I once attended a graduation party for one of my wife’s students. The young graduate was an adept hostess and, in an effort to ensure that people felt comfortable with one another, she began introducing everyone. At one point she introduced me to a woman who was about my age, and jokingly said, “You'd better watch out. Mr. Watson is in the security business.” Inwardly I cringed, knowing what would come next…. Just as I thought, the woman immediately launched into an animated story about how the Security Officer at her place of employment had stopped her because she forgot her badge. Since this type of thing happens to me often, I knew the drill; I politely listened and then made my escape when another person was introduced.
Although the woman seemed nice and was probably just trying to relate to someone she'd just met, I found this and similar experiences rather exasperating. After all, the lady had no idea what type of security business I was in. For all she knew, I owned a gun shop. Besides, did she really think that someone in the security business would be sympathetic to her plight? If so, she was mistaken. My sarcastic nature wanted to say something like, “Oh, that dastardly company! I can’t believe that make you wear a badge, of all things. How terrible, how utterly terrible!”, but I’m not that good of an actor. I’m sorry, but being required to wear an item that weighs less than an ounce doesn’t seem like such a heavy burden to me.
A similar incident happened when I was asked to coordinate security for a children’s event at my church. It was the first time the event had a security staff, so I wanted to make sure we would set the right tone. One lady, who I normally get along with quite well, dismissively said to me, “I don’t even know why we need security!”. Once again, my sense of diplomacy won out. Instead of asking whether she had read a newspaper in the last ten years, I simply tore out a page from the post orders and handed it to her. The page discussed how children are a gift from God and how the church had a moral, ethical and legal responsibility to take reasonable steps to protect them. It then went on to explain how pedophiles often show up at children’s events.
Our Choices Impact Others
I could cite literally dozens of other examples. When it comes to security matters, otherwise nice and intelligent people frequently make uninformed comments. I’ve come to realize that people aren’t trying to be mean or obnoxious when they say such things. They really don’t consider that bad things happen to someone, somewhere every day.
Since most of the people we run into haven’t experienced a critical incident, they dismiss the possibility of it occurring. After all, we tend to filter data through our own experience.
Indeed, after 17 years as a security professional, I have increasingly come to see that my role has a great deal more to do with teaching and sales than I had previously realized. If you regularly read this blog, you probably already have a security mindset. If so, then I encourage you to educate others. Something you say just may save their life. If you haven’t been reading this blog for awhile then I encourage you to do so and to look at other sources of information on personal security. If approached from a rational process, security can be integrated into your daily life without impacting the quality of your life.
By: SA Watson
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Building Security Assessments: A Quick Guide for Users
Buildings play a significant role in our lives. We live in homes, apartments and dorms. We work in office parks, stores and high rises. We go to school on campuses and we attend a whole host of events indoors. Still, if you’re like most people you never give the physical security of these structures a second thought. That is until, something gets stolen or someone gets assaulted. In the aftermath of an event, security receives a great deal of attention…for awhile.
As a security professional, I’ve rarely been called in to review the security of a building for proactive reasons. Typically something has already happened; either in that facility or somewhere nearby. When consulting about such issues, I spend a great deal of time emphasizing the need for a proactive mindset regarding security. Sometimes these efforts bear fruit. Other times, people listen politely and then promptly ignore everything I’ve just told them. This used to surprise me, but it no longer does. It is simply human nature. In the absence of immediate threat, most people relax to the point of their previous vulnerability.
Whose Responsibility is it?
Building owners, managers and their agents have legal, ethical and moral responsibilities to provide a reasonably safe environment for the users of their facility. Still, if you’ve been reading this blog for awhile now, you know that you cannot solely rely on others to protect you. A basic knowledge of physical security concepts will help you make informed decisions about your personal security.
Physical Security 101
While the purpose, operating parameters and specific risks of every building are unique, there are some physical security concepts that are universal. I encourage you to take the following into consideration when deciding how your personal security is impacted by the buildings you frequent.
Concentric Circles: The concentric circle theory of security is fundamental to understanding how physical protection measures should be deployed. Concentric Circle theory says that a building should be surrounded by multiple layers or “concentric circles” of increasingly heightened security. In order for an adversary to gain access to the building’s most valuable assets, he would have to first pass through all the other layers of security. These multiple layers of security increase the odds are that the adversary would be stopped prior to reaching his target.
