Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question For Armed Officers.

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

  • #16
    I'm actually considering it right now! I JUST finished training for my firearm permit and the interview I have monday is at a hospital that doesn't allow guards firearms.

    Firearms training: $175
    Firearm Permit/BG Checks:$100
    New (level 2) holster: $25
    Giving it up for $12/hr?
    Sure.

    If they want to pay me for the skills I've learned, without asking me to use them... Gotta say OK!

    Gives me a chance to find some "new and creative" ways to defend myself!

    Comment


    • #17
      I guess maybe I come from more of an actual law enforcement officer perspective then 'security' ....but personally, I would not want a job, regardless of pay, where it was my duty, responsability or job function to insert myself in a situation to directly enforce rules, regulations, detain / arrest persons of unknown charactor, apprehend or respond to crimes in progress, all while wearing a uniform representing some level of authority, without also being allowed to carry the tools which would facilitate my defending myself against any & all threats which might come my way...and normally do, when you least expect it.
      (this includes those armed positions that say they wont let you vest up!)

      The novelty of wearing a firearm on my hip, or lugging around a patrol rifle all day, wore off about 10yrs ago, or shortly after I had to strap one on everyday. This is true of any officer who has worn one for any duration, day in, day out. You'll find the few newbies that "think its cool & makes them maco" in these cases, they #A = havent done it before but watch way too much COP's on TV or #B = have something to prove or some other deep seated agenda where they feel the need to "be a man"...not anyone I'd want armed in either case. As in most things in life, it has its positives & negatives. It is both a burden & great liability, but its your only tool in some situations that occurr in our general line of work. I've had to draw mine many times in the line of duty, I've stuck it on the nose of more then one idiot, but luckly never had to put somebody down, because its presence alone was enough to gain the nessicary complaince..if I didnt have that tool available, I'm certain the outcome would have been different in those situations.

      I also know 1st hand that the mear fact I was armed, more then once kept a situation from going sideways, I was even told this by a perp once after he was cuffed once. Remember, criminals profile anyone in uniform, just as often as they profile thier next victim. Alot of Police work, especially Security work is more "presence" then it is "proactive"...if you look professional & act professional, you'll eliminate 90% of those that might do you harm, from ever doing so,... I feel that this same thing applies to those that work armed, versus those that dont..if you look prepared for anything, up to & including being able to bring lethal force to bear, your less likely to ever encounter the need to use it.
      ...."the power of the gun, is not in its actual use, but in its implied level of force to that it is capable of"
      c/o my friend Mass from LFI II.
      Yoda
      Sometimes there is "Justice", sometimes there is "Just Us"

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Mr. Security
        How many of you would remain in security if you could work unarmed at a decent wage w/o fear of being harmed? I know this is a hypothetical question, but I want to see how many are in it because they get to carry a firearm. (I'm sensing a fascination with this "gun" thing )
        I would, but most of the unarmed jobs around here, even within this company, pay around $10-14 an hour less than my current one, and that's including supervisory positions

        I could really give a rip whether or not I'm an armed officer, to me it's just another "tool" on my belt. The "fascination" wore off around 11 years ago, when I turned 21 and bought my first handgun, got a concealed license and quickly grew bored with it. Years of carrying off-duty as a citizen, on-duty as a deputy sheriff, cop, armed guard and EP dork have jaded me to the "power of the gun" (not my quote).

        It's not a sure-fire answer to any situation, not always the best answer, but occasionally it's a neccesary option, and no one wins. I've been in one deadly force incident where we put down a bad guy, and went home at the end of the day. I won't say anymore, but suffice it to say, even though it was completely justified, to this day I still don't feel like I "won".

        Comment


        • #19
          I left armed security Contract making 19.00 and hour, to an unarmed dispatcher 14.36, to a BUG HOUSE Guard making 17.24. However I work for the State of Connecticut Have a much better retirement better than most PD's in this state, and I have better insurance. The cops that I work with though they should do not have firearms at their immediate disposal.

