Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Am I the only one who thinks this is incredibly stupid?

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

  • HotelSecurity
    replied
    I don't know the stats but like I've posted elsewhere, this is the main reason I have told, that Security Guards working in banks in Canada are no longer armed.

    Leave a comment:


  • NRM_Oz
    replied
    This is quite common now in Australia - they ensure they can't be fire on and also ensure it is a little money earner - forgetting that there has to be a trail somewhere down the line. A security agency had 35 glocks and a few revolvers taken about 30 minutes away from where I lived a few years ago and the law said - you need an armoury and armed guard. They followed the law and when you have a Mosberg in your face asking for the firearms you would offer them a free coffee as well.

    The same Glocks had 1 of them turn up at a bar with a ......... wait for it ....... modified 30 round mag (I had never seen this before). It looked like an auto pistol (yes they are made) and had only seen one in a magazine and I guess it was not about extra carrying but spraying a target like with a Mach 10 or something similar. Again these are a cash commodity waiting for someone to purchase them and the latest group were caught recently after 3 armoured truck hijacks (still with the cash, firearms and ammo in the house of 1 of them). I will see how I can go for some comparison stats.

    Leave a comment:


  • SecureTN
    replied
    In case you're not aware, a significant number of firearms recovered from armed robbers are usually handguns stolen from armed S/O in the USA. This is another reason why the liability insurance goes up for an armed guard company. In California and across the USA, robbers who had just been released from prison will beat up and mug an armed S/O to steal his gun, so he can resume his armed robbery career. The injured guard must then file for workmans comp until he recovers from his injury. [/SIZE][/QUOTE]


    I am curious where the "statistic" came from.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Really?

    In case you're not aware, a significant number of firearms recovered from armed robbers are usually handguns stolen from armed S/O in the USA.
    I'd like to see a stat on that little tidbit...

    Leave a comment:


  • OMG_Ihatethisjob
    replied
    "Armed guard" from a business perspective

    I'm not too familiar with firearm license laws in other states and countries, but in California, a guard must have a separate license to carry an exposed firearm. Only off-duty LE moonlighting as S/O can carry concealed firearms. No one had mentioned it, but generally, it cost more for a business to contract a guard company to furnish an armed S/O. If the guard at a bank (or any high-risk post) is unarmed, its because the client didn't want to pay the higher cost of an armed guard. If you were a business who needed guard service, the cost of contracting an armed guard is at least an additional 40% higher, than the cost of getting an unarmed S/O. You see more unarmed S/O because its cheaper for the client than to contract for an armed guard. If you were to start your own guard company, your liability insurance coverage starts to increase when you tell your insurance provider your guards will be carrying mace or batons. It increases even more when you say your guards will be carry firearms. In California, a significant number of guard companies only offer unarmed guard service because the liability insurance for mace, baton, and firearm equipped guards more than doubles over the cost of an unarmed guard company. This higher liability insurance cost is passed on to the clients when they specify they want an armed guard.

    In case you're not aware, a significant number of firearms recovered from armed robbers are usually handguns stolen from armed S/O in the USA. This is another reason why the liability insurance goes up for an armed guard company. In California and across the USA, robbers who had just been released from prison will beat up and mug an armed S/O to steal his gun, so he can resume his armed robbery career. The injured guard must then file for workmans comp until he recovers from his injury.

    Leave a comment:


  • ChuckyZ73
    replied
    That is why I like the company I work for. It is written into every contract that armed officers can work the property. if they say they specifically don't want armed he will charge them more because it causes more issues when making the schedule.

    Also an aside to the reason stated for going unarmed, to prevent the issue of accidental discharge our company policy requires officers that are not peace officers to carry their weapons at "amber status".

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Chaple
    replied
    When I worked for Allied Barton they had several armed accounts, but most of them paid the same as O/R. Some paid as little as $9.00. They still appear to have a few. http://www.greatsecurityjobs.com/sec...ns/search.aspx

    Edit: The link does not work the way I intended. Your must search for armed positions. And for the record, I was employed with A/B for less than a month before I started looking for a new job.
    Last edited by Mr. Chaple; 02-01-2008, 01:52 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireEMSPolice
    replied
    Fifth Third Bank is completely anti-gun. In Ohio, all their banks are posted with no guns signs to keep law-abiding citizens from carrying concealed weapons on their premise. I know a ton of people who closed accounts there for that reason, among many. Screw Fifth Third Bank.

    Leave a comment:


  • kingsman
    replied
    The entire idea of an unarmed security officer in a bank is strange. In fact, I don't think any of the banks I have dealt with have ever had even an unarmed security guard!

    If you are working unarmed, I would also hope you were not uniformed. If they want someone to just stand around and act as a witness, why also make them a target?

    If I was in such a position I would be glad I had a CCW. What the employer don't know is just fine.

    Leave a comment:


  • CAP
    replied
    Originally posted by msofin View Post
    I thought of starting my own company one day. If I ever do that I know for certain I will only contract out well educated and armed officers.
    Try finding an insurance provider who will provide General Liability Insurance to a brand new "ARMED" company. If you do happen to find one, get ready to kick ou some serious $$$.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nauticus
    replied
    Originally posted by HotelSecurity View Post
    Since when? I went for training when I worked for Pinkerton in 1973. 2 hotels in Montreal had armed people. (OK, 1 were not really security - the Chateau Champlain was owned by CP Hotels, it employed Special Constables appointed under the railway act).But the Meridien was not railway owned & itès Director was armed. I do not believe there is a law preventing it.
    Since the firearm registration legislature passed, prohibiting normal citizens from carrying around firearms. Remember, in Canada, a security license doesn't afford you any additional rights. In the provinces that don't require a license, you're just a regular citizen - and it's against the law to carry a restricted firearm without a permit of transportation. Regular carry permits don't exist unless you're a peace officer or armoured guard.

    Leave a comment:


  • NRM_Oz
    replied
    There are really only 4-5 key players here that control Australia's Cash In Transit (CIT) work that use armoured vehicles - others use soft cell or just YOUR personal car to collect the cash and make a deposit. BRINKS advertise here constantly for crews and I was thinking if I needed a fill in role between contracts I would consider it until I woke up from my dream !!. Too many CIT units are being held up and their firearms stolen as well. The attrition rate is naturally high as to most people they can sit on their backside and do nothing for 12 hours for easy money or have to work for 12 hours and earn another $100.00 a shift more. To a family person, another $350.00 a week after tax is the cost of a mortgage or rent payment - some have no choice.

    Leave a comment:


  • gcmc security part 2
    replied
    Most of our bank accounts are unarmed. Actually only one national account is armed. The rest are case by case and like I said here just the one. Of course that one accounts for 6 posts in our area.

    Do I like it? Nope it sucks and its hell to hire for too.

    Leave a comment:


  • integrator97
    replied
    Somewhere in the midwest, absolutely none of the banks have security guards, period. Only one credit union has glass between the tellers and customers, that I have seen.

    Some banks service their own ATM's with an off duty deputy escort. Some with no escort for their on site ATM's, some use armored car service.

    Leave a comment:


  • HotelSecurity
    replied
    Originally posted by Nauticus View Post
    Thats because security in Canada cannot be armed. Armoured transport guards are actually not classified as security, hence why they carry firearms.
    Since when? I went for training when I worked for Pinkerton in 1973. 2 hotels in Montreal had armed people. (OK, 1 were not really security - the Chateau Champlain was owned by CP Hotels, it employed Special Constables appointed under the railway act).But the Meridien was not railway owned & itès Director was armed. I do not believe there is a law preventing it.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X