Armed, or unarmed?

[3rd_shift]

I do both.
Unarmed during the week and armed on some weekends just to help get some overtime, err, ahem.... to help out.

[N. A. Corbier]

I do both.
Unarmed during the week and armed on some weekends just to help get some overtime, err, ahem.... to help out.

I have done armed with a pistol, and armed with everything BUT a pistol. I have never, and I will never, work without tools, as it generally means the company is too afraid of the liablity that you create by doing anything but running away, and not afraid enough of vicarious liablity of NOT doing something.

[Contact]

Armed 100% of the time.

[Watchdog]

I just took the test for being an armed officer and am waiting it to be processed. I should be put on armed duty soon after that.

Most people ask, "What is the purpose of an UNarmed security officer?"

While we as security officers know that we are merley just deterrents from people thinking of stealing or damaging the property we are watching, I have to agree that if a person really wants to steal soemthing and do damage and is armed and all I can do is run and hide call the police then I'm not much of security, am I?

[Echos13]

The job demands being armed, with good reason. I just got my semi-auto certification and can now carry ether revolver or semi-auto. Since Florida now allows you to have no more than two firearms on your person I carry my 9mm for a primary and my revolver on my ankle.

Persoanlly I find my revolver more of an edge than the 9mm. But then thier are some pretty decent ammo out there for nines now. I have shotgun traning as well but most of our clients at the moment feels that's "over kill" in high or low profile details.

There have been a few firefights in Florida people do not hear about concerning armed security. Though most of them have been cleared by the state as justified the police tend to keep these things press free and down play a lot of them to the public.

Whats that old saying. Better to be judged a living testimate to defending your self than a dead stastitic to politics and passifists.

[N. A. Corbier]

The job demands being armed, with good reason. I just got my semi-auto certification and can now carry ether revolver or semi-auto. Since Florida now allows you to have no more than two firearms on your person I carry my 9mm for a primary and my revolver on my ankle.

Persoanlly I find my revolver more of an edge than the 9mm. But then thier are some pretty decent ammo out there for nines now. I have shotgun traning as well but most of our clients at the moment feels that's "over kill" in high or low profile details.

There have been a few firefights in Florida people do not hear about concerning armed security. Though most of them have been cleared by the state as justified the police tend to keep these things press free and down play a lot of them to the public.

Whats that old saying. Better to be judged a living testimate to defending your self than a dead stastitic to politics and passifists.

I'm going to warn you right now, if you are ever inspected by Division of Licensing, your G will be immediately revoked, and you will be arrested for carrying a concealed weapon. Wearing a backup gun is illegal in your state. Remember, your concealment is only authorized by management for specific temporary duty, not in excess of three days.

The authorizing of two guns is to provide allows a security officer to carry their pistol, and their shotgun or other rifle. Only LEOs and PIs are authorized to carry a concealled weapon during the regular course of their duties.

If you are ever involved in a shoot, and they find your backup weapon, you may be charged for the conealled carry, and it will hurt your civil and criminal cases - the "killer mindset" attack comes into play.

You may contact the Department of Ag. and Consumer Services - Division of Licensing - Enforcement Division for clarification. Ed would be happy to rip someone's head off and scream Florida Administrative Code down their neck till they die.

[N. A. Corbier]

I just took the test for being an armed officer and am waiting it to be processed. I should be put on armed duty soon after that.

Most people ask, "What is the purpose of an UNarmed security officer?"

While we as security officers know that we are merley just deterrents from people thinking of stealing or damaging the property we are watching, I have to agree that if a person really wants to steal soemthing and do damage and is armed and all I can do is run and hide call the police then I'm not much of security, am I?

The state of Florida, and state of California specifically state the purpose of all security officers: To protect the property of the client they are assigned to, to observe and report criminal activity to their employer, and to summon police if practical.

California provides that if you are on a post, without a phone, you are not required to summon law enforcement, or take any action against a law violator, as your purpose is to document the law violation and allow law enforcement to investigate it. If your client provides, you may make an arrest, as well.

Florida does not have a statutory authorization to arrest, and relies on common law detention of felony activity, or the various statutes allowing shopkeepers, retail establishment, and hotel agents to detain.

Our CLIENTS expect us there to enforce their rules and protect their property and lives from criminal interference. The STATE expects us to observe and report criminal activity to law enforcement - with Florida specifically stating that only the Police are to engage in crime prevention - security guards are to protect the physical/real property of their clients.

Which I never understood, since you can never use deadly force to protect property, so why are they handing out open carry permits?

[Echos13]

I'm going to warn you right now, if you are ever inspected by Division of Licensing, your G will be immediately revoked, and you will be arrested for carrying a concealed weapon. Wearing a backup gun is illegal in your state. Remember, your concealment is only authorized by management for specific temporary duty, not in excess of three days.

