Lockdown at CCSU (next door to Charter Oak)

[DrJohn]

Sanatone,

I'm a senior police officer, and have been for over 10 years. I'm also an academy instructor, Field Training Instructor, Mental Health Officer and a Commissioned Security Officer Instructor. I do not believe allowing security officers to carry off duty will ever happen. Texas Penal Code 46.02 states that the state statute on unlawfully carrying a weapon does not apply to peace officers. I doubt the state legislature will ever amend that to allow minimally trained security officers to carry off duty since they have no constitutional powers of arrest at any time. A peace officer on the other hand, is still a peace officer whether off duty or on duty.

Police Officers are required to have passed a psychological exam and interview prior to being sworn in, a commissioned Security Officer does not have any such requirement. Now, I'm not going to debate the effectiveness of the psychological exams, I believe that exam and interview should have to be passed every five years as a condition of employment instead of just once at the beginning of your career or after a two year break in service.

I think the training requirements of security officers are pitifully lacking, I think the Commissioned Security Officer course should be a hundred hours long, and I also think that TCLEOSE (Texas Commission on Law Enforcement) should take over the licensing of commissioned security officers, much as they do for Armed Public Security Officers.

As for places a police officer can not carry a weapon? The only place I know of is while off duty in the secured areas of an airport, I carry all the time in Federal Buildings, I present my credentials to the security guard on duty and pass right through. As for an on-duty status, there is no place in America that restricts a police officer from carrying a weapon with them in the performance of their duties.....including the secured areas of an airport or on a commercial aircraft. (juvenile proceeding not withstanding)

When I am off duty, I even carry on campus concealed. It isn't against any state law, while it might violate university policy there is no state law that bans that. Besides, no one even knows if I have a weapon on me as it doesn't show. I agree with you, that CHL holders should be allowed to carry on campus. As of the poster who stated that he believes police officers are under-trained on firearms and tactics, I agree with you. My department requires me to qualify twice a year, and none of that qualification involves moving and shooting and other dynamic tactics. The department leaves it up to individual officers to gain proficiency with their weapons, and many officers do, but not all. Personally, I think the training should be more dynamic, scenario based training and qualifications but that requires money and money is very hard to come by in most department budgets. It is hard enough to budget for enough officers and equipment as it is, training is a secondary consideration at best. I would love to see this change, I would love to see some of the same type of training that the U.S. Secret Service Protective detail receives, those guys and gals are second to none when it comes to firearms.

[sanantone]

Security officers could use more training, but it would make the job not worth it. Most armed security officers in Texas make less than $12 an hour, and the state would be asking them to take a few weeks away from working just to receive their licenses. I already know security officers with children who receive government assistance, so 100 hours of training would be a hardship. I don't see what arrest powers have to do with this. If you think CHL holders should be able to carry just about anywhere, then why not security officers who have more training? Like I said earlier, security officers are already armed on government properties while on duty (this includes private security officers). All you need is 15 more hours of training to become a personal protection officer (body guard) which allows you to carry concealed while on duty as long as you are in plain clothes. PPOs are required to pass the MMPI. See, this is what I don't understand. People think that CHL holders should be able to carry anywhere, but they freak out at the thought of security officers, who have several times more hours of training, carrying a gun. In the session before last, the initial security officer training was raised from 30 to 40 hours. The CHL training was reduced from 10 to 5 hours, which I find kind of scary considering how many clueless people I had in my CHL class.

I forgot about the Texas laws that allow officers to carry off duty, but my focus was on LEOSA which does not exempt police officers from laws against carrying concealed on federal property, private properties that do not allow weapons, and government properties that are gun-free under state laws. It only exempts police officers from state laws banning concealed carry. With a couple of exceptions, LEOSA does not cover police officers who work for private entities such as private universities.

[DrJohn]

Sanantone, I agree that 100 hrs for a commissioned security officer class would make it a much harder prospect for achieving a security officer commission. While the benefits to the industry would be great, the cost is likely too high. I can see what you are saying about security officers having more training then a person with a CHL, I agree that is the case but the state is unlikely to change the penal code to exempt security officers from the provisions of chapter 46.02 of the Texas penal Code. A more likely and probably a much better idea would be to simply include the CHL class as a portion of the level-3 security course, by simply adding five hours to the curriculum. If I had my own security training school that is how I would address the issue.

I am a strong believer that every level-3 security officer should be required to have successfully passed the MMPI as is currently required for Personal Protection Officers. I have been around the security industry for many years and have run into many commissioned security officers who probably would have had a very difficult time in passing the MMPI.

Security is not a career when we are talking about security officers working for a traditional security company, you are very correct in that 98% of them make less then $12 an hour, with most making around $9 to $10 an hour. The exception would be the security officers working at U.S. Government contracts. I spent eight years working security at the IRS, currently the pay rate is about $23 an hour, in addition you are provided with a retirement plan (401K), company paid medical insurance, sick leave, and up to four weeks of vacation depending on the number of years employed. After three years you would have three weeks of paid vacation. The Union has negotiated many other benefits as well, to include boot allowances yearly, and holiday pay at double time and a half. The officers working that contract have everything provided for them to include duty gear and weapons, it is a very nice job, they do not require much other then a couple of years experience as an armed security officer, the ability to pass both a federal background check as well as a security clearance every two years. The standards may actually raise a bit in the future, as I have heard some talks about physical agility testing and such.

