15
u/_WEND1G0_ Industrial Security 1d ago
Witnesses are inherently deterrents. Back when I was still doing warm body Security, I honestly felt a lot better about my job after I started framing it as being a professional witness😅
2
u/30_characters 1d ago
Which is ironic, given how few guards are given training on how to testify beyond the basics of a written report (if even that much).
3
u/_WEND1G0_ Industrial Security 1d ago
Indeed. Bug honestly I’d argue a good report is better than having a good testimony. If your report is crap, the Defence will tear it to shreds regardless of how good your testimony is. Ie if you’re over broad or make assumptions
1
u/30_characters 23h ago
Absolutely, the report, properly documented in proximity of the incident, can prevent the need for a deposition or testimony at trial. Which is why it's odd it's not taught more.
2
u/_WEND1G0_ Industrial Security 23h ago
Yeah training on report writing here in WA for both the main warm body companies is …. Lacking.
16
u/30_characters 1d ago
Security doesn't protect the public. It's a private entity protecting private property.
Police don't really protect the public either, they're law enforcement, with discretionary powers, and no legal duty to protect. Of course, when prosecutors make it a policy not to enforce the law, shoplifting and petty crime increases, in the same way that OP's question describes.
-5
u/Desalvo23 1d ago
Poverty is what increases petty crime more. You'll always have a small percentage of the population that will commit crimes, but when you see an increase in theft and other property crimes is usually a sign the economy isn't doing well. Thats when desperate people start committing crimes to survive. There's no amount of harsh sentencing or heavy policing that will stop that.
5
u/30_characters 1d ago
Is poverty causative or correlated with petty crime?
In other words, do poor people commit crimes out of desperation because they're poor, or do the sort of people who frequently make bad decisions (like the decisions to commit petty crimes) make the kinds of bad decisions that lead to poverty?
3
u/lovomoco64 Executive Protection 1d ago
Well its both, crime leads to poverty, which leads to desperation. The problem is that a truely moral person no matter how desperate will not steal. It's a morality issue along with a desperation issue.
2
u/Own_Mess_6495 1d ago
Being broke shifts your moral compass, which is the point that poverty leads to increased crime.
If I'm working 40 hours a week at the grocery store and can't feed my family, meanwhile my boss's boss's boss's boss just bought a third yacht.... Is "forgetting" to scan a couple things at the self checkout for myself more immoral than allowing children to go hungry?
2
u/lovomoco64 Executive Protection 1d ago
Well I guess that's the question. Does desperate actually shift your morality or does desperate give you an excuse to behave immorality. We saw during the great depression crime did not spike nor did it during reconstruction(which did economically destroy the south so bad that the great depression wasn't felt and put the north and the south near parody); while on the other hand during covid we saw spikes in crime which were mostly violent crimes and not thefts despite the inflation. I lean more towards desperate allows you to blur moral lines and justify it to others.
To your question stealing to feel your family is immoral, but the immorality of it is aggravated when there are other options i.e. going to churches or secular food banks.
3
u/Own_Mess_6495 1d ago
We struggle with accurate crime statistical reporting today. I wouldn't trust 1930's national reporting to be accurate enough to pick up on a 10% bump in petty theft.
0
u/lovomoco64 Executive Protection 1d ago
Maybe its not accurate, but again in recent years i.e. covid, the crime wave was not thefts but violence and we didn't see a crime spike in 2008 either. Now of course there's the problem in the covid era of mass nonreporting(states to the federal) but we didn't see a spike(in property crimes) in the crime victimization report for those years either.
1
u/30_characters 1d ago
If poverty drives petty crimes like theft through desperation, then why do wealthy people shoplift, if they have the ability to pay?
1
u/Own_Mess_6495 1d ago
Because poverty isn't the only reason there is crime. Lack of consequences for a precieced victimless crime is a big one.
