Devonai
Member
This backs up my opinion that "unarmed" security is the dumbest idea of all time.
"Hey, this building/facility is a soft target. Let's put a 63 year-old retiree out front!"
If you have an unarmed security force "protecting" your building, aren't you insulted? I would complain to the management.
Being armed isn't the end of the argument, however. I worked for Brink's for three months; talk about a tactically idiotic situation. I went on to work in undercover asset protection which makes much more sense. It seems to me that the only reason to hire an armored car company like Brink's or Loomis-Fargo is if you need 100 boxes of quarters delivered. Otherwise using a plainclothes service makes much more sense. Not only is it less expensive but there's no big armored bullseye stopping in front of your building at the same time every day.
"Hey, this building/facility is a soft target. Let's put a 63 year-old retiree out front!"
If you have an unarmed security force "protecting" your building, aren't you insulted? I would complain to the management.
Being armed isn't the end of the argument, however. I worked for Brink's for three months; talk about a tactically idiotic situation. I went on to work in undercover asset protection which makes much more sense. It seems to me that the only reason to hire an armored car company like Brink's or Loomis-Fargo is if you need 100 boxes of quarters delivered. Otherwise using a plainclothes service makes much more sense. Not only is it less expensive but there's no big armored bullseye stopping in front of your building at the same time every day.