Comments on: But they’re better trained, right? http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html defending our rights from the ramparts Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:20:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: walls of the city http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2585 walls of the city Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:31:51 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2585 <strong>Phil Williams reads WOTC?</strong> Apparently, WTVF's "Investigative Reporter" Phil Williams reads this blog. Tonight's story? Armed Security Training Requirements.The teaser talks about "several high profile shootings across the state" but I haven't heard of any. Three weeks ago, I wro... Phil Williams reads WOTC?

Apparently, WTVF’s “Investigative Reporter” Phil Williams reads this blog. Tonight’s story? Armed Security Training Requirements.The teaser talks about “several high profile shootings across the state” but I haven’t heard of any. Three weeks ago, I wro…

]]> By: Linoge http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2584 Linoge Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:11:52 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2584 No, Steve, my last comment was directed at you, specifically, and was not an allusion to some stereotype (methinks he dost protest too much...). When you get the time to look up "plank mote eye" in Google, I would suggest you do so, especially concerning how you are accusing <em>others</em> of attacking fellow 2nd Amendment advocates, whilst doing a damned fine job of that yourself. Now, regarding my "reading for comprehension", so good of you to launch into ad hominem attacks already. If <em>you</em> would care to look back at what you wrote, and actually <em>look</em> at it, you would realize that it is not immediately clear which category of "officer" you are referring to. Thank you for clearing that up, though in a amusingly high-handed and condescending way. Congratulations on your permits, and your service history. Now that you have finished sharing your <em>anecdotes</em>, however, would you be so kind as to present some <em>evidence</em>? As I said before (though you seem to have some reading comprehension problems of your own), if you have concrete examples and numbers to provide, please feel free to provide them. But the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy simply never works in the stead of hard evidence. No, Steve, my last comment was directed at you, specifically, and was not an allusion to some stereotype (methinks he dost protest too much…). When you get the time to look up “plank mote eye” in Google, I would suggest you do so, especially concerning how you are accusing others of attacking fellow 2nd Amendment advocates, whilst doing a damned fine job of that yourself.
Now, regarding my “reading for comprehension”, so good of you to launch into ad hominem attacks already. If you would care to look back at what you wrote, and actually look at it, you would realize that it is not immediately clear which category of “officer” you are referring to. Thank you for clearing that up, though in a amusingly high-handed and condescending way.
Congratulations on your permits, and your service history. Now that you have finished sharing your anecdotes, however, would you be so kind as to present some evidence? As I said before (though you seem to have some reading comprehension problems of your own), if you have concrete examples and numbers to provide, please feel free to provide them. But the “appeal to authority” logical fallacy simply never works in the stead of hard evidence.

]]> By: Steve in TN http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2583 Steve in TN Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:53:35 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2583 Linoge, I think you have not read for comprehension what I have said since I have already addressed you "challenge(s)" above. As one who has acquired both the permit and armed security card for Tennessee, who has worked in almost every facet of the private security industry, and who has four years' experience as a peace officer I do believe I can tell the difference between a security officer and a police officer. If you wish to read what I have written above and respond without the polemically disruptive phases such as "calm down" and the like, I'll continue. However, as I alluded to in the post above your latest, too often the Blart myth of mall security is given as an objection to real world reality, as you did in your last comment. Linoge, I think you have not read for comprehension what I have said since I have already addressed you “challenge(s)” above. As one who has acquired both the permit and armed security card for Tennessee, who has worked in almost every facet of the private security industry, and who has four years’ experience as a peace officer I do believe I can tell the difference between a security officer and a police officer.
If you wish to read what I have written above and respond without the polemically disruptive phases such as “calm down” and the like, I’ll continue. However, as I alluded to in the post above your latest, too often the Blart myth of mall security is given as an objection to real world reality, as you did in your last comment.

