Member Survey: Are Private Security Officers Being Attacked More Frequently?

After a rash of recent attacks in the Palm Springs area, local television news station KESQ-TV is highlighting the increase in assaults and attacks on private security officers in the Coachella Valley. 

The article on the TV news website says, in part:

Police say it's becoming a disturbing trend -- security guards being threatened and attacked by criminals.

Two security companies in the desert NewsChannel 3 spoke to both agree that security guards are being targeted more now than ever.

They say it's because of a lack of respect for what these men and woman do. What they're doing, they say, is trying to protect the community.

In May, two Bower Security guards were shot while patrolling a shopping center in Cathedral City.

On June 9th, a 66-year-old security guard was protecting a housing development when he was pulled from his car and beaten to death.

And just this past weekend, a security guard patrolling Time Waner Cable in Desert Hot Springs was carjacked.

CALSAGA wants to know whether members believe this is a growing problem throughout California, or isolated to the Palm Springs area.  CALSAGA has considered sponsoring legislation to increase penalties for attacking a security officer, and as a possible interim, to require BSIS to keep statistics to show whether attacks on private security are increasing.

Let us know your thoughts and experience on this issue.  Please clink on the comments link below and tell us whether you are experiencing an increase in attacks on your officers, and what you think about possbile legislation to address this problem.

Comments

[Roger Combs of Copper Eagle Security]

Yes assault on security officers is a problem. Most are minor, but we experience it at least once a month or more. Most recently Monday this week. LASD looks upon it as minor as we are not police officers and rarely if ever will help us prosecute. We have even had a window shot out of a patrol car that was written off by LASD as minor vandalism instead of assault with a deadly weapon. Security officers are in the front line often more than police officers and assault on a security officer should be as serious as an assault on a police officer.

[Rob Warcholik]

Personally I believe these incidents are isolated. Maybe the heat of the desert is making some people act irrationally. Until more events are documented throughout the state it can be assumed there is only a small number of people acting in this manner towards security officers. If copycat incidents follow in other areas, then we may consider this a much larger issue.

[David Williams]

Yes I think penalties should be increased for attacks on security officers especially with the amount of current training security guards need to go through as well as FBI & DOJ background checks. It's had to believe that this hasn't been done by the State yet. Just over this past weekend one of my people were almost shot when a gang member arrived at an event we were doing and shot and killed a patron standing next to our unarmed security guard. Our employee took control of the situation secured the building kept patrons back until trained medical and law enforcement personnel arrived. Had the gunman missed and hit our guard it could have been a worse situation for his family, our company, and be another industry statistic. The victim was an also an alleged gang member himself. Tougher penalties on assaults to security officers are needed now.

[M Stickley]

Unfortunately, there has been a rise in violence period over the last decade. Security officers do deal with the public more frequently than police officers do thereby increasing the chance of a voilent attack. Some attacks are specific (as it would seem in the Palm Springs area), but most are spur of the moment. Security officers catch the brunt of law enforcement bashing or negative humor just because the public sees them as second rate, wanna-be police officers that could not make it. Security companies would be wise to train their officers not only how to do thier job, but how to deal with people. Most potentially violent situations can be resolved wihtout injury if the officer knows how to deal with people. It would be beneficial to the security industry if attacks on security officers carried a more stringent penalt. But, we can only expect the public to support it if we continue to improve the professional image that we portray to the public.

[Dee Reynolds ABM Security]

Interesting to note that the media comments refer to " security guards" while member comments refer to " security officers"

It took CCPOA several years to change the image and profile of their members. They have become a respected member of the law enforcement community due in great part to changing their name from " Guard" to " Officer"

If we want to achieve any level of comparison to sworn officers, we need to embark on a campaign to change our image. That change could start by universally dropping the term " GUARD".

While our organization needs to modernize it's name, BSIS should not be issuing " Guard Cards", but " Security Officer License" or something close.

[William Nelson]

During the past two years there has been a definate increase of attacks against our officers. The only arrest I have made while a field supervisor was because a suspect was going after one of my officers. Since that time we have had two different occassions at MetroLink stations where an officer was punched because someone missed their train and at another station where the officer was stabbed. Burglars attacked one of our officers at a Waste Management facility and hit him in the face with a fire extinguisher. Officers have had a knive pulled on them while conducting a lawful tow from a fire lane. They have also been threatened with a claw hammer. The attacks are on the increase and also the threats. Private Security officers conduct a great service of deterrance to crime and do not get paid much for doing so. The penality for attacks against these people should be severe and have prompt attention by law enforcement.

[Maureen Weinstein]

Our company provides service in a fairly small community. We have not seen a rise in attacks on officers, but we are very aware of the dangers of placing officers in high risk areas. Efforts need to be made to educate the public about the services provided by security. Many do not realize the importance of the service. The media has poked fun at the security industry over the years and it is an uphill climb to bring the public up to speed to reality. Our media is extremely powerful in shaping a reputation for a profession. These officers deserve to be paid a higher wage and to be respected for what they do.

