Has There Been A Noticeable Anti-Police Vibe On Security Info Watch Forums Lately?

[Jim1348]

Now, maybe I am misreading or misinterpreting this, but there seems to have been a noticeable anti-police vibe on the forums lately. Have others notice that, too? If so, why?

Or, is there just a small minority on here that are anti-police? It seems very ironic to me that anybody in security would be anti-police.

[Lunch Meat]

Now, maybe I am misreading or misinterpreting this, but there seems to have been a noticeable anti-police vibe on the forums lately. Have others notice that, too? If so, why?

Or, is there just a small minority on here that are anti-police? It seems very ironic to me that anybody in security would be anti-police.

What I find ironic is the noticeable anti-security vibe from the "management" here

[Squid]

Part of it is people are always critical of the level above them. I've never heard a construction worker say good thing about an architect. When the level above you does their job well no one notices.

Security is booming because of an increase in bad people doing bad things, and most of that is Left Wing political policy, but a lot of the problem is the police, who are molded by bad policy themselves. They have all the same evils of rest of entrenched Civil Service.

This stems from two causes.

1)The Founding Fathers never intended a Civil Service where any Govt employee couldn't be instantly fired by a elected official, who in turn could be "fired" in an election. Tell anyone if private enterprise they will have a Civil Service type HR regime and they will laugh in your face.

2)When The FFs wrote the Bill or Rights they never meant it for a Police Regime that would be asked to do full scale top to bottom social engineering and rebuild of huge numbers of uncivilized foreigners. They never imagined there ever would even be "police". City of London started the world's first Police Dept in 1820, to deal with increasing numbers of foreigners doing crimes, who were a side effect of the far flung Empire. When they wrote the Bill of Rights being "shunned" was the primary punishment for bad behavior. There are reasons Southern European regimes use a "Presumed Guilty" framework.

One Week 832PC (same as week 1 of real academy) is Powers of Arrest. Its 40hrs of harping on subverting the Constitution's 4th Amend. The instructor never says "use your badge to bully citizens into giving up their 4th Amend Rights" but its clear that what it is, and if it ain't crystal clear the cadets in real academy will eagerly explain the best ways for which "subjects" etc. That will also be the main training of your rookie year. Of course, any REAL criminals are fully wise to this, so what happens is cops are trained to avoid real criminals and stretch the law, or just lie, to put minor charges on non-criminal normies. None of "he consented to the search" would be allowed in a real court. Try a Civil Case where one businessman claims another willfully and knowingly gave up important Rights for no reason and no "consideration". You would be laughed out of court and assumed to be lying about everything else. No one that isn't down with subverting the Constitution by any means necessary becomes a cop. Organized Crime can infiltrate Police but no one that respects the Constitution will make it through their Rookie year. The problem is we asking Police to deal with problems while still pretending those problems should have Constitutional Rights.

Security is a funny biz. What is bad for everyone else is good for us. A lot of what creates "good for us" is police failure, so we talk about it a lot.

[Condo Guard]

I will only talk about my comments, and those are specific to Seattle. I worked security in Seattle in the 1990s. I left the city and went back in 2016. There had been a real change in police response, but I don't blame SPD. They have little to no support from the city council (and at least two members that are unabashedly anti-cop), they are understaffed, and they have been told that homeless heroin addicts are a protected class.

There are so many property crimes (thefts, car prowls, shoplifting and fraud) every single day that they simply can't respond to all of them. And why should they? The city attorney pretty much doesn't touch any case that isn't a violent felony or property loss above $750 (and there usually has to be another charge or a long criminal history).

Clients and in house managers are turning to the next badge they see (Security) and demanding we do something, without understanding the scope and limitations of our job. I have the utmost respect for Seattle Police, and the ones I've met are doing a thankless job in a clueless socialist city that basically hates them.

Do I get frustrated when they don't come when needed? Oh yes. Do I understand it now in 2019? Sadly, yes.

[Squid]

I will only talk about my comments, and those are specific to Seattle. I worked security in Seattle in the 1990s. I left the city and went back in 2016. There had been a real change in police response, but I don't blame SPD. They have little to no support from the city council (and at least two members that are unabashedly anti-cop), they are understaffed, and they have been told that homeless heroin addicts are a protected class.

There are so many property crimes (thefts, car prowls, shoplifting and fraud) every single day that they simply can't respond to all of them. And why should they? The city attorney pretty much doesn't touch any case that isn't a violent felony or property loss above $750 (and there usually has to be another charge or a long criminal history).

Clients and in house managers are turning to the next badge they see (Security) and demanding we do something, without understanding the scope and limitations of our job. I have the utmost respect for Seattle Police, and the ones I've met are doing a thankless job in a clueless socialist city that basically hates them.

Do I get frustrated when they don't come when needed? Oh yes. Do I understand it now in 2019? Sadly, yes.

well said, when my first car was stolen the cops knew the guy so well they couldn't even remember how many times he'd been arrested for Auto Theft because it was "non-violent" Catch and Release. How could anyone not become cynical if the people you are supposedly protecting are so misguided. I'll admit, if I was a cop I'd be telling crooks "steal all the cars you want, I'm not doing squat until public wakes up".