]]> By: Linoge http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2582 Linoge Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:31:34 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2582 Funny, Steve - speaking as a handgun carry permit holder, I <em>do</em> carry my firearm and look out for the safety of myself and my family every day. So, now, who is attacking whom? You seem to be confusing/conflating "police officer" with "security officer" - the two are separate, distinct, and disjoint sets, especially here in Tennessee. You will never have any argument from me that a police officer is better-trained than an average handgun carry permit holder. However, if you try to allege that the armed <em>security guards</em> strolling through malls are better trained... well, the numbers simply do not add up. Now, if you have specific examples to bring up concerning what additional training that <em>armed security guards</em> (<em>not</em> police officers) go through, and what training they do before every shift, feel free to field it here and now. WizardPC presented hard evidence and numbers in his post, and now that responsibility is incumbent upon you, since you are challenging his premises. And while I cannot speak for WizardPC, I think I am relatively safe in saying that <em>there was no attack intended</em>. Presenting the numbers of hours of training an armed <em>security guard</em> is required to have is not an attack, and does point out that their <em>required training</em> is not significantly greater than ours. As for optional/elective training on the part of the guards and their employers, that argument holds water in <em>both</em> directions. So calm down already, before you impale yourself on the plank in your eye. Funny, Steve – speaking as a handgun carry permit holder, I do carry my firearm and look out for the safety of myself and my family every day. So, now, who is attacking whom?
You seem to be confusing/conflating “police officer” with “security officer” – the two are separate, distinct, and disjoint sets, especially here in Tennessee. You will never have any argument from me that a police officer is better-trained than an average handgun carry permit holder. However, if you try to allege that the armed security guards strolling through malls are better trained… well, the numbers simply do not add up.
Now, if you have specific examples to bring up concerning what additional training that armed security guards (not police officers) go through, and what training they do before every shift, feel free to field it here and now. WizardPC presented hard evidence and numbers in his post, and now that responsibility is incumbent upon you, since you are challenging his premises.
And while I cannot speak for WizardPC, I think I am relatively safe in saying that there was no attack intended. Presenting the numbers of hours of training an armed security guard is required to have is not an attack, and does point out that their required training is not significantly greater than ours. As for optional/elective training on the part of the guards and their employers, that argument holds water in both directions.
So calm down already, before you impale yourself on the plank in your eye.

]]> By: Steve in TN http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2581 Steve in TN Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:21:57 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2581 <i>Uh, Steve, he was not attacking armed security. Rather, he was pointing out that armed security is not really any better or more-trained than handgun carry permit holders, which is a favorite argument of the people you would like us to attack.</i> Armed security IS better and more trained than the average permit holder. That is MY point. For my reasoning please see the other commments I've posted here. Go after Hardaway, please, and not your fellow 2am supporters. What things like this post do, when unchallenged, is perpetuate the myth of the lazy slob who straps on a revolver and sleeps his way through his shift in a remote post. Uh, Steve, he was not attacking armed security. Rather, he was pointing out that armed security is not really any better or more-trained than handgun carry permit holders, which is a favorite argument of the people you would like us to attack.
Armed security IS better and more trained than the average permit holder. That is MY point. For my reasoning please see the other commments I’ve posted here.
Go after Hardaway, please, and not your fellow 2am supporters. What things like this post do, when unchallenged, is perpetuate the myth of the lazy slob who straps on a revolver and sleeps his way through his shift in a remote post.

]]> By: Steve in TN http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2580 Steve in TN Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:12:24 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2580 The offense is that you are ignoring evidence. Armed officers, as I pointed out above, do this every day. Permit holders do NOT. In addition, in this scenario the permit holder is much more likely to be in condition white than the armed officer. Diners are eating and socializing while the armed officer is on alert looking for whatever trouble his uniform did not deter. You are stuck on the initial security course. Typical armed security officers undergo further training above and beyond the initial course and, as I state above, armed officers train every time they go on duty. Hardaway in this narrow case is correct: The typical armed officer is better trained than the typical permit holder. The WRONG that Hardaway did was to try to mandate that non-signed establishments MUST hire armed security. Places that allow permit carry are, by their very nature, more safe than gun free zones. Forcing one class of business to expend resources that the competition does not for political purposes is wrong. That should be the point of objection to Hardaway. In truth, the "gun free zones" are the ones that are in dire need of armed officers. However, your attack on armed officers is misplaced and misguided. Further, from my observation Tennessee officers generally are more professional regarding their duty than most other states. Poor target selection, in my opinion. The offense is that you are ignoring evidence. Armed officers, as I pointed out above, do this every day. Permit holders do NOT. In addition, in this scenario the permit holder is much more likely to be in condition white than the armed officer. Diners are eating and socializing while the armed officer is on alert looking for whatever trouble his uniform did not deter.
You are stuck on the initial security course. Typical armed security officers undergo further training above and beyond the initial course and, as I state above, armed officers train every time they go on duty.
Hardaway in this narrow case is correct: The typical armed officer is better trained than the typical permit holder. The WRONG that Hardaway did was to try to mandate that non-signed establishments MUST hire armed security. Places that allow permit carry are, by their very nature, more safe than gun free zones. Forcing one class of business to expend resources that the competition does not for political purposes is wrong. That should be the point of objection to Hardaway.
In truth, the “gun free zones” are the ones that are in dire need of armed officers.
However, your attack on armed officers is misplaced and misguided. Further, from my observation Tennessee officers generally are more professional regarding their duty than most other states. Poor target selection, in my opinion.

