Security Guards switching unarmed to armed..

[PiedmontChun]

Not a thread debating to advantages / disadvantages of either or employment as such. More of an open ended question...

I work for a large company. My particular site / office of 400+ workers is in a suburban area, not high crime area, and with little violent crime in the area period. We have the standard swipe badges for all access points of the building. We have security guards and for the 5 years I have worked here, I have never seen them armed with a weapon nor have we have any kid of major incident. Most realistic threat is more likely an angry ex or possibly a disgruntled former employee

I'm walking behind one of the security guys in a hallway today and notice he has what looks like a handgun in a LEO type belt and holster. I don't see how it could be a taser unless there are models that closely resemble a composite frame handgun like a Glock. Now I am all for guns in the hands of responsible people; I own a few myself an carry when traveling eveen if not day to day. But something still irks me about our security suddenly switching from being unarmed to armed essentially overnight with no explanation..... or at the very least peaks my curiousity. There was no office email or memo that went out informing anyone, there was no change in security staffing I could see, no incidents that anyone was made aware of. So why the change?

Unless I am wrong, a lot of studies have shown the shooting accuracy of even seasoned police officers while under duress can be poor. Our security people are nice folks, but their primary job the entire time I've worked here is just monitoring people entering and exiting the building (handling lost badges, letting in authorized visitors, etc), and being prepared to call the police should &*%$ hit the fan (sub-station located under 1/2 mile away). The guy I saw today was a young guys in early 20s mostly likely. Its not like they are hiring seasoned security people with prior LE experience. So I'm not sure slapping a gun on them makes me feel any safer in actuality. Am I wrong?

 

[ballen0351]

Well considering most military members are "Young guys in early 20s" and most new hires at Police departments are "young guys in early 20s" Im not sure the age matters a whole lot. Also most states have background checks and training requirements to allow armed security I think your fine.

 

[Xue Sheng]

NYS there is armed and unarmed security, but as ballen said, the training requirements are different. But with that said in NYS you could not, in most cases, change from armed to unarmed over night because of the differences in required training. But I know of cases where they have on College campuses in both NYS and Mass. But in those cases the officers on duty had already been through police academy training, not just security training and in the case of Massachusetts those officers had been through Mass State Police Academy.

 

[Tez3]

The guy I saw today was a young guys in early 20s mostly likely. Its not like they are hiring seasoned security people with prior LE experience. So I'm not sure slapping a gun on them makes me feel any safer in actuality. Am I wrong?

I have to agree with ballen here, ex military in their early 20s can have six or seven years, perhaps more of experience behind them, ours can join at 16 go on active service at 18 so have two or three tours of Afghan under their belt as well as plenty of other experience both of combat and policing type duties. They could also be ex military police.

 

[PiedmontChun]

*shrug* Its not that I feel unsafe or am super concerned. My biggest curiosity is why they made the (relatively) sudden change. Isnt there usually some kind of catalyst for change in how security is handled? Things are slow to change in a large company; even decisions regarding painting or floor waxing go thru multiple levels and meetings for goodness sake. Thats why it strikes me as odd to see it without hearing anything.
Well , here in the US someone would not have actual military experience prior to 18. So hypothetically someone could have training and frontline experience before returning to civilian life, all before reaching 20 or 21. I have nothing against the guy's age, I realize that being in my 30s I'm guilty of looking at people in their 20s and assume they have little real life experience, but I realize that is a stereotype and certainly not always true. However, when your security detail consists of couple elderly men and an overweight woman.... and then a super young guy gets hired to work right alongside them and not over them, you tend to assume they are a bit of a lackey. He's the one I happened to see armed today, no idea if anyone else is yet.

 

[Xue Sheng]

*shrug* Its not that I feel unsafe or am super concerned. My biggest curiosity is why they made the (relatively) sudden change. Isnt there usually some kind of catalyst for change in how security is handled? Things are slow to change in a large company; even decisions regarding painting or floor waxing go thru multiple levels and meetings for goodness sake. Thats why it strikes me as odd to see it without hearing anything.
Well , here in the US someone would not have actual military experience prior to 18. So hypothetically someone could have training and frontline experience before returning to civilian life, all before reaching 20 or 21. I have nothing against the guy's age, I realize that being in my 30s I'm guilty of looking at people in their 20s and assume they have little real life experience, but I realize that is a stereotype and certainly not always true. However, when your security detail consists of couple elderly men and an overweight woman.... and then a super young guy gets hired to work right alongside them and not over them, you tend to assume they are a bit of a lackey. He's the one I happened to see armed today, no idea if anyone else is yet.

