Moderator: carlson1
joke!!
i have tons of hard copy material on the topic. Chris wrote:i'm licensed by the state of Texas to provide a full blown crime prevention inspection, and trained in crime prevention through environmental design. i can get people up to a 15% discount on their homeowner's insurance.
i've done security surveys for huge construction companies and projects, residences, and all kinds of other commercial establishments. the worst one i did was a chemical company. the terrorist thing all of the sudden got them concerned about security. they had the worst security of any place, and they absolutely did not want to spend a penny on it (i don't know why they even called me). and to think this place was right next to a major highway, in the middle of DFW, and an explosion there would have leveled the radius of a half mile to a mile, and resulted in evacuation of half the metroplex. some people just don't have a clue.
luckily they moved a little while after that.
a lot of places don't realize it, but when a security survey is done, it is basically written notification from a subject matter expert that there are known security concerns to the company. i usually have to explain this part in depth before doing the survey, and a handful have declined to continue. part of getting a lawsuit filed against a company for negligence requires foreseeability. in other words, the owner, or person in charge now knows there is a problem, and if they don't take steps to remedy it, they can be held liable, should something happen as a result of them not fixing the issue. in the survey, i might address things they would have not known about otherwise, and could use that as a defense later. when i do a survey, i usually provide the best and most optimal solution, then the most economically feasible option that still addresses the concern. no one should skimp on security, but it's the one thing you won't see any results from. if you beef up security, you might not ever know if it prevented anything. it's hard for managers to justify expenses on stuff that might never happen.
depending on the establishment, and what they're looking to address, these security reports can get pretty involved. the smallest one i ever did for a commercial place was 18 pages. the biggest looked like a novel.
i could go on and on about security issues. a lot of things are pretty simple concepts, and can easily be taught to employees. there are things employers can do to make security a mindset in employees too. if you are serious about it, i can give you my phone number and we can discuss it. like i said, it's a pretty in depth topic.
!! I already have a few in the payroll.. Wanna go to the gunshow this weekend ??Do your reports ever include reccomendations of removal repressive antigun policys and suggest letting CHL holders carry?Chris wrote: depending on the establishment, and what they're looking to address, these security reports can get pretty involved. the smallest one i ever did for a commercial place was 18 pages. the biggest looked like a novel.
oh no. that opens me up to civil liability. my recommendations are for physical security only. what sort of flexibility that place offers its customers is between them, and their customers. i can certainly offer my opinion on the subject, as i do hold a valid CHL, but i would never put that in writing as any sort of suggestion or recommendation. i've only had it come up once, but i would never suggest that a company allow it. that could easily come back to bite me. in that one instance, i basically explained to the owner what the process was, and what his rights were as a business owner. i think he was just interested in a CHL for himself.Liberty wrote:Do your reports ever include reccomendations of removal repressive antigun policys and suggest letting CHL holders carry?Chris wrote: depending on the establishment, and what they're looking to address, these security reports can get pretty involved. the smallest one i ever did for a commercial place was 18 pages. the biggest looked like a novel.
Good point you brought out Popshot and the answer is says the board is very receptive about security concerns. This is a private non-profit member owned organization and has been in existintence since 1911. March 1 is my first session and I will let you know how it goes. A couple friends from the sheriff's office will help me..Popshot wrote:Reysc,
You are going at this in a well-thought out manner.
When determining your curriculum, please consider one other very important issue: Is the management and/or membership receptive to learning about serious safety concerns? If so, are they willing to take action? Without these conditions, success is questionable.
I hope your people are receptive and can learn from you.
That's understandable. And I assume the reverse is also true: that you don't recommend banning, nor go out of your way to explain 30.06 signage.Chris wrote:oh no. that opens me up to civil liability. my recommendations are for physical security only. what sort of flexibility that place offers its customers is between them, and their customers.Liberty wrote:Do your reports ever include reccomendations of removal repressive antigun policys and suggest letting CHL holders carry?
it's never come up. i suspect that most places that are concerned with security are a little more gun savvy than the anti types. one company owner, the one i mentioned earlier, ended up being a big gun type and i spent probably another hour at that business chatting about firearms and hunting trips. he invited me back to stop by and chat again.KBCraig wrote:That's understandable. And I assume the reverse is also true: that you don't recommend banning, nor go out of your way to explain 30.06 signage.Chris wrote:oh no. that opens me up to civil liability. my recommendations are for physical security only. what sort of flexibility that place offers its customers is between them, and their customers.Liberty wrote:Do your reports ever include reccomendations of removal repressive antigun policys and suggest letting CHL holders carry?
Kevin
