Why O&R security does not work

[junkyarddog]

The policy where I work is O&R with the exception of felony in progress. In that case we are required to take effective action to stop the commission of the crime.

[Mr. Security]

bpdblue

Excellent points to consider. Just to add to your point regarding legal representation by the security company:

Even if the company's attorney will appear in court with you, remember that you are not their client, the company is. It may be wise to have your own counsel to ensure that your interests are represented and your rights protected. If you violate company policy, expect the company to distance itself as far as possible from you and your actions.

[bigdog]

Is observe and report the best policy for the guard on the beat? You have to take all the info at hand, as well as your company's policy, and the law to decide whether you are going to get involved in something bad that is going on.

A police officer is suppose to have training, education, and experience, that the state feels is good enough to give the police immunity from prosecution for doing their job and getting involved. The police also often have lawyers on hand (through their police associations) to provide free attorney service for lawsuits against them, or for district attorney's going after them criminally for doing their job. Hopefully their cities also cover their backs with legal protection.

Does your state provide you with immunity? Does your company have your back covered with free lawyers to represent you in any civil or criminal case against you, even when you violated the company policy? Are you filthy rich so you can cover your own butt? Not me!

I only bring all this up because doing the right thing in our minds might not always be the right thing in someone else's mind, and that usually means problems. I could tell a hundred stories of things that have happened where someone got involved in something, and things escalated, or changed a bit, and worse things happened then probably would have.

So think before you act outside your company's policy, try to minimize your physical involvement at first (like yelling you have called the police) and if you have to get involved physically, you better KNOW your going to have to justify all your actions (including the escalation of force policy you use), especially if someone gets hurt because of your actions, and bring all that money you have to get a good lawyer, and possibly to get yourself bailed out of jail!!!!!! (Sorry for being so negative on this one, but I've seen it happen lots of times.)

Florida has immunity from criminal or civil action for ANYONE using justified force under state law.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.--
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

[bpdblue]

Tough decisions for tough times.

Is observe and report the best policy for the guard on the beat? You have to take all the info at hand, as well as your company's policy, and the law to decide whether you are going to get involved in something bad that is going on.

A police officer is suppose to have training, education, and experience, that the state feels is good enough to give the police immunity from prosecution for doing their job and getting involved. The police also often have lawyers on hand (through their police associations) to provide free attorney service for lawsuits against them, or for district attorney's going after them criminally for doing their job. Hopefully their cities also cover their backs with legal protection.

Does your state provide you with immunity? Does your company have your back covered with free lawyers to represent you in any civil or criminal case against you, even when you violated the company policy? Are you filthy rich so you can cover your own butt? Not me!

I only bring all this up because doing the right thing in our minds might not always be the right thing in someone else's mind, and that usually means problems. I could tell a hundred stories of things that have happened where someone got involved in something, and things escalated, or changed a bit, and worse things happened then probably would have.

So think before you act outside your company's policy, try to minimize your physical involvement at first (like yelling you have called the police) and if you have to get involved physically, you better KNOW your going to have to justify all your actions (including the escalation of force policy you use), especially if someone gets hurt because of your actions, and bring all that money you have to get a good lawyer, and possibly to get yourself bailed out of jail!!!!!! (Sorry for being so negative on this one, but I've seen it happen lots of times.)

[Mr. Security]

Integrator/Maelstrom

Thanks. I think we are on the same page when it comes to intervention. All citizens should be willing to help their fellow man in a crisis, whether it's aiding a cop who is in danger of being overpowered by a subject, or an elderly person who is being attacked. We do it because it's the right thing to do.

[craig333]

Armed O&R? Never heard of that. Its one thing to be expected to break up a fight when you're completely unarmed (like my company, we don't even carry cuffs) but whats the point of having all the tools if you can't use them?

I'm sure all of us have a point we'd say heck with policy and get in and intervene in some circumstances.

I think its interesting, not one person has ever asked what I would do (or am supposed to do). It would be pretty interesting to poll some O&R sites and see just what most of the employees think we're supposed to do.

