Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Security Question

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

  • Bill Warnock
    replied
    Nathan, SecTrainer you have defined security's true mission. Public police does one thing and private security does another. Our grab or their grap for more power hurts all of us.
    Enjoy the day,
    Bill

    Leave a comment:


  • SecTrainer
    replied
    I have never understood the apparent obsession of some in the private domain with "police authority" or "arrest powers" - always with the idea that private forces don't have "enough" authority/power. This is sheer nonsense, and betrays a serious lack of understanding, not only of the security mission itself, but also a serious misunderstanding of the nature, source and reason for police powers, the proper exercise of such authority, and, especially, its very limited role in carrying out the security mission.

    Many people in security who are obsessed with "police power" really have a very different agenda than a legitimate, proven need for authority that they do not have. In my experience, most of them are actually suffering from an inferiority complex. They feel that they are "disrespected" as security officers, and they believe that if they only had "police powers" people would treat them better, call them "sir", jump to obey their commands, and might even fear them more. They believe that if they only had such "powers", the police would treat them as "equals" and "comrades". Bad guys, if they were stupid enough to come within the purview of such super-heroes, would simply curl up and sheepishly hold out their hands for the cuffs to be slapped on. "BOOK 'EM, DANNO!". Some, because of a limited understanding of the forces of micro- and macroeconomics, point to differences in pay between certain "special officers" and other security officers, and believe that if all security officers had "police powers" they would naturally be paid more.

    A few of these sadsacks, who vaguely understand that there is a linkage between an individual's mission and the authority that implies, are seeking to "expand" the security mission into the public domain in various ways, claiming that the police and other public safety people "need our help" to accomplish their own mission...but it's pretty transparent that their agenda is not truly "public safety" (and why are private forces responsible for that?), but a thinly veiled quest to obtain "police powers" by such mission expansion.

    Having made those fairly obvious observations, it still must be said that there are also others who DO have legitimate questions about this issue. We can have a very serious discussion about it if you wish, but I predict that by the time we're finished thinking things over very carefully, you will prefer NOT to have "police powers", and you will see much less need for them.

    However, I won't start that discussion as it will involve lengthy posts (there are some things you can't discuss in "sound bites"), and I have not found that such posts are generally well received here....so if it begins, I don't want to hear any of that sort of guff from anyone.
    Last edited by SecTrainer; 04-15-2007, 12:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by HotelSecurity
    Canadian law gives us more power than the average citizen. A citizen can arrest when he witnesses a felony. (Not called felony in Canada). The owner of property & his agent (us!) can arrest for felony or mistomeaner as long as we witness it & it is on or inrelation to our property.
    Technically, we have no more power than we do on our own land. Its just we happen to be a professional agent of the property owner. We have no more power than Joe Sixpack and Sally Soccermom, when they're on their own property.

    Some states grant additional powers, "real powers", to "security personnel" that are either licensed or specially created, which include powers "in the name of the state."

    Leave a comment:


  • HotelSecurity
    replied
    Canadian law gives us more power than the average citizen. A citizen can arrest when he witnesses a felony. (Not called felony in Canada). The owner of property & his agent (us!) can arrest for felony or mistomeaner as long as we witness it & it is on or inrelation to our property.

    Leave a comment:


  • N. A. Corbier
    replied
    Originally posted by Christopherstjo
    Although there is most likely some form of "post orders" to help the security officer in knowing what to do. It also depends on the specific authority given in the security officers' license, for example. Here in Missouri, if the individual has a Class B "guard" license then he or she has no authority to contact the suspect and must simply and only observe and report, as such is expressly stated in current law. If on the other hand, the person has a Class A "officer" license, he or she has a duty to act and failure or refusal to do so might result in criminal charges filed against the security officer, as well as a civil lawsuit.

    The point being here is that with more and more states enacting laws and "Acts" to regulate security officers - we are no longer able to rely solely on "post orders" to carry out our duties. Yes, this most certainly can and all too often does put the security officer in the cross fire between doing what he or she is legally required and being fired for doing so because the client / employer did not like what the law required of you to do.
    Um, I beg to differ about a "regular" security officer having no authority to "contact the suspect" and may only "observe and report." Unless you can show in Missouri Law (Which does not regulate private security services, last I checked) or city ordinance where a property owner may not utilize their rights to defend their property, themselves, or another (person), then "Class B Security Officers" do not just have to "observe and report."

    Something that has irked me is that people with special police powers seemingly forget that the mission of a security officer is primarily the protection of property of the property which they are assigned to protect, and the client/employees/visitors who frequent this property.

    Law Enforcement authority is granted in some states to private citizens to help keep the peace and protect themselves and others. It is granted to security personnel who act as agents of the owner to protect society through the protection of specific interests (What you are guarding.)