The authorizing of two guns is to provide allows a security officer to carry their pistol, and their shotgun or other rifle. Only LEOs and PIs are authorized to carry a concealled weapon during the regular course of their duties.

If you are ever involved in a shoot, and they find your backup weapon, you may be charged for the conealled carry, and it will hurt your civil and criminal cases - the "killer mindset" attack comes into play.

You may contact the Department of Ag. and Consumer Services - Division of Licensing - Enforcement Division for clarification. Ed would be happy to rip someone's head off and scream Florida Administrative Code down their neck till they die.

I pretty much recognize all that you have said for truth and with respect. But you know that perhaps some of the armed guards (even unarmed) out there do the same thing and would rather worry about being able to face consequences rather than be a statistic. You probably know the assaults on guards in Florida have tripled in the last few years. Many with the use of a weapon of some kind and the guard being the statistic at best. But your concern for legal repercussions is founded. But it seems that many across the country use one form of security blanket or another. I know, the status quo in this matter should not be the standard. But it's happening out there not with malice or with the over kill mentality.

We all at my company are most of the time concealed due to the clients request (low profile). Most details last four days -yes, pushing it but a man's got to eat- at best sometimes seperated by a day or so of laxed activity. We all have long gun certification. But so far the job only states in exteme situations are we allowed to have shotguns in ready view (or availible to access) upon demand. So there are some of us who carry a little something extra. Yes, it's a no, no in the eyes of the state and so on. But most of us being former street enforcers have a hard time breaking old habits that have saved out asses many times.

One thing does bother me at best. We are limited to what we can utilize as the working man, or women. But in the civil sector the citizen with a Florida concealed weapon/firearm permit can pretty much carry what ever they want with very little training.

[N. A. Corbier]

I pretty much recognize all that you have said for truth and with respect. But you know that perhaps some of the armed guards (even unarmed) out there do the same thing and would rather worry about being able to face consequences rather than be a statistic. You probably know the assaults on guards in Florida have tripled in the last few years. Many with the use of a weapon of some kind and the guard being the statistic at best. But your concern for legal repercussions is founded. But it seems that many across the country use one form of security blanket or another. I know, the status quo in this matter should not be the standard. But it's happening out there not with malice or with the over kill mentality.

We all at my company are most of the time concealed due to the clients request (low profile). Most details last four days -yes, pushing it but a man's got to eat- at best sometimes seperated by a day or so of laxed activity. We all have long gun certification. But so far the job only states in exteme situations are we allowed to have shotguns in ready view (or availible to access) upon demand. So there are some of us who carry a little something extra. Yes, it's a no, no in the eyes of the state and so on. But most of us being former street enforcers have a hard time breaking old habits that have saved out asses many times.

One thing does bother me at best. We are limited to what we can utilize as the working man, or women. But in the civil sector the citizen with a Florida concealed weapon/firearm permit can pretty much carry what ever they want with very little training.

Your working with an agency (The State) that uses the same standards that Florida Sheriffs used in the 1950s. You can only carry 2 weapons. You can't conceal a weapon on your person (Guards don't need back up guns, since they only protect property, blah blah blah).

The "three day rule" can be extended, as its a "reasonable expectation" of the state that a temporary assignment can be only three days long.

Remember when you could only carry .38s? I was running around with a .357 Magnum Heavy Barrel with Federal HydraShok +P+ ammo, so that if I shot someone, I KNEW there would be a kenetic kill effect with the ammo, and not just go through them with no tissue damage. A quote from, oh, what was his name, the Director of Enforcement. I want to say Valdemort or whatever, but I think that's a Harry Potter character. "The 9mm pistol is a thinking man's gun. Guards should have revolvers, they can't screw them up." This was to hundreds in the industry at the Orlando Security, Investigative, and Recovery Confrence in 2004.

Also notice that PIs have been able to carry 9mm while on duty as security, and a PI does not require to have a dedicated manager. The owner, who must be a PI, can simply designate ANY PI in the office as an M-B licensee.

As far as the backup gun, the way I have felt about these things is simple: So long as you understand the legal and moral ramifications of what your doing, and your supervisor and company can disavow any knowledge of it, its between you and the state, JUST DON'T LET ME SEE IT.

Good luck, stay safe.

[Arff312]

Currently Unarmed hopefully next year i will be armed. But i would have to change companys first.

[N. A. Corbier]

That's the job OF unarmed security. Walk around and be a deterrant. Your job isn't to detain, question arrest or otherwise "enforce" anything.

Actually, depending on prevailing law, contractual agreement, and local ordinances, your job can well BE to enforce specific statue or ordinance, investigate violations, and detain for law enforcement suspected violators.

This is the basis of retail theft prevention / security.

The deterrant function of an unarmed security officer is limited, at best. Most criminals fear that the security officer will intervene in their activity as well as the possibility of backup.

