Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

California now requires psych test for armed security

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

  • psycosteve
    replied
    Originally posted by Consolewatcher View Post

    That article tracked unarmed security guards and armed law enforcement officers. It didn't suggest any rise in armed non-sworn security guards.
    I would say that the rise in armed security is not being noticed as a national trend but being noticed in select localities. Due to the esculatting violence from rioting and the hands off approach of the police many businesses who never considered having security are going armed. When Iwas working in Baltimore after the Freddy Gray riots I saw more shop owners armed and more armed security then I ever saw before. Now with the antifa violence and the attacks on Trump supporters something is going to jump off. The things I have been reading on the net have led me to this conclusion. Armed antifa groups are actively training and recruiting to engage in domestic terrorism. those with their ears to the ground know things are going to get really bad. If I am right the levels of violence that will occur will make the violence of the 60's and 70's look like childs play. The bombings and assassinations will be all over the news.

    Leave a comment:

  • Consolewatcher
    Member

  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    You're right, Steve, in that up to now armed was always a smaller portion of the contracts. Every contract company I worked for only had a couple of armed guys, and they usually had to take other stuff when times were slow (unarmed or bail enforcement, for example).

    I think it is changing slowly. Just from anecdotal evidence in Seattle, I've seen more armed security guards in the last two years than I saw in the last decade. I would imagine other cities that are dealing with homeless, gangs or high levels of violent crime are probably seeing a higher demand for armed guards. (See the link below for changes in campus security.)

    The MMPI, like any other test, is just one tool. I'm sure a clever sociopath could get his score in the "pass" range. You can pretty much figure out the methodology of it if you've got a couple of psych credits from a university. But a test, along with a backround check and an interview, would certainly weed out bad actors better than just the usual "screening" process for unarmed guards. (And I use the term screening in quotes for a reason.)

    https://www.campussafetymagazine.com...s-u-s-schools/
    That article tracked unarmed security guards and armed law enforcement officers. It didn't suggest any rise in armed non-sworn security guards.

    Leave a comment:

  • Condo Guard
    Senior Member

  • Condo Guard
    replied
    You're right, Steve, in that up to now armed was always a smaller portion of the contracts. Every contract company I worked for only had a couple of armed guys, and they usually had to take other stuff when times were slow (unarmed or bail enforcement, for example).

    I think it is changing slowly. Just from anecdotal evidence in Seattle, I've seen more armed security guards in the last two years than I saw in the last decade. I would imagine other cities that are dealing with homeless, gangs or high levels of violent crime are probably seeing a higher demand for armed guards. (See the link below for changes in campus security.)

    The MMPI, like any other test, is just one tool. I'm sure a clever sociopath could get his score in the "pass" range. You can pretty much figure out the methodology of it if you've got a couple of psych credits from a university. But a test, along with a backround check and an interview, would certainly weed out bad actors better than just the usual "screening" process for unarmed guards. (And I use the term screening in quotes for a reason.)

    https://www.campussafetymagazine.com...s-u-s-schools/

    Leave a comment:

  • psycosteve
    Member

  • psycosteve
    replied
    Originally posted by Squid View Post


    You mean MMPI type testing couldn't tell the diff between your typical "just doing it for easy bucks till my real career restarts" guy and a complete PSYCHO (no offense Steve) planning an epic mass murder (apparently with all sorts of Muslim-gay inner conflicts of shooter)???

    Imagine my shock. lol
    My perspective of the security industry tends to be pretty skewed due to my experiences. I realized that security tends to attract those who are not employable at other jobs. The rapid hiring and mass firing cycles that has become a major part of contract security. Due to the low wages there is not a lot of incentive to hire and groom quality line guards. The issue becomes with armed guards is can you get enough demand to keep your armed guys working or fill the demands you have currently for them. Security companies will always look for the cheapest way to do things. Substandard training and cheap just sign them off psychological testing done at bulk rates. I saw plenty of them in PA to get an armed security license and local collages doing act 203 law enforcement certification.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by psycosteve View Post
    The Miami nightclub shooting being the extreme case but between the government psychological testing and background checks

    You mean MMPI type testing couldn't tell the diff between your typical "just doing it for easy bucks till my real career restarts" guy and a complete PSYCHO (no offense Steve) planning an epic mass murder (apparently with all sorts of Muslim-gay inner conflicts of shooter)???

    Imagine my shock. lol

    Leave a comment:

  • psycosteve
    Member

  • psycosteve
    replied
    The essence of contract security has always been about mitigating liability and responsibly. Regardless of the accuracy of the testing the fact that it was used absolves the company in case the guard does something stupid. The Miami nightclub shooting being the extreme case but between the government psychological testing and background checks pretty much allowed G4S to claim innocence in the whole matter .

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Consolewatcher View Post

    The MMPI and other psych tests are useful, but they're not by any means "perfect". You may not necessarily be able to "beat" it, but by having detailed knowledge about it you can have a definite advantage.

