Illinois is grasping at straws: https://cspdailynews.com/technologyservices/illinois-require-security-guards-gas-stations-grocery-stores Wonder how much power these security personnel...

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

https://cspdailynews.com/technologyservices/illinois-require-security-guards-gas-stations-grocery-stores

Wonder how much power these security personnel would be given in actually stopping a crime. Their hands would probably be tied. The criminals would probably sue the security personnel as well as the retail establishment for any perceived infraction.

ddgm Loc: Hamilton, Ontario & Fort Myers, FL

Wondering if proposer of said Bill has any connection to security firms.

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

ddgm wrote:

Wondering if proposer of said Bill has any connection to security firms.

Good question. Dishonest politicians are not an endangered species.👍👍

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

JRiepe wrote:

https://cspdailynews.com/technologyservices/illinois-require-security-guards-gas-stations-grocery-stores

Wonder how much power these security personnel would be given in actually stopping a crime. Their hands would probably be tied. The criminals would probably sue the security personnel as well as the retail establishment for any perceived infraction.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

JRiepe wrote:

https://cspdailynews.com/technologyservices/illinois-require-security-guards-gas-stations-grocery-stores

Wonder how much power these security personnel would be given in actually stopping a crime. Their hands would probably be tied. The criminals would probably sue the security personnel as well as the retail establishment for any perceived infraction.

I cannot even imagine this being legal. The citizens of Illinois, just like the rest of us, pay taxes for police protection. For any part of the government, city, state or federal to demand that business owners pay for their own security is ridiculous.

Dennis

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

dennis2146 wrote:

I cannot even imagine this being legal. The citizens of Illinois, just like the rest of us, pay taxes for police protection. For any part of the government, city, state or federal to demand that business owners pay for their own security is ridiculous.

Dennis

Iagree with Dennis, I carry daily and so does my wife, we are elderly and have to supply our own security! !

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

dennis2146 wrote:

I cannot even imagine this being legal. The citizens of Illinois, just like the rest of us, pay taxes for police protection. For any part of the government, city, state or federal to demand that business owners pay for their own security is ridiculous.

Dennis

I agree with that.

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

DickC wrote:

Iagree with Dennis, I carry daily and so does my wife, we are elderly and have to supply our own security! !

Possibly when I'm elderly I'll do the same but that's a long way off since I will be only 78 next month.🤣

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

This seems pretty problematic. Police can't be everywhere at once, but would you want to empower private firms to use force to keep people from looting and stealing? I bet they'd end up fairly hamstrung by rules of engagement. The main issue in many cities is the DAs aren't prosecuting.

My Aldis' grocery store employs off-duty cops in uniform for security and the city let's them park their patrol car in the fire lane of the store. The message is clear, you're dealing with real police security. Sadly, there are probably not enough cops willing to moonlight to fill all the positions you would need to make a difference.

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

InfiniteISO wrote:

This seems pretty problematic. Police can't be ev... (show quote)

I can only speak to California as we have the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services which has regulated private investigators since 1915 and Private Patrol Operators (security guards) since 1943. Generally the criminal public has no respect for security guards and they seem to be little deterrent (especially since many jurisdictions no longer prosecute theft up to $1000). That is why most large California law enforcement agencies have what is called “off duty work programs” where merchants can hire uniformed police/sheriff personnel. Now a merchant might be able to pay a private security company $35 an hour to place an armed person at a business where as the uniformed officer (administrative costs to run the program, vehicle, if used, personnel costs) might cost north of $100 per hour. So armed guards is certainly nothing new but mandating businesses to employ them is ridiculous, probably illegal and would expose the mandating government entity to liability when someone is injured or killed by one.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Effate wrote:

I can only speak to California as we have the Bure... (show quote)

I go along with what you are saying EXCEPT that IF an off duty LEO is working for a security company then the government agency would not/should not be held liable for the actions of the LEO while off duty and working for the PRIVATE security agency. The officer would be covered by insurance of the security agency in my opinion. Also the officer would not be working in his LEO uniform but would be working in the security agency uniform. It could get to be a very sticky wicket at times.

Dennis

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

dennis2146 wrote:

I go along with what you are saying EXCEPT that IF... (show quote)

Our “off duty” employment was totally administered and sanctioned by our department. We wore our uni with no relationship with a security company. The business just picked up the freight. Never had a legal liability issue but I believe both the business who contacted and the department would be exposed.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Effate wrote:

Our “off duty” employment was totally administered and sanctioned by our department. We wore our uni with no relationship with a security company. The business just picked up the freight. Never had a legal liability issue but I believe both the business who contacted and the department would be exposed.

I would think each department would adhere to different guidelines. I occasionally worked off duty for a movie studio regarding traffic control on public streets etc. It was not so much for security but to control traffic for a few moments at a time when a scene needed to be photographed with only those vehicles belonging in the scene in the area. Money was good for a few hours time.

But of course this is a different scenario than actually working security for a gas station or other business for protection. I doubt my county would have gone along with that scenario.

Dennis

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

JRiepe wrote:

Possibly when I'm elderly I'll do the same but that's a long way off since I will be only 78 next month.🤣

Old age sneaks up on you, I was once 30 years old!!

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

dennis2146 wrote:

I cannot even imagine this being legal. The citizens of Illinois, just like the rest of us, pay taxes for police protection. For any part of the government, city, state or federal to demand that business owners pay for their own security is ridiculous.

Dennis

I paid for MY own security.....Kimber .45