Kind of off the topic a bit, but I am strongly against open carry in Texas, concealed carry is more then adequate in my opinion. I am also a firm believer in raising the standards for security officers as well as for peace officers. I strongly believe that TCLEOSE should require a minimum of an associates degree in order to become licensed. My department won't even let you in the door unless you have a minimum of 30 hrs from a regionally accredited university or college. By the way, TCLEOSE does not recognize national Accreditation, they will only accept college credits / degree from Regionally Accredited schools. Commissioned Security officers should be required to have a minimum of 20 hrs of continuing education every year, and I think that TCLEOSE approved continuing education courses should count for those in-service training hours.

If you have not already done so, I would highly recommend looking at Texas law Shield as a legal services plan for CHL holders, it is a very affordable, they even officer a Commissioned Security Officer plan as well. This way, if you are ever forced into a situation in which you have to use deadly force, they will provide you an attorney free of charge and defend you against any actions resulting from your need to use deadly force. Well worth the $10 or so a month they charge.

[sanantone]

Sanantone, I agree that 100 hrs for a commissioned security officer class would make it a much harder prospect for achieving a security officer commission. While the benefits to the industry would be great, the cost is likely too high. I can see what you are saying about security officers having more training then a person with a CHL, I agree that is the case but the state is unlikely to change the penal code to exempt security officers from the provisions of chapter 46.02 of the Texas penal Code. A more likely and probably a much better idea would be to simply include the CHL class as a portion of the level-3 security course, by simply adding five hours to the curriculum. If I had my own security training school that is how I would address the issue.

The industry is more concerned about having a warm body for deterrence or to reduce insurance rates rather than having security officers with common sense. There is a lot of choosing the lowest bidder. Because of liability issues, many clients opt to not have armed guards when they should. It puts the guards in danger. The armed guard in San Antonio who was shot and killed at the Greyhound bus station several years ago was only making $7 or $8 an hour. The guard who was shot in New Braunfels a few years ago probably wasn't making more than $10 or $11 an hour. It's kind of sad that people expect someone to do such a risky job for a little more than minimum wage.

I am a strong believer that every level-3 security officer should be required to have successfully passed the MMPI as is currently required for Personal Protection Officers. I have been around the security industry for many years and have run into many commissioned security officers who probably would have had a very difficult time in passing the MMPI.

This is very true. LOL. I was a supervisor and grew a couple of gray hairs. My company first gave what they called a psychological test, but it was just a common sense test on ethics. When we were bought out, they gave us a personality test that didn't really test for psychological fit. I know that Securitas requires the MMPI for all of its commissioned security officers, or they used to. One of the companies I worked for gave us a minor physical agility test, but stopped when they got desperate for employees. We had a high turnover rate just like every other security company. The security director for a government client I worked for wanted to pay us $15 an hour, but their contracts department would only pay the market wage, $10 an hour. They later increased the base pay to $11 an hour.

Security is not a career when we are talking about security officers working for a traditional security company, you are very correct in that 98% of them make less then $12 an hour, with most making around $9 to $10 an hour. The exception would be the security officers working at U.S. Government contracts. I spent eight years working security at the IRS, currently the pay rate is about $23 an hour, in addition you are provided with a retirement plan (401K), company paid medical insurance, sick leave, and up to four weeks of vacation depending on the number of years employed. After three years you would have three weeks of paid vacation. The Union has negotiated many other benefits as well, to include boot allowances yearly, and holiday pay at double time and a half. The officers working that contract have everything provided for them to include duty gear and weapons, it is a very nice job, they do not require much other then a couple of years experience as an armed security officer, the ability to pass both a federal background check as well as a security clearance every two years. The standards may actually raise a bit in the future, as I have heard some talks about physical agility testing and such.

I know the contract security officers were making $16-18 an hour on military bases, but they decided to go in-house. I heard the Social Security Administration starts at $15+, but they rarely have openings.

Kind of off the topic a bit, but I am strongly against open carry in Texas, concealed carry is more then adequate in my opinion. I am also a firm believer in raising the standards for security officers as well as for peace officers. I strongly believe that TCLEOSE should require a minimum of an associates degree in order to become licensed. My department won't even let you in the door unless you have a minimum of 30 hrs from a regionally accredited university or college. By the way, TCLEOSE does not recognize national Accreditation, they will only accept college credits / degree from Regionally Accredited schools. Commissioned Security officers should be required to have a minimum of 20 hrs of continuing education every year, and I think that TCLEOSE approved continuing education courses should count for those in-service training hours.

I am all for requiring at least an associate's degree for police officers. Many of the large departments already require at least 60 credit hours. Arlington requires a bachelor's degree. Unfortunately, the Bexar County Sheriff's Office and SAPD don't require any college education unless you have a GED. The quality of the BCSO deputies is low. I've also come across a lot of dumb SAPD officers. I agree with you in that the MMPI should be administered every 5 years or so.

