ERMC-unarmed security

[msofin]

I will be starting with ERMC tomorrow evening at a local mall in the Poconos. I am a little nervous, as this is the first unarmed (disarmed) site I will be working in over a year. Any suggestions how to approach shopping mall security or any advice on ERMC in general? One thing is for certain I'll be wearing my second chance vest.

'Mall security firm ERMC spies growth'

http://www.timesfreepress.com/absolutenm/templates/business-toplocal.aspx?articleid=14790&zoneid=185

Company web site:

http://www.ermc2.com/index.asp?page=security

[Minneapolis Security]

I will be starting with ERMC tomorrow evening at a local mall in the Poconos. I am a little nervous, as this is the first unarmed (disarmed) site I will be working in over a year. Any suggestions how to approach shopping mall security or any advice on ERMC in general? One thing is for certain I'll be wearing my second chance vest.'Mall security firm ERMC spies growth'

http://www.timesfreepress.com/absolutenm/templates/business-toplocal.aspx?articleid=14790&zoneid=185

Company web site:
http://www.ermc2.com/index.asp?page=security

Top that vest off with a ankle holster (if you can legally carry concealed).

If you need to use it, a new job will be the least of your worries.

[gcmc security part 2]

Interesting to note that they do Panama City Mall in FL. Last I remember it was IPC.

Also notice they do Springdale Mall in Mobile. That is a big mall so guess they aint small time.

What I don't like is it seems they do janitorial service to, how much of their budget and time is spent towards security I wonder.

[N. A. Corbier]

Mall Director worked for ERMC, if I remember correctly. Granted, we have no idea how much of his operation was his, and how much was general company policy.

Do some searches for Mall Director's posts, you'll see the kind of things he does.

[Nauticus]

Don't carry a firearm. Your position is unarmed. If you have a problem with being unarmed, then you should not work a position that requires you to be unarmed.

In Canada, there is no mall security force that carries guns, and we have no problems. You don't require a gun. You just have to learn how to use your most useful tools - your hands - better.

[msofin]

Don't carry a firearm. Your position is unarmed. If you have a problem with being unarmed, then you should not work a position that requires you to be unarmed.

In Canada, there is no mall security force that carries guns, and we have no problems. You don't require a gun. You just have to learn how to use your most useful tools - your hands - better.

(this is not sarcasm)
Have you been keeping up to date with the news of shopping mall safety in the United States?

Hand to hand self defense is fine is resonable when you are defending your self from an unarmed person. Please enlighten us, what special training in the use of hand to hand self defense did you learn to protect your self from impact and lethal weapons?

[Tennsix]

I have received a significant amount of unarmed self defense training, to defend myself from such weapons. That said, I still wouldn't to take a knife to a gun fight.

[Black Caesar]

Saying "but it hasn't happened yet, or it doesn't happen often" is not an argument at all. By that way of thinking:

-Most American and Canadian (especially Canadian) Police Officers wouldn't carry guns because the vast overwhelming majority of North American LEOs go their entire careers without firing a shot in anger...

-Armored Truck Guards wouldn't carry guns because armored truck heists are extremely rare

-Canada and every other industrial nation wouldn't have militaries (when was the last time Canada faced a significant military threat)?

- No one would wear body armor because shootings of police and security are extremely rare

A guy shot up a Canadian college and the ONLY thing that prevented more deaths was the purely accidental presence of police officers on campus in an unrelated investigation. Thinking it couldn't happen at a mall just because it's in Canada (or in the U.S. and "this mall has never been attacked before") is IMO naive.

[Nauticus]

Saying "but it hasn't happened yet, or it doesn't happen often" is not an argument at all. By that way of thinking:

-Most American and Canadian (especially Canadian) Police Officers wouldn't carry guns because the vast overwhelming majority of North American LEOs go their entire careers without firing a shot in anger...

-Armored Truck Guards wouldn't carry guns because armored truck heists are extremely rare

-Canada and every other industrial nation wouldn't have militaries (when was the last time Canada faced a significant military threat)?

- No one would wear body armor because shootings of police and security are extremely rare

A guy shot up a Canadian college and the ONLY thing that prevented more deaths was the purely accidental presence of police officers on campus in an unrelated investigation. Thinking it couldn't happen at a mall just because it's in Canada (or in the U.S. and "this mall has never been attacked before") is IMO naive.

Don't get me wrong, I agree. I didn't claim that it wouldn't, but it's a fact that Canadian malls do not get shot up like American malls. Nobody said it won't, but it has not, which is exactly what I claimed.

I understand that malls can be dangerous places for a security officer. However, the position is unarmed. If you have a problem with not carrying a firearm when you work security at a mall, then why would you apply for a position as an unarmed security guard in a mall?