The concentric circle theory of security is not new. In fact, the concept has been with us since people lived in walled cities and castles. Still, many organizations fail to make adequate use of this fundamental concept. Far too many organizations employ an outer layer of security and then call it done. As a direct result of such thinking, once an adversary gets past the building’s outer perimeter, they can wander about freely. While this is very convenient for legitimate users, it is equally convenient for criminals, disgruntled former employees, stalkers and abusers
The Four Ds of Physical Security: The 4 D’s of physical security is a complementary concept to the concentric circle model discussed above. The 4 Ds include Deterrence, Detection, Delay and Denial.
Deterrence: At the outer edge of the concentric circle model is the complimentary concept of deterrence. Deterrence is based on the idea that a rational adversary will make a value judgment about the ease or difficulty associated with committing a particular crime at a particular location. A crime is “deterred” when the adversary judges that the level of visible security poses too much of a risk of being caught and therefore decides to move on to another target. While most people and organizations believe in the concept of deterrence, it is exceptionally difficult to quantify. After all, how does one measure an event that never happened? Still, common sense dictates that deterrence is real and can prevent at least some people from selecting a particular location for their criminal activities.
Detection: If an adversary is not deterred by the visible security at a given location, the next best step is early detection. Detection is the point at which responders learn that the adversary has gained unauthorized access to the facility. Detection includes such countermeasures as cameras, alarms and employee awareness programs to name a few.
Delay: Delay, as the name implies, serves to slow down the advance of an adversary until the arrival of security or police responders. Delay must work in conjunction with detection. In other words, an adversary must be detected first, and then delayed long enough for responders to reach the adversary. Delaying measures typically include various types of barriers and locks.
Denial: Denial occurs when security or police responders arrive on scene and capture or cause the retreat of the adversary.
Note that all four Ds must work together.
1. If an adversary is not deterred, there must be a method of detection
2. If an adversary is detected, the detection technology needs to elicit a response from the security forces.
3. While the security forces are en route, there must be sufficient delaying mechanisms present to allow the responders to reach the scene in a timely manner.
4. When the responders reach the scene, they need to be equipped and trained so as to properly handle the situation.
Characteristics of a Secure Facility
"Secure" is a relative term, but as a matter of practicality the reader should consider how the presence or lack of the following characteristics could impact their personal security program.
Area Characteristics:
1. Is the building located in a high crime area?
2. Is the building located near high profile facilities that are likely to be targeted by criminals or terrorists?
3. Are there any obvious natural hazards that could impact your safety?
4. Are there any technological hazards or unsafe conditions that could pose a hazard to you?
Property & Building Characteristics:
1. Does the property have well established borders and an easily identifiable purpose?
2. Does the property limit areas of concealment and allow for natural surveillance?
3. Is the facility well maintained?
4. Is the facility well lit?
5. Is there a method of actively controlling access to the property?
6. Is there a method of actively controlling access to the building?
7. Are visitors required to be escorted by employees or other authorized persons?
8. Do the occupants have a sense of ownership and/or community?
9. Is there an onsite security force present? If so, do they look and act professionally?
10. Do security personnel or another designated group provide escorts to people walking to their vehicles?
11. If cameras are present, are they well maintained and actively monitored by a real, live person?
12. Is the facility adequately segmented into layers of security?
13. Finally, if you were going to commit a crime, would you choose this facility? Why or why not?
One need not be a security professional to adequately assess the personal risk they face as a user of a particular building. Applying the basic concepts discussed here should assist the reader in determining how the security measures at a given facility may impact their personal security program.
By: SA Watson
As a security professional, I’ve rarely been called in to review the security of a building for proactive reasons. Typically something has already happened; either in that facility or somewhere nearby. When consulting about such issues, I spend a great deal of time emphasizing the need for a proactive mindset regarding security. Sometimes these efforts bear fruit. Other times, people listen politely and then promptly ignore everything I’ve just told them. This used to surprise me, but it no longer does. It is simply human nature. In the absence of immediate threat, most people relax to the point of their previous vulnerability.
Whose Responsibility is it?
Building owners, managers and their agents have legal, ethical and moral responsibilities to provide a reasonably safe environment for the users of their facility. Still, if you’ve been reading this blog for awhile now, you know that you cannot solely rely on others to protect you. A basic knowledge of physical security concepts will help you make informed decisions about your personal security.
Physical Security 101
While the purpose, operating parameters and specific risks of every building are unique, there are some physical security concepts that are universal. I encourage you to take the following into consideration when deciding how your personal security is impacted by the buildings you frequent.
