Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In apporiate behavior of a security officer

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

  • In apporiate behavior of a security officer

    Boring and misrepresentation of how it played out
    Last edited by IPC 332; 03-26-2010, 07:30 PM. Reason: fixed garbage

  • #2
    I read your post 3 times and have no idea what you are talking about.
    Hospital Security Officer

    Comment


    • #3
      IPC, could you clarify a few things for us? Do you work at the resort, and if not why were you patrolling it and listening to its radio traffic? Or were you visiting on vacation or something? Was it late in the evening and dark?

      Honestly, what I can make out of your story I probably would have been suspicious and cautious as well. If you weren't there on duty or in some official capacity then you were there as just a private citizen. Maybe it could have been handled better on both sides without the need for an "argument". He was doing his job in watching for unusual or suspicious activity, and something about you sent his internal alarms off. True, maybe he should have approached and talked to you. Or maybe he intended to but was also giving his co-workers a heads up that he was concerned before he did talk to you. In either case the comment was directed to his co-workers, not you.
      That's a direct quote. Not word for word, but the gist of it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by EMTGuard View Post
        I read your post 3 times and have no idea what you are talking about.
        I'm afraid I have no clue, either.
        Some Kind of Commando Leader

        "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

        Comment


        • #5
          Ah...um...WHAT?

          Comment


          • #6
            I could only partially under stand what you were getting at. From what I could gather, I may have considered you suspicious and made approach for the purpose of a brief fact finding field interview, but probably not much else.

            As for the radio thing... I doubt it was, in any way, appropriate for you to be listening on on frequencies the you really had no right to, regardless of whether or not you had no ill intent. Keep in mind that most security agencies, in-house and contract, consider people actively listening in on security communications to be considerably suspicious if not an outright breach of security.

            As for you revealing that you are a Security Officer... what purpose was there in doing so, other than the possibility of some professional courtesy? You status as a Security Officer (state licensed or not) has no bearing on the duties of other officers on other properties where you have NO given color of right, and may actually land you in more trouble should the incident have been considered more serious or if the actual onsite security agency had decided to press the issue.

            The responding security officer may not have been the most professional and you may have taken offense to his approach, but he was still in the right in considering you suspicious (as this is a highly subjective classification and he was entitled to make his own decision) and in making his approach for interview purposes...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by IPC 332
              "Honestly, what I can make out of your story I probably would have been suspicious and cautious as well"

              Okay, thats find. But the questions is would you have made the terry stop, If I find someone sucipious I stop and talk to them and call it out. I really, myself do not care of people listen to my radio traffic.
              Your grammar and spelling is atrocious.

              Terry Stop? Are you a cop? No, you are a guard and Terry Stops don't have a thing to do with you.

              "If you weren't there on duty or in some official capacity then you were there as just a private citizen"

              guest of the resort, which I frequent alot

              Maybe it could have been handled better on both sides without the need for an "argument"

              I was tring to avoid the argument and find out what made me so sucipious to him, he never really did say. Which is what was aggervating, I usually inform the people I talk to why I talked with them. "Such as I stop you because your actions drew my attention to you and I recived a commpilant from .........."
              Stop being so sensitive. You cannot expect others to do things as you would, and just because you think you know about a job does not mean you know best or how everyone should act.

              True, maybe he should have approached and talked to you. Or maybe he intended to but was also giving his co-workers a heads up that he was concerned before he did talk to you.

              The heads up is find, but the radio traffic would be different. Case point, 32 to central I be out with one male white, one male black that was conducting werid behavior at turnaround. Can I have a back if applicable...... or hold the air.......
              Again, more of you wanting people to do things the way you would. It is a sign of immaturity.

              In either case the comment was directed to his co-workers, not you

              You have to understand that why I realize that, I don't like being labeled as the bad guy for no real good reason at all. I support the fact that he patrols the grounds, is their in a time of need and answers request of service. What I don't like is his inability to have the apporiate public relations skills required to do the job in stops which is essential function of hotel/resort security. If he was so scared to make a stop perhaps he should not be in the industry or should have contacted the local sheriff, but maybe thats to harsh of a statement.
              Again, who are you to judge others? I get the impression you are a intrusive busy-body that sticks his nose in places he should not, then gets bent out of shape when things do not go his way. I suggest you take a chill pill and relax.
              Last edited by txinvestigator; 05-06-2009, 12:27 PM.
              Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.

