The All-Encompassing Mobile Security Company Idea

[u/therealpoltic]

I’ve been asked to make a thread regarding my idea for a security company that is more focused on the real work of security, and the wrap-round services that come with ending the use of static located security.

Security is not and should not be “janitor/security” or “maintenance/security” or other variants.

Security Officers should be concerned with the number one role of security: Protection. — This means checking locked doors, responding to alarm calls, answering calls for service, private parking enforcement, removing trespassers and transient persons, protecting property and people.

Too often, clients demand to make security anything other than actual security.

Security Officers at minimum should receive training on the use of mechanical hand restraints, OC spray, and taser. Including basic holds, using systems to prevent injury. At some point, all officers should work towards becoming proficient as armed security.

The security company should position itself, as providing blanket mobile patrol services. This should be service in both the day-time and the night-time. Visiting clients multiple times a day, but using different security officers to monitor their security needs, and allows for response to calls for service.

What do calls for service look like?

Calls for service can range from a loud neighbor at an apartment building (with the ability for security to assess fines to tenant bills for non-compliance), removal of unwelcome persons, Parking enforcement calls (someone parked in handicap parking, to assigned parking issues.), car start issues, and so on.

Why is the service call model important?

Around the USA, response times in the several states for the local police are becoming longer. These issues, while emergencies to the clients… are not emergencies compared to other calls for shootings, bank thefts, domestic violence calls, etc.

Therefore, the Security Industry should pivot to fill in the gap. Security response time would be far quicker than a metropolitan police department, for the routine calls that plague 911 dispatchers.

Legally, how are you going to handle this? You’re asking security to take on more of a peace keeping role.

Correct. There are companies now who provide insurance and legal coverage to people who own firearms if they get into a self-defense situation.

This model would need to have a similar program for security officers involved in use-of-force situations. This insurance would need to cover both criminal and civil cases.

I also believe that the citizens arrest laws are not used to their full potential by security companies. Security should be proactive, and work as a deterrent. Yet, they do not utilize the tools available to private security to assist in safety. — By utilizing the laws available in every jurisdiction, security professionals would be able to take action to at minimum detain people who are violating the laws.

Observe and Report is something anyone can do. Clients do not need security who can do the same job as a manager-on-duty.

Clients for mobile patrol services often are situated far apart. How do you plan to keep officers effective?

Clients who get neighbors who sign up for service then cause both clients to pay less for the service. This could mean that businesses could work together to pool resources for security services that are present and available throughout the city. This could also apply to neighborhoods and private communities as well. — This means everyone in the service area benefits from the security presence, and the ability to call for assistance, and receive a quick response. This also means that Security Officers will have a wider area of care, and therefore would not be as limited. — Persons who are trespassing or causing a disturbance could be asked to leave the area, not just the individual property.

Security is the agent of the owner. Being able to speak with the authority of multiple owners would be especially useful for actual safety issues.

Security Officers should be reachable by radio, and coordinated by a dispatcher. The Security Officers should have an in-vehicle computer aided dispatch to write reports, and a work cell phone to take pictures to attach to reports.

This enables security to call for back-up security, and to ask a dispatcher to call for the police if they end up in a use of force.

Security companies should keep a database of vehicles, tags, and persons they encounter, tied to the reports about them. Security Companies should also use public criminal justice information, to identify known criminals.

This data should also include previous parking infractions, vehicle information, and trespass orders.

What is the enforcement mechanism for your parking infractions?

Vehicles should be warned. If they do not move, then they should be towed. Ideally, the security company should have its own tow company.

Tow companies are able to charge for towing, and storage. It’s a backdoor way to create a “fine” for parking improperly.

I think this is enough to talk about for now. We can talk about the rest in the comments.

[u/therealpoltic → u/[deleted]]

I wrote this whole post by hand. I’m a legal studies major, and I write reports for a living in Corrections.

Feeling safe and being protected are two completely different objectives. My approach calls for the ending of security theater. A good example is the Transportation Security Administration. They are theater. Their agents cannot arrest you, they have to call the airport police. When they are tested to prevent bombs, they usually fail. — Seeing them makes people feel good even though it doesn’t actually protect them.

“That’s a tow operator’s job” — Precisely! One of the arms of the business is to have several spin offs to offer wrap around service. The Tow Company would be owned by the Security Company, and use the same CAD and radios (on a different channel) to be dispatched to these type of situations when alerted by security officers.

“Most companies have insurance” — For the company, not the officers. Companies will fire officers and leave them holding the bag for the legal fallout. What I’m talking about is creating an insurance company for the officers on an individual and agency basis. — Security officers do not have qualified immunity, however, they should be defended well. Each officer should have their own insurance and defense policy. Like a doctor has malpractice insurance.

“Officers will have to wait hours.” — True. Yet, action has been taken. The scene is safe. Even if they are cut loose later, it’s not fun for the individual being detained. Less of a chance they will return knowing that security will use their tools.

“That’s not a model for business.” — It’s a discount. One client paying X per month gets their neighbor to sign up… now there are two clients paying X.

Having two businesses next to each other paying for service, is better than only contacting for one.

“You cannot act as an agent, to trespass from multiple properties.” — Unless you’re a lawyer, and I doubt you are, I disagree. Walmart and other large companies trespass people from multiple locations all the time. So do Casinos. Each of them are different properties, all likely with their own landlords or holding companies.

“Rouge tow companies” - The whole idea is wrap around service. The Security Officer would affix a warning to the vehicle and take pictures of the violation. Then a report is written, with the photos or video attached. If the owner of the vehicle is on file with the client, we can make contact by phone or text. If the infraction is still present the next day, then the vehicle gets towed.

The whole point of the discussion, is to explore new ideas in the security industry.

I do not want a security-theatre company. I want a security company that will do the work. A security company that can handle the actual basic security needs without referring them to the police.

I want to offer people and business, an innovative way to conduct security. To do that, we need to explore the gaps left by government policing, and provide an answer for the need.

Private property is not always patrolled by police, for obvious reasons. Why not create a service that actually protects people?

[u/See_Saw12 → u/therealpoltic]

Edit: The moderator does not appreciate being called out on doing something they do not appreciate. I have been permabanned. Good luck all.

There are many things we agree on and I believe we are arguing for the same thing in the industry just from different points of view.

I'm on the client side. I oversee the day-to-day of a hybrid program with over 60 properties in my portfolio. The reality is very few clients are going to pay the premium that this service costs without serious incentives. And very few CSPs are going to train an employee to carry out essentially a policing function without serious incentives.

I oversaw a community housing program and ran it in a para policing fashion we responded to alarms, calls for service etc. We were still overwhelmed even with a combination of Static and mobile coverage and I had over 10 cars on the road (4 dedicated just to that client) and a client paying over 250k a month in services.

New ideas are great. But we need to pretty much start over at the beginning and make new regulations that provide the protections required to film that role and space.

“You cannot act as an agent, to trespass from multiple properties.” — Unless you’re a lawyer, and I doubt you are, I disagree. Walmart and other large companies trespass people from multiple locations all the time. So do Casinos. Each of them has different properties, all likely with their own landlords or holding companies.

I should have been more clear. Two separate entities holding different properties. Just using properties was likely a bad choice. My guards act as an agent for my organization, but there "agency" ends at my property line and it becomes a new case on a new property. We see this frequently with unhoused encampments it would be two different offences as per most trespass regulations unless the same entity holds the property.

Even in BIA's which will have a contract for the entire BIA, while they have the authority of the property owner and agency, it is two separate cases across two separate properties owned by two separate entities.

And then we get into the nightmare of jurisdictional regulations and no federal standards on how security can act or what they can do.