    I don't have an issue with it being used as part of the initial hiring process. However, given the fact that the test is not 100% reliable, I have issues with using it as a "pass this or you lose your job" test.
    AFAIK, MMPI isn't just "not 100% reliable" but most likely less than 0%, in that its findings will be less accurate than random assigned results. When a fellow student asked our MMPI fan-boy professor (who was otherwise big on Scientific Method) about any independent verification of MMPI's incredible, magical powers, our prof quickly changed the subject. I'm gonna go way out on a limb and guess that all MMPI stuff is very legally protected and anyone doing an independent study will be sued for "illegal use", copyright, etc.

    IIRC there is something I'd call the "Quack Effect" (has another name but forgot). It means that people will believe and embrace a Quack's findings (and course of treatment) BECAUSE, not in spite of, the Quack being not just inaccurate, but completely off the mark and creating pure fiction. That is because the Quack's findings will be something you never dreamed of, so you assume he must know more than you.

    Once your average HR drone or manager gets a printout from the wizards from MMPI, the drone then feels it is their job to see the MMRI claims in the subject, and failure to do so means the HR drone is point of failure, not MMPI. Whats an HR drone gonna say? "These tests some saleman conned the boss into paying are less accurate than newspaper free horoscope"?

    Leave a comment:

  • Consolewatcher
    Member

  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Soper View Post
    The MMPI and CPI are highly respected and verified tests, used throughout the US and other countries to determine a baseline in psych issues and to determine where on the spectrum the testee is. You can't beat it, no matter what YOU think.

    There is no such thing as an "MMPI employee". Do you really just makes things up or are that dumb?

    Squids blithe dismissal of it, and his acknowledgement that he's never taken it, yet criticizes it, shows exactly where he is coming from: utter ignorance.

    It doesn't take a shrink to see what issues squid has. He would be better served if he spoke about the very limited security experience he has ( guarding dirt lots), and not try and discuss things so far out of his ken that he embarrasses himself each time he posts.
    The MMPI and other psych tests are useful, but they're not by any means "perfect". You may not necessarily be able to "beat" it, but by having detailed knowledge about it you can have a definite advantage.

    I don't have an issue with it being used as part of the initial hiring process. However, given the fact that the test is not 100% reliable, I have issues with using it as a "pass this or you lose your job" test.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Soper View Post
    and verified tests,
    link to ANY verification, much less by a neutral or skeptical party?


    Leave a comment:

  • SoCalGuard
    Member

  • SoCalGuard
    replied
    California requires security officers who wish to carry a firearm to take two days of training, pass a test, apply for a permit, and now pass a phycological test. California also requires armed security to pass shooting tests 4 times in two years to keep their permit. I have no problem with background checks, training requirements, and licensing to work security. I would rather see more intensive training requirements for security, but not just to carry a firearm. Keeping a gun for self-defense is a constitutional right and should not have additional regulatory tests to permit.

    Leave a comment:

  • Soper
    Senior Member

  • Soper
    replied
    The MMPI and CPI are highly respected and verified tests, used throughout the US and other countries to determine a baseline in psych issues and to determine where on the spectrum the testee is. You can't beat it, no matter what YOU think.

    There is no such thing as an "MMPI employee". Do you really just makes things up or are that dumb?

    Squids blithe dismissal of it, and his acknowledgement that he's never taken it, yet criticizes it, shows exactly where he is coming from: utter ignorance.

    It doesn't take a shrink to see what issues squid has. He would be better served if he spoke about the very limited security experience he has ( guarding dirt lots), and not try and discuss things so far out of his ken that he embarrasses himself each time he posts.

    Leave a comment:

  • Consolewatcher
    Member

  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Squid View Post

    do your own research into this MMPI. its lots of claims and "everyone uses it" but once you try to nail down anything there is nothing there and NO outside review is allowed. Without even checking (never taken a MMPI anything) I'd bet good money that part of taking an MMPI is agreeing not to use for anything except "intended use" one-time license and no "reverse engineering" etc allowed or they could sue.

    Its a Holy Grail "black box".

    The UCB frat I mentioned had done an "informal review" of a number of MMPI results and IIRC found them less accurate than Horoscopes or "Hand Writing" personality tests..

    From wiki: Hathaway and McKinley used an empirical [criterion] keying approach, with clinical scales derived by selecting items that were endorsed by patients known to have been diagnosed with certain pathologies.

    from me: When other legit and capable groups (such as major American universities) have tried this to create competing/similar tests they (as they say in Science) "were not able to duplicate the results". (thats how Scientists say "I think you are full of BS and just made your stuff up to make some easy money off dumb people")

    My Psych 101 professor was a big believer in MMPI and said it was amazing how accurate was for him and recommended we take one. Like I said, the UCB frat got similar results giving pledges other peoples random tests and telling them it was their results. Its just like a horoscope in that everything is so vague it applies to anyone 1/2 normal.

    I always tell Astrologers "ask me all the questions you want, ask anyone who knows me ANY questions (except my birthday) and then tell me may birthday, or even MONTH of birth". No takers to date.

    Same offer to MMPI. Give me the test, then I, or any MMPI True Believer you so chose, picks my MMPI results out of a stack of my and 11 other random MMPI results.