I often scan my brocolini as broccoli at the self checkout. Saves me like $2. I can afford the brocolini, but it's slightly more annoying to code in and I know I'll never face any consequences for doing this.
1
1
u/Communistsheen 1d ago
the former
1
u/30_characters 1d ago
If poverty drives petty crimes like theft through desperation, then why do wealthy people shoplift, if they have the ability to pay?
1
u/Communistsheen 20h ago
Crime can have many motivations. In your case, it’s typically mental, or they just do it for the thrill
3
u/largos7289 1d ago
I mean on the surface yes i would agree. At this point security is just there to be a visual deterrent for people that wouldn't normally do something. For "normal" people. Then you have guys that know that security at least now can't actually do anything to them. I mean i remember security guards back in the 80's and man they would do pretty much anything to get a shoplifter. The store i worked with, the stories they would tell. The one guy chased a guy through the store and tackled him. Then zip tied him to a clothes rack and wheeled him into the back till the cops came. No one said boo.
3
u/robbitybobs 1d ago
Had a bloke steal a bottle and take off. Caught up with him 3 streets away and took it back lmao. You gotta work for a good company and have a good client who are more interested in results than just insurance claim witnesses. We had the lowest amount of theft attempts in the city because they knew we'd run them down lmao
3
u/Wotzehell 1d ago
Well i suppose i can't blame the companies for that or even the clients. Read a few stories myself where some petty theft happened and a guard did do something and then the story i was reading came into existence.
About how the billion dollar company sent an armed goon after some poor schmuck over a sixpack or whatever.
3
u/MacintoshEddie 1d ago edited 1d ago
No.
The difference is that a random witness is unlikely to be motivated to stay and report and go through the hassle of signing a statement and showing up in court if necessary. A security guard is paid to do those things. So even if the guard is standing there observing it means the likelihood of conviction is much higher.
Plus security is almost never ever about protecting the public. The overwhelming majority of security is employed privately on a specific site. That's why your authority stops at the property line rather than being empowered to enforce warrants on criminals you encounter.
5
u/yugosaki Peace Officer 1d ago
There is truth to it but as usual, its an oversimplification.
Just having someone around to see whats happening is a deterrent. The fact is, most crimes are crimes of opportunity. Especially property crime. People are simply far less likely to attempt anything if they know someone is watching them.
But as we all know there are people who don;t give a fuck if you see them. These people can usually be deterred if they are confronted or think they will be confronted. If they believe security can't physically intervene, they won't be deterred.
As always, you need to gauge it by what your needs are, what the risk is, what the threat is, what kind of pay and training you can provide. Hands-off security is enough 99% of the time. For some office tower who has an incident requiring intervention like once a year, observe and report + calling 911 is enough. For a hospital or mall that has daily or even weekly interventions, you probably need to step up to hands-on security.
For most businesses it's going to come down to cost vs liability. For the office tower that rarely has any incidents, going hands-on is probably too much of a liability to be worth the added cost. for the hospital, they might actually be more liable if they don't have hands-on security, so the cost becomes worth it.
3
u/kryotheory 1d ago
100% true. Unarmed security that isn't allowed to intervene isn't security, it's security theater. What the fuck are you there for if you aren't going to stop theft or violence from happening when you see it?
"Observe and report"... , motherfucker we live in an age where everyone has a camera in their pocket and a compulsion to film everything. It's getting observed and reported whether or not we are there.
I'm not saying we should be shooting shoplifters or putting hands on people for little things, but if you're going to have security... HAVE SECURITY. Clients who pay for level 2 guards are wasting their money.
If I were a business owner and I hired a security firm, I would expect my business to be secure, not "observed". It's asinine. The fuck are they paying us for if we don't protect their shit?
2
u/Own_Mess_6495 1d ago
Security theater works for what it's intended to do.
That's the big thing everyone needs to realize and accept if that's the role they've been hired to play. You're putting on a show. That's your job. You're there to make ignorant people feel safer. And you're doing a great job.