You think these Do Gooders and Bleeding Heart Liberals would say "We need to do SOMETHING for these poor lost souls with careers stealing crappy cars for joy rides, for their own good", but NOOOOO.

[v859]

My experience is totally different. In all of my training ethics and constitutional law were huge topics and the instructors definitely erred on the side of caution

Now teaching investigative techniques that have been ruled by the Supreme Court to be legal like consent searches IS NOT teaching how to violate people's rights. If you think consent searches shouldn't be allowed complain to SCOTUS not to the police. They operate in the parameters they are given.

It is unusual though that someone who thinks consent searches violate rights also complains the cops aren't doing enough to solve crimes.

[Soper]

Part of it is people are always critical of the level above them. I've never heard a construction worker say good thing about an architect. When the level above you does their job well no one notices.

Security is booming because of an increase in bad people doing bad things, and most of that is Left Wing political policy, but a lot of the problem is the police, who are molded by bad policy themselves. They have all the same evils of rest of entrenched Civil Service.

This stems from two causes.

1)The Founding Fathers never intended a Civil Service where any Govt employee couldn't be instantly fired by a elected official, who in turn could be "fired" in an election. Tell anyone if private enterprise they will have a Civil Service type HR regime and they will laugh in your face.

2)When The FFs wrote the Bill or Rights they never meant it for a Police Regime that would be asked to do full scale top to bottom social engineering and rebuild of huge numbers of uncivilized foreigners. They never imagined there ever would even be "police". City of London started the world's first Police Dept in 1820, to deal with increasing numbers of foreigners doing crimes, who were a side effect of the far flung Empire. When they wrote the Bill of Rights being "shunned" was the primary punishment for bad behavior. There are reasons Southern European regimes use a "Presumed Guilty" framework.

One Week 832PC (same as week 1 of real academy) is Powers of Arrest. Its 40hrs of harping on subverting the Constitution's 4th Amend. The instructor never says "use your badge to bully citizens into giving up their 4th Amend Rights" but its clear that what it is, and if it ain't crystal clear the cadets in real academy will eagerly explain the best ways for which "subjects" etc. That will also be the main training of your rookie year. Of course, any REAL criminals are fully wise to this, so what happens is cops are trained to avoid real criminals and stretch the law, or just lie, to put minor charges on non-criminal normies. None of "he consented to the search" would be allowed in a real court. Try a Civil Case where one businessman claims another willfully and knowingly gave up important Rights for no reason and no "consideration". You would be laughed out of court and assumed to be lying about everything else. No one that isn't down with subverting the Constitution by any means necessary becomes a cop. Organized Crime can infiltrate Police but no one that respects the Constitution will make it through their Rookie year. The problem is we asking Police to deal with problems while still pretending those problems should have Constitutional Rights.

Security is a funny biz. What is bad for everyone else is good for us. A lot of what creates "good for us" is police failure, so we talk about it a lot.

Since you've never attended an academy, your assumptions are invalid and just prove the point about guards.

[Lunch Meat]

Since you've never attended an academy, your assumptions are invalid and just prove the point about guards.

Go home and get your shine box

[Squid]

Since you've never attended an academy, your assumptions are invalid and just prove the point about guards.

if you read, you see I did attend the 1 week same as real academy required for non-sworn officers and dog catchers, building inspectors, etc.

they run "real academy" on same campus concurrently and we were encouraged to interact with fellow students.

[Consolewatcher]

Sadly, there are people who want to be police officers but who never could for various reasons, including having too much "baggage". These are the people who go for these minimum wage guard jobs with no benefits, and spend hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars on training and equipment, because it's the closest thing to policing they can get. I've found that you can usually distinguish these people by the following:

1. Working at a minimum wage guard job and spending thousands of uniforms/equipment/training when there are other companies that pay better, because those companies are more "hands-off".
2. Wearing a uniform that closely resembles that of police officers (and trying to hide any elements that suggests they are security guards).
3. Hatred of the police, usually caused by jealousy.
4. Thinking that they generally know better than the police (a security guard can have an opinion on certain matters, and on occasion may be right; it's the overall "I know better than the police how to do their job" that I'm referring to).
5. Constantly talking about all the "courses" they took even though they are not anything near the quality police officers receive, and usually take a lot less time.
6. Getting offended if someone refers to them as a "guard", even if it is not meant to be disrespectful.
7. Trying to argue that what they do isn't really security work, but somewhere on a higher "level".
8. Hatred of traditional "observe and report" security guards, because they think they make them look bad.
9. Getting upset when clients/companies want them to be "hands-off".

[Lunch Meat]

Now, maybe I am misreading or misinterpreting this, but there seems to have been a noticeable anti-police vibe on the forums lately. Have others notice that, too? If so, why?

