The debate between deploying ARMED and UNARMED private security officers is seemingly timeless.
While cost, liability, and client expectations are all part of the decision making process, NOTHING (in our opinion) is more important than the safety of the officers standing guard.
To that point, a recent story out of Florida caught our attention. It appears to be a unique situation where an armed AND unarmed guard confront two shoplifting subjects.
Read the story by clicking the link below and consider the answers to the questions we pose in the following section.
After digesting the news story, what do YOU think about the following questions?
1. How could an INTERMEDIATE option help BOTH officers feel more confident in their abilities in a situation like this?
2. How would audio, video, or photos of the encounter HELP all parties (and businesses) involved in the incident?
3. What are the various LIABILITIES that arise from an encounter like this and could those be MITIGATED with the use of an INTERMEDIATE option?
4. Could there be unanticipated COST IMPLICATIONS to these officers' hiring businesses/agencies based on their actions?
This story raises a lot of questions that may seem too complex to handle at first blush. However, based on your answers to the questions above, do you think an intermediate option could have resulted in a more favorable outcome for all parties involved?
Variations of encounters like these happen every day between unarmed or armed guards and members of the community. Without adapting our "black and white" (armed or unarmed) mindset and considering alternative tools for guards to deploy, how can we expect private securtiy professionals to adapt their behvaior in a world full of gray?