    Just to make it fair, I'll let an MMPI employee hang out or interview folks that know me (GF, buddies, teachers, roomies, parents, employer, etc) and fill out my test for me, although one of MMPI famous claims is that their test is "cheat proof" and will uncover people trying to "out smart the test".
    Yeah, the MMPI and other tests have ways to try to and weed out people who are lying or otherwise manipulate the test. For example, a test will ask "Do you get angry?" If you were trying to answer the "correct" response, you might say "no". A healthy person does get angry at times, though, and if you ver get angry at all it means that you have psychological issues.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squid
    replied
    Originally posted by Consolewatcher View Post

    Like the polygraph, the MMPI is useful but is not by any means perfect. From the point of view of the employees, I'm glad that it appears already-armed guards won't have to pass the psych test they use; it's one thing to say to someone "you failed this test, so we can't hire you for this job". It's another thing altogether to say to someone "you failed this test, so we have to fire you from the job you already have".

    Of course, it may not so much be a "psych test" but instead a test on whether you truly understand firearms laws and have correct mindset. For example, they could be looking out for things like "if X happens, I GET to shoot the guy", instead of "if X happens, I may HAVE to shoot the guy" and testing to see whether you are a) planning to retreat instead of shooting if safe to do so, and b) understand that you cannot shoot someone to defend property.
    do your own research into this MMPI. its lots of claims and "everyone uses it" but once you try to nail down anything there is nothing there and NO outside review is allowed. Without even checking (never taken a MMPI anything) I'd bet good money that part of taking an MMPI is agreeing not to use for anything except "intended use" one-time license and no "reverse engineering" etc allowed or they could sue.

    Its a Holy Grail "black box".

    The UCB frat I mentioned had done an "informal review" of a number of MMPI results and IIRC found them less accurate than Horoscopes or "Hand Writing" personality tests..

    From wiki: Hathaway and McKinley used an empirical [criterion] keying approach, with clinical scales derived by selecting items that were endorsed by patients known to have been diagnosed with certain pathologies.

    from me: When other legit and capable groups (such as major American universities) have tried this to create competing/similar tests they (as they say in Science) "were not able to duplicate the results". (thats how Scientists say "I think you are full of BS and just made your stuff up to make some easy money off dumb people")

    My Psych 101 professor was a big believer in MMPI and said it was amazing how accurate was for him and recommended we take one. Like I said, the UCB frat got similar results giving pledges other peoples random tests and telling them it was their results. Its just like a horoscope in that everything is so vague it applies to anyone 1/2 normal.

    I always tell Astrologers "ask me all the questions you want, ask anyone who knows me ANY questions (except my birthday) and then tell me may birthday, or even MONTH of birth". No takers to date.

    Same offer to MMPI. Give me the test, then I, or any MMPI True Believer you so chose, picks my MMPI results out of a stack of my and 11 other random MMPI results.

    Just to make it fair, I'll let an MMPI employee hang out or interview folks that know me (GF, buddies, teachers, roomies, parents, employer, etc) and fill out my test for me, although one of MMPI famous claims is that their test is "cheat proof" and will uncover people trying to "out smart the test".

    Leave a comment:

  • Consolewatcher
    Member

  • Consolewatcher
    replied
    Originally posted by Condo Guard View Post
    The devil will be in the details, but it is a good first step. Anyone allowed to carry a firearm in the scope of employment can be and should be screened. It may also deter some who should not be carrying.

    As far as your comments on the MMPI - it is recognized as a legitimate screening tool and has been around for decades. No psych test is perfect, but its better than just handing people loaded guns and telling them, "Don't shoot anyone unless you have to." I agree with Soper - let's have some facts to boost these assertions that everything is "BS." (When was the incident at UCB? Source?)
    Like the polygraph, the MMPI is useful but is not by any means perfect. From the point of view of the employees, I'm glad that it appears already-armed guards won't have to pass the psych test they use; it's one thing to say to someone "you failed this test, so we can't hire you for this job". It's another thing altogether to say to someone "you failed this test, so we have to fire you from the job you already have".

    Of course, it may not so much be a "psych test" but instead a test on whether you truly understand firearms laws and have correct mindset. For example, they could be looking out for things like "if X happens, I GET to shoot the guy", instead of "if X happens, I may HAVE to shoot the guy" and testing to see whether you are a) planning to retreat instead of shooting if safe to do so, and b) understand that you cannot shoot someone to defend property.

    Leave a comment:

  • Condo Guard
    Senior Member

  • Condo Guard
    replied
    The devil will be in the details, but it is a good first step. Anyone allowed to carry a firearm in the scope of employment can be and should be screened. It may also deter some who should not be carrying.

    As far as your comments on the MMPI - it is recognized as a legitimate screening tool and has been around for decades. No psych test is perfect, but its better than just handing people loaded guns and telling them, "Don't shoot anyone unless you have to." I agree with Soper - let's have some facts to boost these assertions that everything is "BS." (When was the incident at UCB? Source?)

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X