]]> By: Linoge http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2579 Linoge Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:59:37 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2579 Uh, Steve, he was not attacking armed security. Rather, he was pointing out that armed security is not really any better or more-trained than handgun carry permit holders, which is a favorite argument of the people you would like us to attack. So, in short, he <em>was</em> attacking "legit targets". You might want to check <em>your</em> fire... Uh, Steve, he was not attacking armed security. Rather, he was pointing out that armed security is not really any better or more-trained than handgun carry permit holders, which is a favorite argument of the people you would like us to attack.
So, in short, he was attacking “legit targets”.
You might want to check your fire…

]]> By: wizardpc http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2578 wizardpc Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:49:30 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2578 Not real sure where the offense is. Hardaway and the like make the argument that armed guards are better trained than carry permit holders. I argue, with evidence, that the state mandated training isn't all that different for the two groups. If they trust one, they should trust the other. That goes for everybody. Not real sure where the offense is. Hardaway and the like make the argument that armed guards are better trained than carry permit holders.
I argue, with evidence, that the state mandated training isn’t all that different for the two groups.
If they trust one, they should trust the other. That goes for everybody.

]]> By: Steve in TN http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2577 Steve in TN Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:33:36 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2577 When will 2am supporters learn to shoot at legit targets? Armed security is NOT it. Despite your intentions, this is what you have done. Go after the proper targets, which are the opponents of carry permits and those who seek to restrict our right to self defense by establishing "gun free" zones. I worked as armed private security for many years. I also have four years as a peace officer under my belt. I can say without reservation that the average armed officer is better equipped to handle AND DETER confrontational situations in the setting described (diners at a restaurant with an armed guard) because the officers do this every day and are alert. The permit holder is not at attention every day for entire shifts and is distracted by EATING and SOCIALIZING. Remember basic firearms training: Practice Makes Perfect. Armed officers practice looking for potential problems every minute of every shift. Permit holders, by and large, do not. Private Security's FIRST duty is to deter clients' loss by being VISIBLE and ALERT. Patrons at a restaurant do not fit that description. Everyone goes into Condition White at times. Armed officers on duty are much less inclined to do so. You identified your target (Representative Hardaway (D-Mem)) right off the bat. And then you strayed to the friendlies... I look forward to future ON TARGET posts. When will 2am supporters learn to shoot at legit targets? Armed security is NOT it. Despite your intentions, this is what you have done.
Go after the proper targets, which are the opponents of carry permits and those who seek to restrict our right to self defense by establishing “gun free” zones.
I worked as armed private security for many years. I also have four years as a peace officer under my belt. I can say without reservation that the average armed officer is better equipped to handle AND DETER confrontational situations in the setting described (diners at a restaurant with an armed guard) because the officers do this every day and are alert. The permit holder is not at attention every day for entire shifts and is distracted by EATING and SOCIALIZING. Remember basic firearms training: Practice Makes Perfect. Armed officers practice looking for potential problems every minute of every shift. Permit holders, by and large, do not.
Private Security’s FIRST duty is to deter clients’ loss by being VISIBLE and ALERT. Patrons at a restaurant do not fit that description. Everyone goes into Condition White at times. Armed officers on duty are much less inclined to do so.
You identified your target (Representative Hardaway (D-Mem)) right off the bat. And then you strayed to the friendlies… I look forward to future ON TARGET posts.

]]> By: Linoge http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2009/06/but_theyre_better_trained_right.html#comment-2576 Linoge Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:52:00 +0000 http://www.wallsofthecity.net/?p=1624#comment-2576 But... but... but... that is half-again as much training! Really, I have never really understood why some people will trust certain people with firearms, and not certain other people. If someone is going to be unstable and go on a murderous rampage, no amount of training will fix/change that. Accuracy certainly does increase with practice, but private firearm owners often end up practicing more often than some police departments. And as for security guards... yeah, I think you just blew that <em>right</em> out of the water :). But… but… but… that is half-again as much training!
Really, I have never really understood why some people will trust certain people with firearms, and not certain other people. If someone is going to be unstable and go on a murderous rampage, no amount of training will fix/change that. Accuracy certainly does increase with practice, but private firearm owners often end up practicing more often than some police departments.
And as for security guards… yeah, I think you just blew that right out of the water :) .

]]>