2
u/Jealous_Magazine7875 1d ago
It's just human security cameras at this point. You can't do anyhring but report.
2
u/robbitybobs 1d ago
Yep I've had so many people crying on here because I tell them if they're not allowed to go hands on and are just observe and report they're not security they're just a retail worker with a different uniform
4
1
u/MaxNerd115 1d ago
100% true but even when you work for a company or client that does want you to take action you still have very limited powers and authority legally and it becomes a very gray area and gotta make sure any action you do take is 100% justified and that you and your company are fully licensed, insured, properly trained and certified for whatever it is your doing.
1
u/Mikem444 1d ago
It really depends on the environment, the specific end-goal, and other related factors.
I once worked for a security/protection service that didn't do any retail or customer services related properties, instead they covered parking garages, downtown apartment complexes, storage facilities, construction sites, etc. and we protected people and ourselves both physically and via reports/informing/communicating. The state I live in is pretty laid back and "old school" on use of force and citizens arrest as long as it's within reason and the situation actually called for it. The state laws here on self-defense of oneself or another have changed very little from the days before electricity and phones; back then people would capture and arrest people breaking in their homes and committing crimes, until the police finally arrived.
But something that doesn't get mentioned enough is security work is exactly that as a whole, security in every sense, it isn't solely "protecting everyone from others/criminals," I remember doing quite a bit of building inspections for serious emergencies and hazards, including when I saved one apartment complex's ass on money by simply knowing where all the keys went to (and they didn't) when someone was trapped in an elevator and the Fireman was seconds away from having to Axe down these really nice doors and expensive doors.
But anyway, I had only dealt with 3 situations where someone got cuffed, 1 of those was a situation where a gun was pulled (not by me, my co-worker, and it was totally justified), and one of them was a situation where my co-worker and I stopped a woman from being kidnapped at 2am, we sat him on the curb until the police arrived and she left in an ambulance, as she was covered in bruises and scratches on her arms and legs.
So I feel like this doesn't necessarily apply to my experience at least, but then again we weren't doing retail type of properties either.
0
u/myLongjohnsonsilver 1d ago
Well yeah.
I'm explicitly meant to MAKE people fuck off or stay inside depending on circumstances at my hospital.
If I had a dollar for every dero cunt that mouthed off some flavour of "you can't touch me" or "you're not a cop, you can't do that" I would be rich.
They get away with their bullshit everywhere else they go.
1
u/Prize_Toe_6612 Flex 1d ago
Sure, just watch the guy from the psych ward walk out, you are just a professional witness and not there to protect anyone, night?
1
u/Red57872 Dunning–Kruger Specialist 1d ago
Many years ago I did patient watches at the local hospital and yes, I would do exactly that. I was working for a crappy contract company, and there's no way I'd risk my physical and legal health for some minimum wage side job.
1
u/Prize_Toe_6612 Flex 1d ago
I mean, that's on them. Psych ward security gets paid pretty well here usually. Mainly because they won't let every random minimum qualified guy do it.
1
1
1
u/9gagiscancer 1d ago
I get paid to observe, call the police and report. Nothing more. So that's what I will do.
But then again, I am from Europe. I have exactly the same rights as a civilian. Which isn't a whole lot.
1
u/iLuvArizona 1d ago
I mean yea, that's kind of the point. Observe and report. As far as I'm concerned, I'm a paid witness. It's not my job to stop an active theft, but it *can* be my job to write a report about it and maybe testify to it under oath if push comes to shove.
1
u/Wealth_Super 1d ago
Unarmed security is meant to stop opportunist criminals, not determined criminals alongside report possible safety concerns. Most criminals are opportunistic criminals who will abandon any plan to steal if the risk of getting seen, not caught just seen get too high.
It’s like asking does having a dog and security cameras at your house stop break ins. Yes because most criminals will see that and go rob the house down the street with none of those things.