[Maelstrom]

Many so-called O&R security officers are allowed to use reasonable physical force to prevent bodily harm to others and themselves. That certainly has been the case for both O&R companies that I have worked for.

Than they wouldn't be strictly O & R, perhaps AOR (advanced observe & report)?

Even if I worked for a company that absolutely forbids physical intervention, I would do what is necessary to protect those in my care, as long as the law permits it. I can always find another security company to work for and I'll sleep better at night.

That is a refreshing & reassuring stand point, and I too must applaud it!

[integrator97]

Many so-called O&R security officers are allowed to use reasonable physical force to prevent bodily harm to others and themselves. That certainly has been the case for both O&R companies that I have worked for.

Even if I worked for a company that absolutely forbids physical intervention, I would do what is necessary to protect those in my care, as long as the law permits it. I can always find another security company to work for and I'll sleep better at night.

I'm glad you feel that way. And that's my points. That a company should have a policy to protact, and that a person who chooses the security field should be willing to step in in extreme circumstances. Again, I'm not talking about seperating gang members, or even drunks, if that's not your job. But an innocent, defenseless person being harmed.... I'm glad there are people who will put there principles above their job security (no pun intended).

[Mr. Security]

In my (albeit limited) experience, the effectiveness of O & R security is directly relative to the public's misconception of this industry

The most 'troublesome' individuals I've encountered were busy telling me that I legally can't touch them (armchair lawyers)... and while that MAY be the policy of some security providers, Section 458 of the Victorian Crimes Act 1958 clearly states otherwise...

Sadly whilst the Education system is busy teaching tomorrow's citizens their rights, they are neglecting to tutor them of their obligations to others & society as a whole (sadly I don't see this changing)

Many so-called O&R security officers are allowed to use reasonable physical force to prevent bodily harm to others and themselves. That certainly has been the case for both O&R companies that I have worked for.

Even if I worked for a company that absolutely forbids physical intervention, I would do what is necessary to protect those in my care, as long as the law permits it. I can always find another security company to work for and I'll sleep better at night.

[Mr. Security]

No problem, smokey.

Ok

Just because you "think" a certain way doesn't mean that it is right. I work at an office site where O&R is just fine. We have access control and as long as you don't admit a bad guy, there is no problem.

It's clear that you don't like O&R security - we got that from you already. Nevertheless, O&R will continue to be a part of the security industry whether you like it or not.

My post was not directed at you. If my questions bother and personal experiences bother you, ignore my posts. Okey dokey?

[Mr. Security]

Where is the 'feeling' of well-being? I see O&R guards and I don't think 'Oh, good, someone to call 911 if I get attacked' I think, 'Oh, wow, designated 911 punchers.' However, if I see a guard with a weapon, who I know is hired to be active, I feel safer. Does this make sense?

Just because you "think" a certain way doesn't mean that it is right. I work at an office site where O&R is just fine. We have access control and as long as you don't admit a bad guy, there is no problem.

It's clear that you don't like O&R security - we got that from you already. Nevertheless, O&R will continue to be a part of the security industry whether you like it or not.

[Arff312]

Hello again,

I have been away for a while and am now back in the mix. We have O &R security that covers my post at night. They are armed but routinely refuse to protect staff and patients. We are in the middle of the ghetto and a county facility. We are all armed in my dept and routinely act and enforce alws and regulations due to our policy and us being couty. There was an incident a few days ago where there was a mentally ill man threatening staff and the guards ( i refuse to call them officers) stood by and the police had to send in 6 officers to deal with the situation./ one guard left because it was too much. I feel O & R belongs at a factory or low activity site not in the field.

[Mr. Security]

So we can all agree that O&R is the second part of your definition. "The feeling of well-being"

Cute....

Doesn't seem like it worked very well for the old lady that was getting punched around.

Thanks for stating the obvious. Like I said, O&R is not for every site.

[Maelstrom]

Where is the 'feeling' of well-being?

In the ignorance of what security actually do... the difference is you have knowledge of the industry and can identify 'designated 911 punchers' (as you call them) from pro-active security, they (the general public) cannot and so they go on with their business blissfully ignorant of the fact that this O&R security can't/won't physically intervene should they require assistance