          Comment


          • #20
            I have worked both armed and un-armed security with pay ranges all over the place. Right now I am working for an un-armed department making $15.00 an hour. I left a armed position making $13.00 an hour. it boils down to the money you make for me, trust me I would like to be armed but bills, child support, and gas in the car comes first.

            anyways the armed jobs that I want here in Columbus are very hard to get. some of these companies pay around $19.00 an hour and have tons of people standing in line to apply. the other issue is good paying security jobs both armed and un-armed want you to have your Police certification. most of their Officers are off duty Police. I don't think having your full Police cert just to work security is right. I understand they want trained Officers, but this does not give a lot of us a chance to prove we know how to do the job, and anyways those off duty Police Officers do not have Police powers when employed as a Security Officer.
            Last edited by ocp; 01-28-2007, 09:31 PM.
            SGT. WARD

            Comment


            • #21
              I suppose if there were no chance of getting hurt then I would do my job unarmed for the same pay . Having said that, I will also state that I really like firearms. Actually I like weaponry of all sorts and electronics and.... well, I guess I just plain like equipment! LOL! I wouldn't say I am fascinated however. I was infatuated with handguns when I first went into security and law enforcement but I soon grew out of it. I have been wearing one on my hip since 1981 and I can count on one hand the times I have had to draw it. It would be just fine with me if I never have to draw it again.

              Comment


              • #22
                OCP, as Nathan has pointed out many times it is the money and the liability. The client who hires off duty police officers lowers his liability because the police officer is on duty 24/7. True the police officer may not understand all the nuances of security, the client accepts that.
                Twenty years ago all bank directors of security were retired or former FBI agents. Why? The banking instutution understood they were federal crime fighters and bank robbery was a federal crime. Today these same retired or former agents may do the same work after retirement or leaving because they have been exposed to most of the aspects of security and know how to form cohesive teams.
                As the threat becomes more sophisticated, so have the means and methods of preventing or fighting it.
                Enjoy the day,
                Bill

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bill Warnock
                  OCP, as Nathan has pointed out many times it is the money and the liability. The client who hires off duty police officers lowers his liability because the police officer is on duty 24/7. True the police officer may not understand all the nuances of security, the client accepts that.
                  You just described one of the reasons for in-house Campus Police Departments lol. My College District gets a HUGE discount for having it's security force be trained and certified police officers, just like it helps to have a fully staffed health center and Nurses. If the district's security force were only trained to the level the state requires of security officers, the discounted rates would be "not so great" (this is how the District Legal Counsel explained it to us anyways).

                  The district saving money on us (campus police) is great job security .

                  Twenty years ago all bank directors of security were retired or former FBI agents. Why? The banking instutution understood they were federal crime fighters and bank robbery was a federal crime. Today these same retired or former agents may do the same work after retirement or leaving because they have been exposed to most of the aspects of security and know how to form cohesive teams.
                  As the threat becomes more sophisticated, so have the means and methods of preventing or fighting it.
                  Enjoy the day,
                  Bill
                  Don't the Casinos across the country do that too? Hire ex-Federal Agents and such I mean.
                  ~Black Caesar~
                  Corbier's Commandos

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

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    As a former cop, I couldn't agree more - the weapon loses its fascination about as quick as "new car smell" fades from the upholstery.

                    The equation "to arm or not" is complex and the variables in the equation are:
                    1. Type of facility.
                    2. Type of responsibilities.
                    3. Environment immediately around the facility.
                    4. Past history of violent/serious crime at the facility and the immediate environment.
                    5. History of violent/serious crime at similar types of facilities.
                    5. Socioeconomic factors regarding occupancy of the facility and the immediate environment.
                    6. Terrorism (domestic or transnational) and organized crime threats with respect to the facility.

                    Note that I do not agree with some who suggest that "increased liability" should be "the" consideration, or even a consideration at all.

                    Here's the reason: If the factors listed above indicate that the facility faces the substantial FORESEEABLE possibility of an armed threat, the failure to meet this adequately will prove to be a far greater liability than any increase in your liability premiums will ever be for arming your officers, assuming they are properly trained and supervised. Believe me, you CAN find yourself in court explaining why your officers were NOT armed and paying dearly for some lame excuse about "increased liability". What's more, both you and the client will pay, and the fact that the client refused to allow your officers to be armed will not sway the jury. YOU were supposed to be the expert and to know the proper level of security required, not the client.