    People who go, "A security guard/officer can't intervene because they're not a cop, and I'm a special cop so I can," make me wonder if they know what they're job is.

    A very good example of this is Florida, where security officers are NOT law enforcement officers, and yet they can still make detentions and use force to protect themselves and others because state law says all citizens may.

    Companies that scare their guard force with, "You're not the police, you can't touch anyone or confront anyone," make me wonder what kind of business they're in.

    Unless you can produce a city ordinance (because the State of Missouri does not license "Class A" or "Class B" anything related to security personnel), then you are basically saying that a property owner may not confront a "suspect" or take any action than calling 911. Tread lightly, your statements show you fail to realize that the building blocks of police authority rest with the power of the citizen, to which the state adds additional powers in its name.

    Leave a comment:


  • Christopherstjo
    replied
    Originally posted by BHR Lawson
    You don't want to be doing stuff without the manager's approval
    Although there is most likely some form of "post orders" to help the security officer in knowing what to do. It also depends on the specific authority given in the security officers' license, for example. Here in Missouri, if the individual has a Class B "guard" license then he or she has no authority to contact the suspect and must simply and only observe and report, as such is expressly stated in current law. If on the other hand, the person has a Class A "officer" license, he or she has a duty to act and failure or refusal to do so might result in criminal charges filed against the security officer, as well as a civil lawsuit.

    The point being here is that with more and more states enacting laws and "Acts" to regulate security officers - we are no longer able to rely solely on "post orders" to carry out our duties. Yes, this most certainly can and all too often does put the security officer in the cross fire between doing what he or she is legally required and being fired for doing so because the client / employer did not like what the law required of you to do.
    Last edited by Christopherstjo; 04-15-2007, 04:50 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • hrdickinson
    replied
    Originally posted by EMTjon
    Out of curiosity, what sort of resturant has a security presence?

    Does the establishment sell alcohol?

    Are you a bouncer?
    Here in Houston, like many large cities, the crime rate is fairly high, but unlike other places, the crime is not confined to certain areas if the city. Especially muggings, "push-ins", etc.

    I have never seen as many security officers at restaurants as I have here. Many are off-duty LE's. We have an acquaintance that was followed into a men's room at an upscale restaurant in an upscale area, had his head slammed forward into the wall as he was standing at the urinal. They took his wallet and watch. It happens all the time, apparently.

    Leave a comment:


  • DMS 525
    replied
    I've worked security at a restaurant or two that is open all night, and has trouble with drunks coming in after the bars close.

    I also worked at a restaurant/bar, that could be a hot spot at times. All depends on circumstances which justify security.

    Part of your job is to keep an eye on EVERYBODY. I'm sorry to say, but a lot of harassment complaints I received, I came to find out it was the employee who started the trouble.

    I usually tell the employee to go on about their job, and I'd keep an eye open. If the situation persists, then I'll step in and handle it. Usually just your mere presence will put a stop to such behavior.

    I've had to tell more than one waitress or bartender I am not their damned watch dog, so don't think they can say "sic 'em" and I'll act without assessing the situation first.

    Leave a comment:


  • HotelSecurity
    replied
    Originally posted by EMTjon
    Out of curiosity, what sort of resturant has a security presence?

    Does the establishment sell alcohol?

    Are you a bouncer?
    Hotel restaurants, shopping mall restaurants etc

    Leave a comment:


  • joecolerulz
    replied
    Most restaurants attached to hotels have security or if its a real high class well known one it may aswell.

    Leave a comment:


  • EMTjon
    replied
    Out of curiosity, what sort of resturant has a security presence?

    Does the establishment sell alcohol?

    Are you a bouncer?

    Leave a comment:


  • JL_7
    replied
    Outstanding Answers

    Thank you all very much for your input in regards to the above security question. Each one of you was professional in your answers, and kept in mind the liability aspects, and possable allegations of the incident.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecolerulz
    replied
    Originally posted by Eric
    Based on the limited information available from the original posting, I would get the Manager involved to cover my butt, what is wrong with that?
    What if the Waitress was the problem and redirecting blame for some other cause?

    The role of Security is not always "to take care of these situations" by jumping into the fire.

    Thats why i would observe the person she is making the accusations at and if there is just cause and he looks intoxicated and troublesome more then likely he did what the waitress said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eric
    replied
    Originally posted by joecolerulz
    what will the manager do? Just come and tell security anyway....securitys job is to take care of these situations.
    Based on the limited information available from the original posting, I would get the Manager involved to cover my butt, what is wrong with that?
    What if the Waitress was the problem and redirecting blame for some other cause?

    The role of Security is not always "to take care of these situations" by jumping into the fire.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecolerulz
    replied
    well normally you would speak to the manager before your shift has begun and informs you how strict he is etc and what he expects of you and then if one person is hostile and is harrasing patrons he should be ejected. If problems continue to occur the police would then be called.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X