Concentric Circles: The concentric circle theory of security is fundamental to understanding how physical protection measures should be deployed. Concentric Circle theory says that a building should be surrounded by multiple layers or “concentric circles” of increasingly heightened security. In order for an adversary to gain access to the building’s most valuable assets, he would have to first pass through all the other layers of security. These multiple layers of security increase the odds are that the adversary would be stopped prior to reaching his target.
The concentric circle theory of security is not new. In fact, the concept has been with us since people lived in walled cities and castles. Still, many organizations fail to make adequate use of this fundamental concept. Far too many organizations employ an outer layer of security and then call it done. As a direct result of such thinking, once an adversary gets past the building’s outer perimeter, they can wander about freely. While this is very convenient for legitimate users, it is equally convenient for criminals, disgruntled former employees, stalkers and abusers
The Four Ds of Physical Security: The 4 D’s of physical security is a complementary concept to the concentric circle model discussed above. The 4 Ds include Deterrence, Detection, Delay and Denial.
Deterrence: At the outer edge of the concentric circle model is the complimentary concept of deterrence. Deterrence is based on the idea that a rational adversary will make a value judgment about the ease or difficulty associated with committing a particular crime at a particular location. A crime is “deterred” when the adversary judges that the level of visible security poses too much of a risk of being caught and therefore decides to move on to another target. While most people and organizations believe in the concept of deterrence, it is exceptionally difficult to quantify. After all, how does one measure an event that never happened? Still, common sense dictates that deterrence is real and can prevent at least some people from selecting a particular location for their criminal activities.
Detection: If an adversary is not deterred by the visible security at a given location, the next best step is early detection. Detection is the point at which responders learn that the adversary has gained unauthorized access to the facility. Detection includes such countermeasures as cameras, alarms and employee awareness programs to name a few.
Delay: Delay, as the name implies, serves to slow down the advance of an adversary until the arrival of security or police responders. Delay must work in conjunction with detection. In other words, an adversary must be detected first, and then delayed long enough for responders to reach the adversary. Delaying measures typically include various types of barriers and locks.
Denial: Denial occurs when security or police responders arrive on scene and capture or cause the retreat of the adversary.
Note that all four Ds must work together.
1. If an adversary is not deterred, there must be a method of detection
2. If an adversary is detected, the detection technology needs to elicit a response from the security forces.
3. While the security forces are en route, there must be sufficient delaying mechanisms present to allow the responders to reach the scene in a timely manner.
4. When the responders reach the scene, they need to be equipped and trained so as to properly handle the situation.
Characteristics of a Secure Facility
"Secure" is a relative term, but as a matter of practicality the reader should consider how the presence or lack of the following characteristics could impact their personal security program.
Area Characteristics:
1. Is the building located in a high crime area?
2. Is the building located near high profile facilities that are likely to be targeted by criminals or terrorists?
3. Are there any obvious natural hazards that could impact your safety?
4. Are there any technological hazards or unsafe conditions that could pose a hazard to you?
Property & Building Characteristics:
1. Does the property have well established borders and an easily identifiable purpose?
2. Does the property limit areas of concealment and allow for natural surveillance?
3. Is the facility well maintained?
4. Is the facility well lit?
5. Is there a method of actively controlling access to the property?
6. Is there a method of actively controlling access to the building?
7. Are visitors required to be escorted by employees or other authorized persons?
8. Do the occupants have a sense of ownership and/or community?
9. Is there an onsite security force present? If so, do they look and act professionally?
10. Do security personnel or another designated group provide escorts to people walking to their vehicles?
11. If cameras are present, are they well maintained and actively monitored by a real, live person?
12. Is the facility adequately segmented into layers of security?
13. Finally, if you were going to commit a crime, would you choose this facility? Why or why not?
One need not be a security professional to adequately assess the personal risk they face as a user of a particular building. Applying the basic concepts discussed here should assist the reader in determining how the security measures at a given facility may impact their personal security program.
By: SA Watson
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
No Panaceas, Secret Techniques or Magic Bullets
One of the occupational hazards of being a security consultant is that people I meet in social settings, will often ask rather complex security questions, and then expect simplistic answers.Worse yet, some people already have a strong opinion and expect me to support their viewpoint. While I always try to be polite in such situations, as a matter of ethics, I cannot just provide overly simplistic or rubber stamped answers. Security is a dynamic discipline and while basic concepts are important the actual application of these concepts may differ considerably.
The following is a short-discussion of two of the most common personal security questions I hear:
"Should I Study Martial Arts?"