[Tri City Patrol, Inc. / John Balm]

In the past 18 months we have seen a 40% increase in attacks on your officers in areas that we have serviced for the past 5 years. We believe this increase is in part that there is no respect for the Security Industry and no sever penalties when a Security Officer is attacked. We have even been told by local Law Enforcement that attacks on Security Officers is not taken as serious as an attack on a civilian when submitted to the District Attorney for prosecution since it is a part of the job. I strongly believe that there should
be increased penalties for attacking a security officer, and legislation to address this problem should be strongly supported.

[Mike McCorkle]

I agree that attacks on security officers are on the rise. The opinion of most people is you are not a cop you can not tell me what to do. I have had several cases of my staff being attacked on duty. One guard was on foot patrol in an apartment complex when he was jumped by three teens. They ended up breaking his leg, the attackers were never caught. Another guard on duty at a nightclub was bitten to the point that the skin was broken. The attacker was just found guilty in court. The list goes on from there especially in our nightclub division. The sad fact is that many police officers feel it goes with the job. However those same officers use a different approach if one of their own is hit. We provide a public service and assist in areas to bring down crime. we are called upon to meet higher standards in training. yet we have not improved the standards to protect our guards. The best way would be to increase the penalty for anyone who harms a guard in anyway. We strongly support any legislation that will address what has been a problem and seems to be getting worse.

[Joel Wiesner]

I don't know if they are being attacked more frequently or
rather the media, finally, is noticing these attacks and reporting more than before?

Perhaps since September 11, 2001 the community is finally waking up and realizing that private security personnel are a vital part of the protection entity for this country and hence need to be appreciated and recognized more

[Nolan L Flowers]

I am in agreement with all the statements that have been posted, however, we also must look at the private sector in which we serve. Most clients thinks that our industry is a low paying industry and want pay for adequate protection that allows the security firms to properly train and enforce rules that is consistant with the Law. When an Officer loses a life, we can't just look at that Officer as a body to be replaced. We are at ground zero and the police can't be everywhere. But if legislation doesn't care whether or not these Security Officers put their lives on the line on a daily bases, then why should the crimminals who break the Law. Also, if Law enforcement doesn't support the Security Industry, then we have failed to show crime that we are a team working hand in hand to help serve our communities and business. Finally, the executive branch of any Security Firm needs to understand that if we are not properly training our Officer to Observe and report, then they have failed in their duties as support for the Officers that they send out to serve our communities and businesses.

[Steve Wagner]

Yes, stiffer penalties for assaulting a security guard, just like EMT’s.

However, private security should tighten up how it operates.

Security guards should be unarmed and have no duty belt. It should be clear they will take no action and clients should know they will take no action.

Patrol officers should be armed and should have POST standards of training in all levels of force and officer safety tactics. They should also be educated in state laws and possibly have status like a “public officer,” not peace officer.

Professionally prepared people make less of a victim and people can see that difference. BSIS needs to make different training requirements for different security jobs.

[Richard DeFressine]

I sent CALSAGA an e-mail regarding this issue back in April '06 with no reply. As the Security Manager of a fairly large and popular ski resort in the Lake Tahoe region, I have seen or know of recent violent physical attacks on officers in our area. Early that year, two Harrahs Casino officers were stabbed by an individual that they were attempting to escort off the property. Both required hospitalization for somewhat serious injuries. In March '06, one of my officers was attacked by a small group of resort guests that were engaged in a scullfe between themselves. He was punched twice in the face (without provocation) while attemting to investigate the disturbance. His injuries involved a trip to the emergency room and resulted in a severly bruised mandible and a substantial concussion which required him to miss several days of work. Three individuals were arrested and convicted of simple battery, 242 p.c. After some research I found that there are no special circumstances for private security officers such as those listed in Penal Code 243 that pertain to other occupations with an elevated risk of assault. This section covers punishment for battery on peace officers, custodial officers, firefighters, EMT's, lifeguards, process servers, traffic officers and animal control officers. Should'nt "uniformed private security officers" be included in this list? I have not seen any statistics on the issue, however, I would think that security officers would have a far greater chance of being assaulted than a lifeguard! As the role of "private security" increases so should the role of the law-makers. Honest, dependable, well trained officers deserve the same protections that these other public servants expect. I believe it's well past time to revise the law books.

[Jeff Flint]

Richard, I don;t have a record of your email from last year, but we apologize if we did not reply.

However, I would like to thank all the members for the very fruitful discussion on this topic, and as we pursue this idea of legislation, we will take it all into account.

We welcome members to continue to utilize this blog forum to comment on issues of interest to the membership.

Yesterday was the most daily "hits" and most daily comments we have had on the blog since we launched it, and we hope you will continue to participate. You need not wait on a blog entry called "Member Survey" to comment.

[Bill Petitt]

240/242, 245 assault/battery sections of the CA penal code should apply to security officers as it does with law enforcement, fire, medical, rescue workers, etc.