In my security days one of the places I worked for was a lower level state college. None of use were armed since none of us had the training. However they hired a guy to work nights who decided all on his own that he was going to wear a duty rig with a side arm on the night he had to work a double..... he lost his job.

Is it possible they are not armed but this person just decided he was going to be?

 

[PiedmontChun]

Is it possible they are not armed but this person just decided he was going to be?

That's a good question, but apparently a co-worker I talked to had noticed it as well already, so today is not the first time the guy came to work packing a handgun.

 

[Tez3]

super young guy gets hired

Personally I wouldn't complain if a guy like that turned up could make night shifts interesting.

 

[drop bear]

In a country where anyone can carry guns. I am surprised any of them walk around unarmed.

 

[RowdyAz]

If you carry a gun you are making a statement. Therfore implying you will need to have more force to come at me. For example security has a glock so the aggressor brings a sawn off shotgun. Security may even get shot just for posing as a bigger threat than they would of been if unarmed

 

[Transk53]

In the UK I believe we should

If you carry a gun you are making a statement. Therfore implying you will need to have more force to come at me. For example security has a glock so the aggressor brings a sawn off shotgun. Security may even get shot just for posing as a bigger threat than they would of been if unarmed

What?. If I have a Glock, I'd drop the idiot miles away. Assuming that I did not have a .50 cal machine gun.

 

[RowdyAz]

In the UK I believe we should


What?. If I have a Glock, I'd drop the idiot miles away. Assuming that I did not have a .50 cal machine gun.

Sounds good in theory but that's the way it works in Australia kid. Not even bank security guards where guns here. And surprisingly they vary rarely get robbed.

 

[Transk53]

Sounds good in theory but that's the way it works in Australia kid. Not even bank security guards where guns here. And surprisingly they vary rarely get robbed.

Worked with a couple of Ozzies. I heard the if they have a fist, you use an ashtray. They have an ashtray, you use a chair kind of thing.

 

[Tez3]

In the UK I believe we should


What?. If I have a Glock, I'd drop the idiot miles away. Assuming that I did not have a .50 cal machine gun.

You can join the MOD police and be armed ( Uk's only armed police ie doesn't have an armed unit, all armed.)! I recommend them.

 

[Xue Sheng]

In a country where anyone can carry guns. I am surprised any of them walk around unarmed.

It is called "Laws" you know, those pesky little things that regulate such things

If you carry a gun you are making a statement. Therfore implying you will need to have more force to come at me. For example security has a glock so the aggressor brings a sawn off shotgun. Security may even get shot just for posing as a bigger threat than they would of been if unarmed

This is an unrealistic view of the escalation of violence. One does not necessarily lead to the other. And who is implying you need more force? This has nothing to do with the OP

Sounds good in theory but that's the way it works in Australia kid. Not even bank security guards where guns here. And surprisingly they vary rarely get robbed.

Not even bank security guards here has guns either...as a matter of fact most banks here don't have guards and surprisingly they vary rarely get robbed. But I fail to see how any of this has to do with the OP

 

[RowdyAz]

In the UK I believe we should


What?. If I have a Glock, I'd drop the idiot miles away. Assuming that I did not have a .50 cal machine gun.

Yes you could and go to jail for unnecessary force. Typical hero mindset.

 

[hoshin1600]

looking at this from a business perspective it is possible the security agency has recently up graded itself to an armed agency thus higher contract fees and has nothing to do with anything but looking good and charging more.

 

[Buka]

The difference between armed security and unarmed security - vast. Really fricken vast. Legally, moralliy, tactically, business wise, PR wise and what might be actualy be necessary for survival of both the company and the individual.

 

[Transk53]

Yes you could and go to jail for unnecessary force. Typical hero mindset.

What using a machine gun. More like complete utter lunacy. Actually I was joking and obviously failed. Anybody did that then they would get a sniper round through the head. End off. Sorry I thought you're post was a little silly. Just responded in kind. Sorry about that

 

[RowdyAz]

What using a machine gun. More like complete utter lunacy. Actually I was joking and obviously failed. Anybody did that then they would get a sniper round through the head. End off. Sorry I thought you're post was a little silly. Just responded in kind. Sorry about that

Apology accepted. I have a security license how about yourself. To be honest reading some of your posts I doubt you even train. Did you also know there is a 20 second reactionary gap between getting your gun out of the holster and being stabbed. There's a great instructor that you probably haven't heard of, his name is Dan Inosanto. He proves this. Keep studying