I’ve heard this question asked numerous times and my answer is always the same…maybe. People study martial arts for a variety of reasons including physical fitness, discipline, cultural understanding, art, sport, and, of course personal protection. The fact is that the serious and long-term study of martial arts, under a competent instructor can yield results in all of these areas.
That being said, the way most people study martial arts does not lead to the long term success they desire. For the most part, Americans are busily engaged in too many activities. If you are like most people, life simply gets in the way. I say this as one with experience. I started studying Karate through a YMCA program when I was in middle school. I loved the program and continued on for a few years. Unfortunately, my Sensei (teacher) eventually moved and I stopped practicing. In college I studied Tae Kwon Do and, once again, I loved the program. Unfortunately after graduating, getting married and starting my career, I again stopped training. Then in 2003, I found a Hapkido and Tae Kwon Do school. Again I loved practicing, but the demands of my career and other commitments eventually led me to stop training.
The reality is that my experience is typical. People struggle to find the balance between life and work and this struggle often manifests itself in the on and off way in which they study martial arts.
If you decide to study martial arts for personal protection skills, remember the following:
(1.) The study of martial arts will EVENTUALLY, lead you to a point where you can adequately defend yourself against most potential adversaries, but it is a long road. Don’t expect quick or lasting results without a permanent commitment.
(2.) As you progress in martial arts, it requires more study, not less.
The next question people ask is, “What style of martial art should I study?” That’s a loaded question. Everyone seems to think that their art is the best and this leads to endless debates about the effectiveness of one art over another. My experience is that the style of the art matters much less than the commitment and skills of the individual student.
If you decide to study martial arts here are some tips on selecting a school:
(1.) Ask people you know who are already studying about their schools
(2.) Visit some schools, take a few lessons, and see if you like it
(3.) Be wary of schools that guarantee a black belt in a certain period of time
(4.) Be wary of schools that seem primarily concerned with money
(5.) Be wary of schools that won’t tell you how much your lessons will cost
(6.) Be wary of schools whose instructors seem to relish conflict and fighting
(7.) The closer a school is to your home the more likely you are to consistently study
“Should I Carry a Gun?”
The following is a short-discussion of two of the most common personal security questions I hear:
"Should I Study Martial Arts?"
I’ve heard this question asked numerous times and my answer is always the same…maybe. People study martial arts for a variety of reasons including physical fitness, discipline, cultural understanding, art, sport, and, of course personal protection. The fact is that the serious and long-term study of martial arts, under a competent instructor can yield results in all of these areas.
That being said, the way most people study martial arts does not lead to the long term success they desire. For the most part, Americans are busily engaged in too many activities. If you are like most people, life simply gets in the way. I say this as one with experience. I started studying Karate through a YMCA program when I was in middle school. I loved the program and continued on for a few years. Unfortunately, my Sensei (teacher) eventually moved and I stopped practicing. In college I studied Tae Kwon Do and, once again, I loved the program. Unfortunately after graduating, getting married and starting my career, I again stopped training. Then in 2003, I found a Hapkido and Tae Kwon Do school. Again I loved practicing, but the demands of my career and other commitments eventually led me to stop training.
The reality is that my experience is typical. People struggle to find the balance between life and work and this struggle often manifests itself in the on and off way in which they study martial arts.
If you decide to study martial arts for personal protection skills, remember the following:
(1.) The study of martial arts will EVENTUALLY, lead you to a point where you can adequately defend yourself against most potential adversaries, but it is a long road. Don’t expect quick or lasting results without a permanent commitment.
(2.) As you progress in martial arts, it requires more study, not less.
The next question people ask is, “What style of martial art should I study?” That’s a loaded question. Everyone seems to think that their art is the best and this leads to endless debates about the effectiveness of one art over another. My experience is that the style of the art matters much less than the commitment and skills of the individual student.
If you decide to study martial arts here are some tips on selecting a school:
(1.) Ask people you know who are already studying about their schools
(2.) Visit some schools, take a few lessons, and see if you like it
(3.) Be wary of schools that guarantee a black belt in a certain period of time
(4.) Be wary of schools that seem primarily concerned with money
(5.) Be wary of schools that won’t tell you how much your lessons will cost
(6.) Be wary of schools whose instructors seem to relish conflict and fighting
(7.) The closer a school is to your home the more likely you are to consistently study
“Should I Carry a Gun?”
