First off, I know these guys were limited by the terms of their contract. But to me, this would have been a scenario where violating those terms of the contract could have saved this victim from being beaten. Common sense and basic human compassion should have been applied to this situation. I know most guys on the high end of security contracting, would have stepped in regardless, because that would have been the right thing to do. For the lesser paid, and minimally trained folks who the company really doesn’t care about anyway, then scenarios like this are going to happen. This just happened to be filmed.
From a pragmatic point of view, the guards did exactly what they were supposed to do. If anything, I think Metro’s policy is what is really at fault here, because they hired and trained these folks to just be observers, and that is it. The policy has put these guards into a terrible position, and it is something to think about for us all. Especially after incidents, where organization create knee-jerk reactionary policies and make asinine rules that are supposed to somehow make it impossible for another incident to ever happen again. pffft. For all we know, this ‘just observe’ policy was created as a less than lethal, cheap, and less liability option, as opposed to hiring armed guards who know what they are doing. Who knows, but now that the film is out, and the public has outraged, here we go….
With that said, if you are with a company who has set up policies within the contract that do not meet the realities of what is going on out in the field, then either you need to demand a re-thinking of the contract/policies or leave. While on post, you should be going through your head, every ‘what-if’ situation you can, and game that situation. If you are severely limited by your current policies, and your life or the lives of innocents are impacted negatively by those policies, then you need to say something. Of course be tactful, but still, it needs to be brought up and a supervisor needs to know about it. How else is it to be changed?
Another example, is these unarmed contracts for ship security in the Gulf of Aden? We know pirates attack boats using all the weapons of warfare, yet there are those in the industry that continue to promote this concept that you can defeat those tools of warfare with less than lethal options. It does not work. An RPG trumps a water cannon, every time. AK 47’s trump LRAD sound machines, every time. And when we watch entire security teams jumping over the side of boats in order to escape the wrath of an attacker, all because they were not able to defend the boat with their less than lethal tools, then what was the purpose in the first place for hiring these guys? The same rule applies to this deal in Seattle.
The other point I want to make is the money and liability of security these days. Thanks to a violence averse and litigation happy society, private security has been weakened in many places throughout the world. There must be a recognition for the fact that security is a human endeavor, and sometimes it is not perfect. How could it be? Contracts should reflect this, and they should have protections for the guards so they can actually do their job.
Or that companies continue to play the odds, and think they can ‘do without’ just fine, and luck will be on the side of their ineffectual and low cost guards following weak policies. Pffft. Criminals and terrorists are laughing at us.
We also have criminal and terrorist type elements who know how to exploit this stuff. The obvious angle, is the kinetic one–just use a gun and you have now put the fear of god in that unarmed, minimally trained, low paid guard. That equates to those thugs doing whatever they want. Criminals or terrorists could also make a film of these pathetic guards, throw it up on youtube, and the thing makes the rounds across the world. If their intention was to show some weakness of a security apparatus or destroy the legitimacy of a state’s institutions through propaganda, well then they just accomplished that task.
Since everyone has camera phones now, this reality becomes very sobering to think about. As security professionals, we need to think how our actions will look to the public or innocents, if in fact we were filmed. Of course there will always be someone who will film it, edit it, and try to take it out of context. But still, we have to be focused on doing the right thing out there. That is another reason why I like the Jundism concept of ‘be the guy that does it right, when no one is looking’. Let me know what you think. –Matt
—————————————————————–
Seattle authorities to review security rules after transit beating
February 11, 2010
Seattle, Washington (CNN) — Video of unarmed transit guards watching a girl being beaten on a bus tunnel platform has prompted Seattle authorities to review guidelines that kept the guards from intervening.
“Public safety is our top priority. I am appalled by the sight of uniformed guards standing by while a person was kicked and beaten,” King County Executive Dow Constantine said in a statement released Wednesday.
“I have ordered a full review of all operating polices that govern Metro’s contract with civilian security guards to determine what changes must be made. People have an expectation of safety when riding public transit, and we must take every measure we can to assure that.”