is going to see it.

                            See where I'm going with it? If you have detention powers, then yes. You can make detentions so long as they are lawful. But the storekeeper detaining someone for retail theft is conducting an arrest.

                            Now to read Bull's post.
                            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


                            • #44
                              [QUOTE=N. A. Corbier]
                              Originally posted by Michael Ledgerwood

                              Right, but you can do an investigative detention or terry stop? This is why I believe that in most cases, Detention = Arrest. If you are not lawfully empowered to conduct investigative detentions (terry stops), then any "detention" you make is an arrest as far as the court is going to see it.

                              See where I'm going with it? If you have detention powers, then yes. You can make detentions so long as they are lawful. But the storekeeper detaining someone for retail theft is conducting an arrest.

                              Now to read Bull's post.
                              You make sense N.A. but this state doesn't see it that way. Believe me 4 days of sitting through this one topic in my police academy was enough to pound it home. Security as well as private citizens can detain but not arrest. A shopowner detaining a kid for stealing a candy bar is not arresting them. Infact shoplifting is not an arrestable offense in this state (unless amount totals $250.00 or more then its a felony). In the case of detention as long as its lawful and on your property you can detain.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                [QUOTE=Michael Ledgerwood]
                                Originally posted by N. A. Corbier

                                You make sense N.A. but this state doesn't see it that way. Believe me 4 days of sitting through this one topic in my police academy was enough to pound it home. Security as well as private citizens can detain but not arrest. A shopowner detaining a kid for stealing a candy bar is not arresting them. Infact shoplifting is not an arrestable offense in this state (unless amount totals $250.00 or more then its a felony). In the case of detention as long as its lawful and on your property you can detain.
                                Here in Colorado a citizen may arrest for any offense committed, or being committed, in their presence. A citizen may not detain anyone on the suspicion that the individual committed an offense. Only a police officer may detain an individual while investigating the possibility that the individual may have committed an offense.
                                "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

                                Comment

                                Leaderboard

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X