Once again my answer is always the same…maybe. While I am a strong supporter of the individual right to keep and bear arms, I do not think that everyone should carry a firearm. People who are mentally incapable of handling such a responsibility should not be able to own and/or use a firearm. The same goes for those convicted of violent criminal acts, children and those under the influence of drugs or alcohol. All our rights as Americans have some applicable restrictions and the Second Amendment is no different in this regard. The political debate surrounding gun rights is simply an ongoing discussion to determine the extent of those restrictions. As a law abiding citizen, you have the right to carry a firearm (with some restrictions). The question is should you?
Before you answer that question, I suggest careful consideration of following:
(1.) Do your personal risks justify this particular countermeasure?
(2.) Can you legally obtain the necessary permits?
(3.) Can you continually comply with applicable firearms laws?
(4.) Are you willing to obtain training on how to responsibly use your weapon?
(5.) Are you willing to deal with the day-to-day inconveniences of carrying a firearm?
(6.) In a life or death situation, are you willing to kill another human being?
(7.) If you end up killing someone in order to defend yourself or your family, are you willing to deal with the potential legal, financial and psychological consequences of such an action?
As I’ve written in previous posts, if you are an able adult, you are responsible for your personal security. The study of martial arts and the carrying of firearms can both provide effective means of personal protection, however like all aspects of personal security, the decision to employ such countermeasures should only be undertaken after careful consideration. You alone can make that decision for yourself. I encourage you to think the matter through and choose wisely.
By: SA Watson
Friday, September 12, 2008
Anatomy of a Crime: The Dark Side of Risk Analysis
In one of my earlier postings, I discussed how a risk analysis is the foundation upon which all security programs are based. When planning for personal security, you need to evaluate your risks and vulnerabilities and then make rational choices based on that evaluation. This is a defensive use of risk analysis; it is designed to keep you safe and ensure that you can go about your day-to-day activities without anxiety or debilitating fear.
Unfortunately, there is a dark side to risk analysis; it can be used offensively as well as defensively. Just as you evaluate your risks and vulnerabilities in order to keep yourself safe, a rational criminal will assess his risks before committing a crime. Criminals risk being arrested, harmed, or killed and many of them take those risks seriously.
Your objective is to make yourself a poor return on investment for the perpetrator. The potential victim who makes him or herself too risky for an attack will likely be rejected in favor of another victim. To exploit this, one has to understand the process by which a rational adversary may select victims.
Ask yourself, in order for a person to physically attack me, what must they do?
Risk Analysis from the Perpetrator’s Perspective
Stage 1: Target Assessment: The perpetrator must select a target. Target selection can be based on some or all of the following:
1. What type of crime does the perpetrator want to commit?
2. Does the intended victim fulfill the requirements of the perpetrator?
3. Is the intended victim distracted and unaware of their surroundings?
4. Is the intended victim handicapped or have some other condition that makes them appear to be an easy target?
5. Does the intended victim show fear or timidity?
6. Is the intended victim carrying bags or other items that may lessen their ability to defend themselves or run?
7. Is the intended victim wearing restrictive clothing that is likely to interfere with their ability to run or fight?
Stage 2: Target Isolation: In order for the perpetrator to commit the crime they must be able to isolate the target.
1. Is the intended victim alone?
2. Are there bystanders present?
3. Does the terrain provide areas for concealment?
4. Are there people within hearing distance?
Stage 3: Probing: Probing is the initial contact between the perpetrator and the intended victim. In the probing stage, the perpetrator is “interviewing” the potential victim and testing boundaries. This process may take place over a long or short period of time. The perpetrator wants to see how the victim reacts when confronted.
1. Is this going to be someone who will struggle, fight or submit?
Stage 4: Distraction: The perpetrator may use ruses to distract the victim from the impeding attack. Some of these may include:
Can you help me find my lost child? A perpetrator approaches his target and says that his young daughter went into the ladies room and hasn’t come out for quite awhile. He then asks if you’d mind going in to check on her. Of course, there is no daughter and you have now isolated yourself in a room with only one escape route.
Can I use your cell phone? Many people will say yes to a request to use a cell phone or to give someone a quarter to use a pay phone. If you are dealing with a criminal you may be assaulted while reaching into their purse or coat to retrieve the phone or quarter.
Faking a medical emergency: You walk out to your car and see someone is laying on the ground clutching his chest. Many people would go over to try and help the person and this is admirable; however, if used as a distraction, you are now in close proximity to the perpetrator and are either on, or close to, the ground. This positioning limits your ability to maneuver or escape.
My car won’t start. Do you have jumper cables? If you have jumper cables, they are most likely in the trunk of your vehicle. Once you open the trunk and bend over to reach inside, you are off balance and can be thrown into the trunk of your own vehicle.