                    So...if your reasoned assessment indicates the need for armed officers, for crying out loud stand up like you've been somewhere and tell the client so. Tell them that increased threat requires increase in response and a larger bill for your services...and then for Pete's sake have the cajones to walk away if they don't want to listen. Facts don't change simply because people don't like them and "a little" security is NOT an acceptable alternative or substitute for "adequate" security.

                    Larger - much larger - than any of these issues, however, is the question. I'm sure you'll recognize it because it's the elephant in the phone booth that security company owners AND their clients seem to want to ignore: What's a human life worth - whether an officer, an employee or a customer? Work that one out in the face of a foreseen armed threat and figure out whether the answer can be expressed in dollars and cents. Not ALL management questions can be decided by the methods of cost accounting.

                    In my judgement, there are far more venues in which officers who should be armed are not than there are venues in which officers are armed who should not be and this is largely due to institutional cowardice on the part of security company owners and their clients who have coldly placed a "value" on human life, which I suppose is just fine so long as it isn't the life of someone YOU love.
                    Last edited by SecTrainer; 01-29-2007, 09:04 PM.
                    "Every betrayal begins with trust." - Brian Jacques

                    "I can't predict the future, but I know that it'll be very weird." - Anonymous

                    "There is nothing new under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9

                    "History, with all its volumes vast, hath but one page." - Lord Byron

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Now i am not a suoper gu n nut or antything,. But i do know about weapons and proper usage etc... I have time in the military and am trained by them to carry a weapon. In the areas i work i would NOT work unarmed. Simply for two reasons. One the PD is way too busy to come save us every time, the second is most of our properties have us because they are NOT safe. So i would not work unarmed. Now maybe if i lived in an area where there is no crime then i would but not here.
                      Robert
                      Here endith the lesson

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by davis002
                        but in my area armed typically pays better than unarmed.
                        Actually D, the Twin Cities is somewhat of an anomaly. Armed officers on average make less than unarmed. When you look at the companies that arm officers (Wolf, Spartan, Capital, Delta, Territorial, etc.) you are looking at the low pay companies. The pay is actually better at the corporate accounts the big boys have. You are just lucky enough to be working for a guy that thinks that it's retarded that armed officers and janitors make the same wage. (And lucky he found a few clients that agree)

                        My view has always been the gun gives me the ability to handle many more problems, where with no equipment, I would have to virtually run away. So even at an account that has no need for it...well...there's always the POTENTIAL for the need.

                        But would I take a paycut to keep it. No way.
                        Last edited by Szorcsik001; 01-30-2007, 04:00 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Hey

                          I am an unarmed officer, as I work for a condominium complex on the beach. But I am checking in to getting my Florida G license so if I find and armed position that pays well and has decent benifits I can jump on it. Armed or unarmed doesn't bother me just the pay and benifits. Single dad after all and bills don't pay themselves. However I don't carry anything for protection on this site. No pepper spray or asp....asp at home collecting dust...as our security and safety director over these property forbids it. Oh well it sucks when ya got some crazy drunk dude on vacation wantin to beat ya to a pulp but nothing I can do about it...but look for work eleswhere where I can at least carry something to defend myself with.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I make $14.00 an hour unarmed. I don't feel a firearm would be a necessary piece of equipment where I work, however a less-than-lethal weapon would be nice. I hold a "carry" license in Michigan but seldom carry. There are some places I go while off duty that I carry: such as the areas I worked while a LEO. I still enjoy target practice.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              When it comes to contract security, unfortunately, most of the time the sole deciding factor about whether a guard will be armed is "is the client willing to pay a premium to have an armed officer?".

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Yes.

                                If unarmed work was the best option for me at the time, I would happily

                                work unarmed. However, at this point in time I would not actively seek a

                                safer, unarmed position. In the type of career that I'm attempting to

                                advance toward, I would imagine that prospective employers would like to

                                know that a potential employee has experience and skill in handling firearms

                                of different sorts. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
                                "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
                                - Thomas Jefferson

                                “Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence.”
                                — Vince Lombardi

                                "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

                                IX. Strive to attain professional competence.

                                Comment

                                Leaderboard

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X