[Andrew Clark]

I believe that there should be escalated penalties for an attack on a security officer in the performance of their duties. Certainly there should be a mandatory minimum prison term for the murder of a security officer (including armored car personnel.)

What I see as problematic is the unfortunate fact that some "security" (typically neither licensed nor regulated, I'm thinking of bar bouncers and bottom-basement events staff) actively picks fights with people. If they were able to use this code section, I think most DAs would simply not enforce the law after it were changed.

I would argue that CALSAGA should in fact push to add us to PC 240/242, 245 but add (or accept as a compromise) that it would only apply to licensed or registered security personnel in the performance of their duties. Thus anyone with a guard card, or the proprietary registration would be covered -- but the kind of unlicensed thugs who wear the big SECURITY shirts and caps as if it were a license to rumble would not be covered.

[B. Chappell]

I agree with Mr. Petitt but also would add that if you get assaulted "off duty" because of your security related employment duties. I would also add that if one identifies him or her self as security i.e. Loss prevention with credentials it would be covered. I too e-mailed CALSAGA about this issue as well as my legislator to not avail.

[Darin Williams]

I agree with much of what has been said in regard to the apparent rise in attacks on security officers.I believe Richard DeFressine had it right when he referred to the increasing role of private security in our society. There are simply more security officers among the general public than before, and therein lies the greater odds for physical assaults against our officers.
Of course, there is also the subject of the officers themselves. First, let me be clear, this is not to condemn those whose unforntunate accounts we have read about in this blog. However, as more and more of us move our operations away from the office towers and into the streets, the situation today calls for officers who are physically fit, and who have the mental frame of reference that is geared towards survival in this brave new world.

[K. Delacruz]

I read all the posts and disagree with Mr. Flowers on not wearing a duty belt. Appearance is half the battle with use of authority when dealing with offenders. Training and tactics in how to deal with issues should be implemented and laws should be changed to protect officers. Law enforcement officers may carry off duty for protection. Security Officers provide the same service minus writing tickets and responding to calls but wear a badge and uniform in the performance of their duties but are limited in their ability to protect themselves. Training should be afforded to security officers and H.R. 218 should extend to the protection of Security officers with proper training in concealed carry as well. California is the only state which puts restrictions on concealed carry.

[Victor Polek, CPP]

A current article in USA TODAY explores the surge in brutal attacks against police officers, and the resulting sharp increase in police officers murdered in the line of duty over just the past year.

If law enforcement officers are no longer feared or respected in the criminal community, how much less are private security officers?

See article at this link: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-10-14-copshoot_N.htm?csp=34

[William R. Petitt]

I think it would be appropriate to first consider completing a survey to find out how large an issue attacks on security officers is. The results I think would lend support in making changes in the laws of each state. Then, hit the ledgislature up for laws that would address the security industry as it relates to assualts/battery. I once approached, then, Assembly Woman Spier who is currently a CA US Senitor. She wrote me back stating that she thought I had a good idea. Spire maybe someone to collaborate with. I think she's terming out but would be a good place to start. I also think it would be very appropriate that CALSAG because of their political might, strongly consider acting on this issue immedately.

[Joshua Burns]

The security industry is an evolving industry with an increase in standards, background checks and training, It only seems natural that protection under the law to increase the penalty for attacks on security officers is the next course. Many security officers are involved in high incident public contacts, this goes for the private security firm as well as in-house loss prevention teams, often far more than just “observe and report” but more hands on and enforcement oriented. This industry should account for the reality of the job required and move beyond just an observer role but that of an intervention role, therefore the laws need to change as a whole to accommodate this progression and sign of the times.

[Terminator]

I think we need to take a hard look at what it is the private security industry provides. The business goal of a Private security company is about sales and money. It's a business. I currently work for a company out of Foster City, CA that has turned over 19 of it's 22 staff memembers in the past eleven months. I recently overheard a Branch Manager say "we owe them nothing!" With that mind set you wonder why there is such little respect for private security?

Private security outnumbers police in the US by 2 to 1. A protection industry outnumbering law enforcement and it continues to struggle for respect. I think we need to evaluate the industry and decide what it is we want to achieve and how to get there.

I think the private security industry needs to consider many issues. Such as training, education levels compenstaion, benefits and retirement packages before it decides it wants to put firearms in the hands of a poorly skilled and under trained security officers.

Security officer are attacked partially because the industry just doesn't recognize the risks involved or mitigate those risks with the right person or level of training.

Updating the penal codes to include security officers is a step in the right direction but wont stop the assaults/battery.

[Bill Chappell]

Is CALSAGA working on lobbying to get increased penalties for assault and or battery on security officers, private or proprietary? I have seen nothing moving in that direction by CALSAGA.How about an update on any progress.

[Jeff Flint]

We are looking at legislation to do this. However, given the state budget, it will be challenging to do any legislation which has a cost, and the state always counts any legislation that increases a penalty as an increased cost in prison time. So it may be challenging to pass in the short term, but we will keep arguing for it in the long term.