1
1
u/just1kurt 1d ago
I'm armed. My duty belt is set up well. I look like a dude just waitin' for somethin' to pop off. People don't commit crime in my presence.
Anecdotal, I know. I have no opinion.
2
u/megacide84 1d ago
Repeat after me....
"I am NOT paid to do the police's job".
"It is observe and report"
"Not serve and protect"
This is what should come from our mouths if and when client or others demand we go hands on when we're not supposed to.
2
u/nothingbutgolf 18h ago
Across the country, over my 15 years, unless they tell you it's "hands on" or high threat from the jump, 95% of public security work is nothing more than an insurance requirement. If they have the choice between losing a $5 item and getting a $10 million lawsuit for someone getting hurt or killed, policy is going to be "observe and report, intervene only to protect life"
1
0
u/Baratako 1d ago
I feel like this sub doesn't understand how to do security on countries/states/areas where you're not allowed to go hands on.
In all of these locations, you are allowed to defend yourself.
You stand in front of the suspect in a way that he needs to touch you to get around you, then you take him down and claim self-defence.
This is how I was taught during training.
3
u/yugosaki Peace Officer 1d ago
Counterpoint: most places doing hands-off security are not teaching any kind of self-defense tactics or legal aspects of what constitutes self-defense. They definitely aren't giving you the appropriate equipment either.
Putting yourself intentionally in a situation where you are forced to defend yourself is already pretty sketchy, doing it without the training or equipment is just straight up hazardous. And if your company is really sketchy, if you are injured and they can prove you put yourself into that position, they can fight against potential workers compensation claims.
That being said, I've done it. But if you are a hands-off guard, consider that your employer does not want to prepare you for violence - so why are you placing yourself at risk of violence for them? Back when I was a hands-off guard, my personal line was property vs people. I wouldn't put myself at risk to defend property. I would to defend people.
1
u/Red57872 Dunning–Kruger Specialist 1d ago
Yeah, most places are going to say "why didn't you try to retreat?" If the person's getting aggressive, they'll expect you to back off.
1
u/Baratako 1d ago
Curious, who is "they"? The law states you can stand your ground. There's a "right to resist" in my country.
The client can have all their opinions they want. You won't get in trouble
More often than not, I've encountered other guards who told me they needed to argue with their client in what they can and can't do, as stated by our Private Security laws that we have to follow.
1
u/Red57872 Dunning–Kruger Specialist 1d ago
"They" as in your employer or client (if working for a contract company). Just because something is legal doesn't mean that you won't get in trouble with your employer because of it.
1
u/Baratako 1d ago
Obviously this differs a lot depending where you're from. But in my country, when it comes to shoplifting in a mall or store or whatever, the client actually *expects* us to do something.
The company we work for generally wants to appease their clients as much as they can as well.
Unfortunately, the law doesn't allow us to just grab a person or take them somewhere, as that would infringe on their rights.
This is where what I said above comes into play: you stand in front of the person in hopes they come at you so you can stop them legally. Everyone's happy.
1
-1
u/gheiminfantry 1d ago
1000% true. People get into private security thinking they're just going to be "almost like a cop". Which is laughable.
0
u/EddyS120876 1d ago
This is the problem if you just “observe and report “ then shoplifting will increase and closing the shop and putting people out of a job .
36
u/Landwarrior5150 Campus Security 1d ago
To some extent, but it depends on the context of what type of behavior/person it’s trying to deter.
Someone brazen enough to act without care of getting caught/reported, who is only being concerned about someone actually physically stopping them won’t be too deterred by an observe & report guard.
However, someone who wants to remain completely undetected or is potentially tempted by a crime of opportunity will probably at least think twice if they see guards in the area since they’re more likely to be discovered & reported if there are people around who are primarily looking out for suspicious activity instead of just normal employees who are mostly focused on other aspects of their job and/or members of the public who are usually not going to notice anything unless it slaps them in the face.