Private Security Expert : Security Worker Broke Cardinal Rule

a shooting happened thursday 3 killed and injured 14 at Hesston, Kansas a cop thinks this started by protection abuse the gunman was fired Excel Industries then The first person Ford shot was the man driving with his two children, and I quote “Walton said. Walton said the gunman later shot and wounded a second person, stealing that person's car, before heading to back to Excel Industries. A 911 call came in at about 5 p.m. CT. Ford was had an assault rifle and a automatic pistol, I quote “Walton said. Excel Industries' CEO, Paul Mullet, said Friday that his first priority is his employees' "safety and wellness." Mullet added that his company is fully cooperating with law enforcement

With municipal and state budgets being slashed across the nation, in response to the prolonged economic recession which devastated America's bottom line, many professional police forces have been compelled to reallocate resources or reduce their numbers. To fill the void in law enforcement left by these cuts to police budgets, many private companies have become increasingly reliant on the services provided by the private security industry. Although private security officers safeguard our apartment buildings after sundown, patrol mall parking lots to prevent theft, and enhance public safety at sporting events, most members of society fail to ascribe the same sense of heroic duty to private security officers as they do the police. Indeed, criminal justice researchers have consistently demonstrated that "without the services of private industry, a gaping, colossal, protection vacuum would exist in the distribution of justice, [and] the protection of assets and facilities" (Nemeth, 2011), but nonetheless private security officers are not afforded the same respect or legal protections as traditional law enforcement officials. One of the most alarming trends to develop in the last decade, as private security contracting grew from a niche occupation to a full-fledged industry, is the rising rate of incidence involving private security officers discharging their service weapons in the line of duty, and being charged with manslaughter or even first degree murder simply for doing

Assume a officer faces the subsequent deadly force situation: He responds, together with 2 different officers, to a residence as a results of a 911 call from the house owner. Dispatch reports the homeowner’s son vulnerable her with a table knife, however she was able to shake off the residence.

As a police officer, the major objectives are to maintain order, enforce the law, protect one’s property, and to save lives. In addition, police are divided into two roles based on how they perform their duties. The two roles of a police officer are a public servant and a crime fighter. A police officer whose role as a public servant is to serve all types of people, as well as criminals. Public servants regularly provide advice and make judgments as to the degree of risk they should take with the public. Many decisions involving risk are relatively easy to make, but others are complex and significant consequences (Kernaghan and Langford, 2016). These risks may involve using force and the consequences could be media backlash or a potential termination. Public servants abide by the oath and uphold the integrity and honor of the organization as an officer. Also, public servant officers like to play it safe because they like to be known as ordinary citizens who like to go home to their

Another major reason why we should be able to carry concealed hand guns is for the protection of our self, families and other. The opponents support prohibition of guns as they claim concealed handguns are not effective methods of self-defense. A person carrying a concealed gun for self-defense is more likely to be shot during an assault than a victim who has no gun. Victims having guns are 4.5 times likely to be shot in an assault than victims without guns as they are not able to use concealed guns as attackers overpower them and also surprise them. In everyday life, there is a chance you will be put in a situation where self-defense will be needed and there is also a higher chance that the criminal or person you are protecting yourself from will be armed. We can all conjure up the night mare scenario of being defenseless in a violent confrontation with a burglar, mugger, carjacker, rapist, or gangs of youth. Violent criminals will always

relationship with police. The officers involved have been placed on desk duty and their guns

Guns and other equipment in an officer’s arsenal play a key role in the officers safety as well as the safety of others

Multiple videos of police involved shootings have surfaced on the internet over the past few years raising the question; should police be carry firearms? A few countries have already disarmed their patrol officers and left only a few specialized armed units. There are some that would believe the same should be done in the United States. However disarming officers would have disastrous results. Police officers must be armed to project force, secure a crime scene, and defend the lives of others.

In numberless events where a law enforcement officer is accused of acting violent against an innocent suspect, the officer is accused of using a weapon, either lethal or nonlethal. An officer’s code of conduct/ethics is normally the determining factor for an officer when deciding how to react to a situation. Although the majority of people believe that all officers have the same codes of conduct/ethics, countless departments set their own in place (Dwyer 1). The majority of the departments have a separate code of conduct/ethics than what the officers learned in the academy.

In a recent interview, Florida representative Clovis Watson, a former police officer says, “As a cop, would you want to go to a scene, where you have a suspect who had a gun shooting, and you have 30 or 40 other people with a gun on their

Police officers have been a major problem with contributing to the increasing number of murders in the United States. By eliminating the catalyst to all these murders: lethal weapons or guns, not only will there be less deaths but the people will feel safer knowing there is not a chance of them getting shot because of

To understand the violations within the scenario, we need to look at the scenario in its entirety and then break it down bit by bit. The fact is, police officers perform duties that include apprehending suspected criminals, providing citizens with protection, aiding people in distress, and maintaining the safety of our streets and communities (Kappeler, 2006). They must make some very tough decisions as will be apparent in the scenario that will be discussed. As stated earlier, there are a few law violations in the scenario, but there is also a possibility of two different civil liability issues that may arise out of the officer’s decisions in the scenario. The possibility of civil liability exists when police officers fail to perform their assigned duties, perform them in a negligent fashion, abuse their authority, or just make poor decisions (Kappeler,

If you have ever been in a life threatening situation with no way to defend yourself, being denied access to a firearm makes the situation worse.  Many law abiding citizens that feel threatened are not able to obtain a firearm for protection.  Innocent people are dying while criminals are getting away with gun related crimes.  There can be many regulations and laws against guns, but if a person wants a gun they will find a way to get one.  The thought of criminals having guns in their possession is a scary thought, but would you want to be the one who is unarmed?  Research shows there is no direct correlation between gun control and lower crime rates; therefore, denying law abiding citizens access to weapons for protection is unfair

Those that have the right to conceal a fire arm under the 2nd amendment; which states that all people have the right to keep and bear arms, should have their permit with them at all times. In today’s world, there shouldn’t be tolerance and leniency for unreasonable search and seizures, due to the fact of high crime rates in our country. For the reasons mentioned above I do not think is proper for police departments to restrict the authority that police officers are granted with. Us citizens depend on the law and police forces to protect us from high crime. With that in mind, it’s unfortunate that the majority of stops and murders are occurring in African American communities, but regardless of race law enforcement officials have the right to stop any individual that seems suspicious, even though a frisk is a violation of the fourth amendment since it protects people and not places; protecting the rights of citizens when there is no reasonable cause for a stop and frisk. In my opinion, just by capturing suspicious acts should be enough evidence to stop and frisk any encounter individual regardless of

There are a lot of arguments all around the world in this subject. Politicians, teachers, sociologists and psychologists declare their ideas and also they write some essays about if the poliçe officers should carry a gun or not. Many people suppose that police officers should carry their guns.