Or, is there just a small minority on here that are anti-police? It seems very ironic to me that anybody in security would be anti-police.

[Condo Guard]

Jim and Console have valid points. I think where the legitimate conflict comes in is when each doesn't understand the other's job. I get frustrated when we have incidents where we have a victim, a suspect and evidence, and nothing happens (i.e. no arrest or citation). (What do I need to do, put a ribbon on it?) I understand (now) that the cop has to make an evaluation in his mind - will the prosecutor actually take this case and go with the charges, or am I wasting time when I could go to the next call that's been holding for 20 minutes?

Police get tired of guards who call them to do their (the guard's) job, or respond to an incident that the guard handled badly and created a bunch of problems in the process. (Excessive force, not getting information, acting like an LEO themselves, etc.) I don't get offended when a cop treats me like a typical guard (until he gets to know me), because I've seen so many idiots doing this job I can't blame them for stereotyping.

Security is security, and LE is LE - we are all trying to protect the our clients and the public within the rules we each to have to adhere to. Can we agree on that, at least?

[Consolewatcher]

Jim and Console have valid points. I think where the legitimate conflict comes in is when each doesn't understand the other's job. I get frustrated when we have incidents where we have a victim, a suspect and evidence, and nothing happens (i.e. no arrest or citation). (What do I need to do, put a ribbon on it?) I understand (now) that the cop has to make an evaluation in his mind - will the prosecutor actually take this case and go with the charges, or am I wasting time when I could go to the next call that's been holding for 20 minutes?

Police get tired of guards who call them to do their (the guard's) job, or respond to an incident that the guard handled badly and created a bunch of problems in the process. (Excessive force, not getting information, acting like an LEO themselves, etc.) I don't get offended when a cop treats me like a typical guard (until he gets to know me), because I've seen so many idiots doing this job I can't blame them for stereotyping.

Security is security, and LE is LE - we are all trying to protect the our clients and the public within the rules we each to have to adhere to. Can we agree on that, at least?

I think that unfortunately the police sometimes forget that guards sometimes do things not because they want to, but because their client is pushing them to. I have, for example, called the police on skateboarders that weren't leaving, not because I thought it was important, but because the client wanted us to. Similarly, police may hate that when the show up on certain sites security guard come to talk to them (even if they're not needed at all), but if the client saw that police were on site and security didn't gather as much info as possible, then the guards would be in a lot of trouble. If a guard comes up to you (a police officer) and asks what's going in, if you can't tell him just say so; the guard can document that and no one will get in trouble; just keep in mind that the guard had to ask.

[Squid]

I put most of it down to Police being caught in the middle of bad Public Policy.

I've been on posts were next door on Govt land with "no trespassing" signs there was major drug dealing and even meth cooking, pit-bull fights, screaming, you name it.

(Mostly) other guards were reporting it to cops, but cops were giving all sorts of BS reasons for not doing anything. Hard to imagine THAT was coming from the actual street cops, because even I know enough and have lived around similar lands to know the local cops DO have the right to bust you just for Trespassing, which in turn Green Lights a shake down for any dope, etc.

Then the cops knew that the guys and client thought they were worthless, but the cops aren't allowed to tell the truth about why they ain't doing anything.

I'm sure that being "handcuffed" in such situations doesn't help Police moral, and how can they not eventually say to themselves "screw it, we're just gonna have to let the voters learn a lesson the hard way".

Last time my car was stolen the guy had untold number of auto theft arrests on the Catch and Release program, running the cops ragged. I'm sure its pretty stressful even for the cops to do a Stolen Vehicle Stop at gun-point.

[Lunch Meat]

I think that unfortunately the police sometimes forget that guards sometimes do things not because they want to, but because their client is pushing them to. I have, for example, called the police on skateboarders that weren't leaving, not because I thought it was important, but because the client wanted us to. Similarly, police may hate that when the show up on certain sites security guard come to talk to them (even if they're not needed at all), but if the client saw that police were on site and security didn't gather as much info as possible, then the guards would be in a lot of trouble. If a guard comes up to you (a police officer) and asks what's going in, if you can't tell him just say so; the guard can document that and no one will get in trouble; just keep in mind that the guard had to ask.

Any site that I'm working on is private property. I don't know about where you're at but around here they can't just show up on your private property without some type of explanation.

I I spent several years working on a city contract. I pulled up to a community center one night that I was supposed to be doing checks on there was a cop sitting in the parking lot filling out a report and I asked his reason for being there. He told me that he had responded to the report of a disturbance at the community center and that's all the information he was permitted to give me.
I told him that my company was responsible for the on-site security and I asked for his business card and the call screen number and I got them both. then I documented in my log exactly what he had said and attached the business card.

I also had a donut eater questioning why I was parked in a parking spot marked Authorized City Vehicles only one morning. I showed her my City Contractor ID told her I was there to do a security check of the building, asked her if she had any other questions and told her to get the hell off my private property. She wasn't happy but guess who left?