If you have not already done so, I would highly recommend looking at Texas law Shield as a legal services plan for CHL holders, it is a very affordable, they even officer a Commissioned Security Officer plan as well. This way, if you are ever forced into a situation in which you have to use deadly force, they will provide you an attorney free of charge and defend you against any actions resulting from your need to use deadly force. Well worth the $10 or so a month they charge.

They handed me those brochures in the CHL and PPO course. I think I'm done with security; I quit my job as a supervisor over a year ago and went to work a civilian position at a police department. I now teach CJ courses at a career school just waiting for my funding package to be put together for the PhD program. Once I get the stipend and start the instructional assistantship, I'm going to stop working and possibly start the San Antonio College law enforcement academy on the weekends.

[sanantone]

I knew about TCLEOSE not recognizing NA degrees. SAPD requires regional accreditation or state accreditation. I'm not sure if they got that term right. On the other forum, I was told that only one state has state accreditation that is recognized by USDOE. Other states just approve schools to operate legally. I started this thread on BCSO not accepting "internet degrees."
http://www.degreeforum.net/general-educa...tment.html

[EI2HCB]

Sanantone, I agree with your assessment of the security officer as an insurance premium reducer. After 10 years working in security for $10 an hour (or so) I now work for Starbucks at $8.50 which offers me ten free RA college courses, $1000 per year for education. Reduced textbook rates and other perks including full insurance for $75 a month plus I walk two blocks to work and I'm home every night. The average rate for a security officer in Chicago is about $10.00 an hour unarmed $12.00 armed with the requirement to pay about $300 a month for insurance plus two hours driving time. (not including the hundreds of shootings in a city that has very strict gun control) I'm much safer and happier at Starbucks, most of the time Now I know you don't see it as "work" but I find it more interactive than sitting in a gatehouse watching B&W CCTV with an antique revolver.

[sanantone]

Sanantone, I agree with your assessment of the security officer as an insurance premium reducer. After 10 years working in security for $10 an hour (or so) I now work for Starbucks at $8.50 which offers me ten free RA college courses, $1000 per year for education. Reduced textbook rates and other perks including full insurance for $75 a month plus I walk two blocks to work and I'm home every night. The average rate for a security officer in Chicago is about $10.00 an hour unarmed $12.00 armed with the requirement to pay about $300 a month for insurance plus two hours driving time. (not including the hundreds of shootings in a city that has very strict gun control) I'm much safer and happier at Starbucks, most of the time Now I know you don't see it as "work" but I find it more interactive than sitting in a gatehouse watching B&W CCTV with an antique revolver.

Starbucks is work, but it's not a career much like security unless you move into management. The experience one gains in food service often does not pertain to his/her future career. No one cares that I worked at McDonald's.

[defscarlett]

Texas may require 40 hours of training to be an armed officer, but the majority of training is not even firearm related. Standing still and point shooting at a target is not any sort of training for LEO or armed security or any member of society wishing to carry concealed. I think 40 hours could be worthwhile training but it needs to be restructured to include move and shoot, stress shooting and shooting from cover and concealment. The other issue is the instructors teaching courses, they are doing the bare minimum to get by and not actually preparing anyone for a dangerous environment.

[DrJohn]

The security commission course isn't designed solely as course on firearms, it isn't designed to teach you how to shoot either. It is a basic course covering basic concepts in penal code, Code of Criminal Procedures, occupations code as it relates to private security, basic report writing, radio usage and first aid. It is designed to incorporate about 10 hours of training to firearms. The State mandates exactly what must be taught and covered, but it doesn't mandate how long each lesson must take. This gives me as an instructor more freedom to cover other aspects longer or shorter as needed or add something else of value to a course. I can not make the course any shorter but I can add just a little bit of time to the course. Like the police academy, the basic security commission course is just that; a basic course. I think more advanced courses should be offered for security officers, things like report writing, penal code and code of criminal procedures, arrest, search and seizure, ect. Knowledge is power, use it to your advantage.

As I and others have stated before, security is not a career field unless you move into government contracts, corporate security, or management.

Sanantone, I had a very difficult time with contract security at military bases, that job was always handed by the military to much better effectiveness. I have seen only a handful of contract guards at Air Force bases, most Air Force bases that I have been to are now once again using Security Forces personnel to man the gates. Of course I remember the old days of Air Force Security Police personnel manning the gates in service dress uniforms instead of wearing the ABU or BDUs as they do now. (I only mention BDUs because that is what was worn prior to everyone now wearing the ABU - airmen battle uniform). It used to be the best of the best was selected to work the main gate, now it seems that it is a duty you are given for a particular shift period.

I wish more law enforcement agencies would require a bachelors degree to become an officer. It makes for a far more professional agency and also goes a long ways to having job satisfaction. Far to often you have uneducated people in command positions that have control over the educated people which causes for great conflict as one side does not understand the other.

[sanantone]

There are active shooter continuing education courses law enforcement personnel can now take. I was required to take the civilian version of the course for my last job.