              Comment


              • #8
                I must say, I'm with txinvestigator on this one. I was trying to gently guide IPC to a discussion of what happened and so on, but bottom line is IPC was in the wrong in making assumptions about how another officer should operate and perform his job.

                IPC, I'm normally one who avoids saying this on the 'net, but please find a way to improve your written language skills. All of your posts are nearly incomprehensible because of grammar, spelling, and unclear sentences. Again, I'm trying not to be an a** about this.
                That's a direct quote. Not word for word, but the gist of it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I wasn't going to comment on this one, but I can't bite my tongue.

                  First, the number one reason why you would be considered suspicious: You're listening to their radio traffic. The average person has no justifiable reason to monitor the radio traffic of police, fire, EMS or even private security agencies. Besides you're own "curiousity", what is your justifiable reason?

                  These officers had no indication of who you are, or who you might be. All they knew at the time was you were walking around their assigned property listening to their radio traffic. As far as they knew, you had the number of officers on duty, each of their locations, any current calls for service, etc. That information in the wrong hands is a huge OPSEC issue. If you wanted to carry out some sort of terrorist attack on the resort, or even a petty crime, what better way to do that than to monitor security's radio traffic?

                  The officer had every right to inform other officers of your location (especially if you were coming up on their backside) and that you were engaged in suspicious activity. I'm sorry this hurt your delicate sensibilities, but they didn't say anything offensive about you, merely the facts.

                  Did you seriously just say you "walked him through the steps of good social interaction or proper people skills"? Who are you to teach him people skills? You are not his supervisor or employer. As far as I'm aware, you are not a certified public relations officer, or an instructor for Community Relations. So, what exactly qualifies you to inform him that his approach was inadequete, or unprofessional? In fact, even based on your account, I see nothing wrong with what he did. Perhaps he didn't want to make contact with you, and rather observe you and find out covertly what your intentions were. If you were minding your own business and not eavesdropping on their communications, you would have never known they had any interest in you. This is the case for 90% of the people we observe during our careers. While you may see someone, and find something suspicious, you don't always make contact. Why? It's not necessary. Simply monitor them from a distance and find out what they're doing. But instead, you had to poke your nose into their business.

                  Now, here's where I'm really confused. What exactly is this complaint you've filed with the FCC? What FCC regulation could they possibly have violated? Could it be because they asked you not to monitor their frequency? If so, I feel they are completely justified and you are out of line.

                  Ok, now I'm going to give you some tough love. IPC, first, please change your name. You are not an IPC employee and to be honest, I'm concerned someone might construe you and your actions to be representative of our company. Second, your post here are rare, but looking back, almost everyone of them is a complaint of how someone or some company has wronged you. Other posts criticized other officers' actions, when in many cases, you have been wrong.

                  The world is not out to get you. You create the world you live in. You created this entire problem, then came here expecting everyone to agree with you and your actions. Do you really not see what you did wrong here?

                  Oh, and please, respond to me in the thread. I really have no desire to take this to PM so you can privately tell me how wrong everyone is. I think everyone here has been spot on...
                  "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God" -Matthew 5:9

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You carry your licenses for "investigative purposes"? Good grief you are some wannabe super secret agent.

                    After passing your complaint around the FCC office and everybody getting a good laugh, your complaint was filed away in file 13, the trash can.
                    Last edited by txinvestigator; 05-06-2009, 04:09 PM.
                    Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by IPC 332
                      That’s why the compliant was filed to the FCC. Plain and simple, it’s not up to me to get in the specifics of the case nor is it a violation to listen to any resorts operating frequencies or police departments or fire departments "as long as you stay out of their way". I carry my licenses with me for investigate purposes, just for this reason.
                      If you're not going to explain, you should have never brought it up in the first place. Don't say "I filed an FCC complaint" and then refuse to explain why. True, it is not a violation, so long as they are not secured frequencies. I never said you legally could not listen to their frequency, I merely stated that was most likely the reason they deemed you suspicious. For investigative purposes? Are you kidding me? Who are you investigating? Are you a licensed investigator? I thought you were on vacation? To be frank, this sounds like BS and makes absolutely no sense.