I never claimed that being armed is a bad thing at all. Quite the opposite. However, it's usually decided in the interest of the security company and the client whether or not the officers will be armed. If you have a problem with their decision, I cannot fathom why you would apply for the job. To me, it's absolutely ridiculous that you would apply for an unarmed security position and contemplate carrying a firearm. If you have trouble following those simple instructions, I can't imagine what other problems you'd have with other instructions.

[jeff194307]

I worked unarmed at a mall in Sacramento for 6 1/2 years. During my time there, I was involved with several felonies. In many of those cases (auto theft, buglary, etc) the perps were not armed and the playing field was even. On one other occasion, it was an armed robbery of a jewelry store. In that case, I was still able to safely locate the perps when they switched from one stolen car to another. They had driven the first getaway car from the front of the mall to the rear where they had another stolen car stashed. Because I was able to get a vehicle discription and direction of travel law enforcement had something to look for upon arrival. It is not always necessary to use a firearm to do proper and effective security work. This is not to say that I disagree with other posters here, there are legitimate reasons for security to be armed, but as mentioned by the other poster, if the post is unarmed please do not carry concealed. Like I said one can be very effective with O&R tactics when they are done correctly.

[Mr. Security]

I worked unarmed at a mall in Sacramento for 6 1/2 years. During my time there, I was involved with several felonies. In many of those cases (auto theft, buglary, etc) the perps were not armed and the playing field was even. On one other occasion, it was an armed robbery of a jewelry store. In that case, I was still able to safely locate the perps when they switched from one stolen car to another. They had driven the first getaway car from the front of the mall to the rear where they had another stolen car stashed. Because I was able to get a vehicle discription and direction of travel law enforcement had something to look for upon arrival. It is not always necessary to use a firearm to do proper and effective security work. This is not to say that I disagree with other posters here, there are legitimate reasons for security to be armed, but as mentioned by the other poster, if the post is unarmed please do not carry concealed. Like I said one can be very effective with O&R tactics when they are done correctly.

Well put. I support O & R security as a part of the industry. The only hick-up here is that mall security involves confrontation since arrests are inevitable. You are always taking a chance when doing that unarmed if the subject hasn't been screened already, such as at a courthouse or airport gate area. A calculated risk to be sure, but not one for me.

[N. A. Corbier]

Observe and Report Security is not:

- Providing security for persons
- Providing protection to property or persons
- An effective deterrent to the criminal element
- Tasked with or capable of terminating a threat to persons or property


Observe and Report Security is for "protecting" a client's property from interference by reporting such conditions after the fact to someone who will fix the problem.

This works great if its a leaky pipe that is costing the company money.

It does not work great if its a guy about to forcibly rape a young woman in the parking lot.

People do not realize that security personnel who are O&R are strictly there to watch the non-living assets of the company and report issues to the client who will fix them on their own time frame.

A mall is a public contact position where the mall management firm is responsible for providing a safe environment for the visitors and employees.

In these cases, the O&R mindset creates casualties and deaths. In these cases, people die because the guard is not trained or capable of ending the threat. He is window dressing. He is useless, as any minimum wage employee can call 911 once people start dying.

The only reason malls buy O&R guard services is because they get a reduction on insurance and another firm to pawn off the liability to.

[bigshotceo]

In the end what it comes down to is a matter of liability and ultimately money. The mall, as a private enterprise, is primarily concerned with reducing its liability. While there are some things that malls are liable/accountable for (such as cleaning up water puddles, making sure elevators/escalators operate in a safe manner, etc...) protection against armed individuals isn't one of them. By adding armed individuals, they would likely only be increasing their liability, as there would be a chance that by shooting someone the company would be opening itself up to lawsuits. As well, by adding armed individuals it could be creating a de facto "duty of care" (since the shoppers might come to expect personal protection) that otherwise wouldn't exist, which would again raise liability.

[Mr. Security]

O & R Security

Nathan's comments are partially true, in my viewpoint. Still, O & R security does deter certain crimes because many crooks don't like to be observed committing a crime. They also can help to prevent panic during emergencies such as fires, and often assist in an orderly evacuation, as demonstrated during 9/11. I'm sure more benefits can be listed, but the bottom line is that all or nothing thinking is flawed.

[msofin]

I took this position due to the fact there were no open armed positions in my area.

Managment has this one track mind set that we are only O&R. Yet, they expect us to confront customers when not following the mall's code of conduct.

E.g. A custodian transmitted over the radio that an individual was swinging a chain in one of the mall hallways. My supervisor was near by and asked him what was going on. He told me "don't worry about it unless it's in your wing, than intercept.". That is not O&R.