Granted, I am not familiar with security operations in states that only allow law enforcement officers any sort of weapon or defensive ability. However, in most states, there is a contractual obligation for unarmed security officers to protect lives and property, and/or enforce certain ordinances or laws through statutory detention powers afforded by the state.

Not all laws are the same in the industry, in every state. After all, striking a Texas Commissioned Security Officer is a felony, and armed or unarmed, that officer will arrest you. In Florida, obstructing a security officer with violence is a felony, as the statute reads, as they have a legal duty to protect the property or people on it, and obstruction of a person with a legal duty is an element of that crime. Usually applied to utility workers, it has successfully be applied to security officers, as well.

[N. A. Corbier]

Your two statements here contradict themselves.

Not really. Criminals fear that the security officer will intervene, not just "call the popo" and flee.

For a security officer to be a trained observer, and NOT intervene, in most states, is a liability issue and a good way to get someone suing your company for failing to perform their legal duty.

Prevailing case law is that security officers, unless the contract is worded very specifically to mitigate this, are there to protect the property (and/or persons), and are to physical measures to protect that property, such as removing the person by force if needed to protect the client's property.

If the issue is related to life or health of a client, then the officer better do more than call 911 while running the other direction, or they are personally liable for failing to perform their legal duty. Prevailing case law has shown that officers can be criminally and civilly liable for failing to protect clients from physical harm, and the company liable vicariously for their employee's failing to act.

[N. A. Corbier]

Can't sue someone for not performing their legal duty if they did perform their legal duty. Well you can, but you'll never win.

Actually, there is prevailing case law in several states. Generally worded contracts, ancillary duties such as 'escorts,' and such langauge as "protect the facility and its employees from interference or criminal attack," which is in alot of federal contracts, all create a legal duty to protect life.

Generally worded contracts which do not specificially state "Security Company will be responsible for the protection of property only, providing one uniformed employee to observe the property and report to appropriate agencies any adverse condition on the client property....

Client acknowledges that the Security Company is retained specifically for the purposes of the protection of property through observation and reporting of adverse conditions, and is not responsible for the protection of the client's life, liberty, or safety, nor any of the client's employees, tenants, or visitors." can be construded to include a legal duty to protect the safety of _______, if it is a custom in that area for security companies to provide such services.

Ancillary duties that the client ropes the company into can create legal duties from generating standards of care above the contract level. Once you create a standard of care - either corporately or at the employee level - you must continue to maintain that standard of care until you get it in writing from the client that you no longer have to. Performing "escort" duties, such as walking people to their cars at night, creates a standard of care against personal attack for the employees and visitors. Cases have been successfully won on this premesis. If it is the employee doing this without corporate permission, the corporation is still vicariously liable if the employee fails to care for all persons he routinely performs the duty for.

And, federal contracts with wording like that will kill a company if they're not prepared to render force protection. Example: An armed intruder entered a federal building at night. The contract specified that the armed security officers were there to protect federal property and employees from interference or criminal attack. One employee was shot, and BOOM, the company was sued by the US Government for failing to protect the property and its employees from criminal attack.

It doesn't take law enforcement training to teach someone how to protect others from criminal attack. Remember, law enforcement training focuses on detecting and apprehending criminal enterprise. Private Security and Law Enforcement share the same training curriclicum in most states on personal protection. The reason that private security is provided a permit to openly carry, even in states where it is illegal for a private citizen to openly or concealed carry, is because it is acknowledged by the legislature that society needs members of it who will protect the lives and property of others, independent of the enforcement of the laws of the government.

Police protect the public and society as a whole. You can't sue the police for being raped because they didn't find you. Private Security protect the public (on a client's property) and the client, speficially. You CAN sue (and win, its happened many times) a security company for being raped because they didn't find you. Its the job of the police to investigate the rape. Its the job of private security to prevent it from happening.

[bigdog]

[QUOTE=N. A. Corbier]
Florida does not have a statutory authorization to arrest, and relies on common law detention of felony activity, or the various statutes allowing shopkeepers, retail establishment, and hotel agents to detain.

im a fl security officer true we have no authority to arrest i have placed a few people in handcuffs for my safetyand they were commiting midemeanors involving violence. i have not in any instancrprosecuted for false arrest.

[N. A. Corbier]

[QUOTE=bigdog]

Florida does not have a statutory authorization to arrest, and relies on common law detention of felony activity, or the various statutes allowing shopkeepers, retail establishment, and hotel agents to detain.

im a fl security officer true we have no authority to arrest i have placed a few people in handcuffs for my safetyand they were commiting midemeanors involving violence. i have not in any instancrprosecuted for false arrest.

There's a difference, especially in Florida, between arrest, detention, and handcuffing for "all person's safety." A person dosen't need to be detained or arrested (but they are, if you do) to be handcuffed. You aren't handcuffing them to arrest them, or to detain them, your handcuffing them to terminate their attack against you, or another person. As you said, "involving violence."

So long as you can articulate that to the police officer who will investigate your detention, they will find it lawful.