                      Originally posted by IPC 332
                      Yes, I've complain about job sites and no I don't deny it. Amazingly everybody told me to leave D & Z and I stuck it threw until something better comes along.
                      Kudos to you for sticking with a job you hate. I understand finding something new before leaving, that's the responsible thing to do. However, if you choose to stay, stop complaining about it. You made the choice. My only point was the majority of your posts have been complaints. Can you please contribute something meaningful to the forum community?

                      Originally posted by IPC 332
                      I guess I attend a very different school on proper way to conduct yourself an officer or guard. I never said I didn't watch people, but I never made them feel as if their bad guys. I'm not his boss, and his boss was forward on the compliant. The investigation is pending and until then I will release no details on the status of it. I was looking for opinions and received them. I could drag this out for ever, but it’s not worth any of are time.
                      How did calling you suspicious make you feel like a "bad guy"? Can you still not comprehend why they thought you were suspicious? It's not that difficult. As a security professional yourself, I would think you would have realized this could happen. What would you think if you saw someone you'd never seen before walking your site with a scanner monitoring your agency's radio traffic? If you would simply write it off as a radio enthusiast and not investigate further, you are naive and a danger to your co-workers and site. You say you wont release any details because of the "pending investigation", however you already told us most of the story. Your reasoning is absurd.

                      Originally posted by IPC 332
                      I was on a fact finding mission
                      What fact finding mission? I thought you were on vacation and just decided to take a stroll through the resort. You can't even keep your story straight. If you were actually "investigating" the security officers there, then they definitely were on the ball monitoring you, as you were clearly "up to something". So which one is it? You can't have it both ways.

                      Originally posted by IPC 332
                      and as far as the name goes, I can choose whatever I like.
                      You're right, you can choose whatever name you like. I never demanded you change it, I only made a request, maybe even a suggestion. Why would you want to be affiliated with a company you no longer work for, and who you have slandered in the past on this very forum?

                      Honestly, I have a feeling this entire story is BS and you simply made it up to get some attention. But, I have no way of knowing since now you want to "protect the integrity of the investigation" and won't give anymore details...
                      "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God" -Matthew 5:9

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by IPC 332
                        It would have been if it was not worth a 10,000 dollars fine.

                        Okay, I done playing childish games with you, moderator can you please closed the thread
                        Yes, please do close it. In fact, I move that this entire thread be stricken from the record based on lack of factual evidence.

                        Geeze, I think my IQ just dropped a few points having even wasted my time on this topic...
                        "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God" -Matthew 5:9

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by IPC 332
                          It would have been if it was not worth a 10,000 dollars fine.

                          Okay, I done playing childish games with you, moderator can you please closed the thread
                          Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            You want me to close the thread, but you continue to post? I'll move it to the burn barrel.
                            Retail Security Consultant / Expert Witness
                            CoAuthor - Effective Security Management 6th Edition

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by IPC 332
                              And I'm not complaining about the company I work for now, I have refrain from that taking your advice as well as others, on this very form.

                              They are not secured frequencies by no means, that’s kind of the point. Yes, I would investiagte the subject with the radio / scanner and get his contact information. The thing I do different would go directly to him / her and gather their information right off the bat. As I stated, I do not feel that by listening to radio communications makes me suspicious. I can see where that security role see's a potential risk, so in that regards, suspicious I guess. But like TX investigator said it not up to me, it’s up to the company how to do their activities or patrol. The post was a fact finding one on how others would handle the same situation and I got my answers. As usual it got blown out of proportion, but that’s life fueled by bad posts (my fault) and strong opinions.

                              I was on mini vacation and confirm that the resort was still in violation of the usage of the radio frequency and heard his response about me. I was on a stroll and that still does not stop me from monitoring the radio traffic. Especially considering the fact that their on a frequency I used, obtain by my license class privileges. This is more to the point of the formal FCC compliant in laymen’s terms. Just to set the record straight no frequency is exclusive, as long as your license properly.

                              As far as what we used here, we utilize Nextel. My personnel equipment that I utilize has encryption on it, not that I use it. But, then again I have that option.

                              Holy Cow. What languange is that?
                              Remember those who died, remember those who killed them.

                              Comment

                              Taboola

                              Collapse

                              300x250

                              Collapse

                              Mid 300x250

                              Collapse

                              Super Leaderboard

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X