Can I help you with that heavy bag? Politeness and/or chivalry aren’t completely dead, but it is much rarer than it used to be. Maybe the young man asking if he can help you with the heavy bag is being polite. Maybe he just wants an excuse to talk or flirt with you and has no intention of harming you. Alternatively, maybe he is trying to lull you into thinking he isn’t a potential threat. Be wise and be wary of people who are too polite for the circumstances.
Stage 5: Attack: In an attack, the perpetrator’s objective is to completely overwhelm the victim by a combination of force and threats. The idea is to so scare the victim that he or she panics, freezes and fails to fight back. Remember, many victims of violent attacks do not submit because of force or injury, but because of threats.
Stage 6: Defeat: The final stage of the attack where the victim is compliant.
Disrupting the target selection process: Some General Guidelines for Personal Security
Accept: Accept the fact that anyone can be a victim of violence. While risk varies from person to person, anyone can be a victim. If one fails to recognize this potential, they will have no reason to plan. Thinking about violence can be scary. Keep things in perspective; most people aren’t out to harm others.
Assess: Try to view yourself as a perpetrator would. Practice “defensive victimology”. Ask yourself, if you were looking for a victim, would you look for someone like yourself?
Plan: Ask yourself “what if” questions. What are you willing to give up to a criminal and under what circumstances? At what point, if any, are you willing to commit to personal combat? The act of planning right now can make you more confident and lessen your reaction time during a critical incident.
Avoid: Avoid potentially dangerous situations. Be aware of your environment- train yourself to notice small details. If your car was locked when you left it there, it should still be locked when you return. If you feel that something is wrong, it probably is.
Act: If you see a dangerous situation, report it to the relevant authorities. By making the area safer for others, you will also make it safer for yourself. If confronted, deescalate the situation, distract the perpetrator and, if possible, escape.
Perspective:
The point of the above is not to make you afraid or fill you with anxiety. The reality is that most people have no intention of harming you. Still, criminals often plan their activities and as a law abiding citizen you are at an inherent disadvantage. You do not know the specific intentions of the people around you or the time and place where someone may choose you as a victim. By thinking, planning and deciding on a general course of action now, you should be better positioned to avoid trouble.
In my next two postings, I will address a couple of questions that I have been asked many times over the last several years: “Should I study martial arts?” and “Should I carry a gun?”
By: SA Watson
Unfortunately, there is a dark side to risk analysis; it can be used offensively as well as defensively. Just as you evaluate your risks and vulnerabilities in order to keep yourself safe, a rational criminal will assess his risks before committing a crime. Criminals risk being arrested, harmed, or killed and many of them take those risks seriously.
Your objective is to make yourself a poor return on investment for the perpetrator. The potential victim who makes him or herself too risky for an attack will likely be rejected in favor of another victim. To exploit this, one has to understand the process by which a rational adversary may select victims.
Ask yourself, in order for a person to physically attack me, what must they do?
Risk Analysis from the Perpetrator’s Perspective
Stage 1: Target Assessment: The perpetrator must select a target. Target selection can be based on some or all of the following:
1. What type of crime does the perpetrator want to commit?
2. Does the intended victim fulfill the requirements of the perpetrator?
3. Is the intended victim distracted and unaware of their surroundings?
4. Is the intended victim handicapped or have some other condition that makes them appear to be an easy target?
5. Does the intended victim show fear or timidity?
6. Is the intended victim carrying bags or other items that may lessen their ability to defend themselves or run?
7. Is the intended victim wearing restrictive clothing that is likely to interfere with their ability to run or fight?
Stage 2: Target Isolation: In order for the perpetrator to commit the crime they must be able to isolate the target.
1. Is the intended victim alone?
2. Are there bystanders present?
3. Does the terrain provide areas for concealment?
4. Are there people within hearing distance?
Stage 3: Probing: Probing is the initial contact between the perpetrator and the intended victim. In the probing stage, the perpetrator is “interviewing” the potential victim and testing boundaries. This process may take place over a long or short period of time. The perpetrator wants to see how the victim reacts when confronted.
1. Is this going to be someone who will struggle, fight or submit?
Stage 4: Distraction: The perpetrator may use ruses to distract the victim from the impeding attack. Some of these may include:
Can you help me find my lost child? A perpetrator approaches his target and says that his young daughter went into the ladies room and hasn’t come out for quite awhile. He then asks if you’d mind going in to check on her. Of course, there is no daughter and you have now isolated yourself in a room with only one escape route.
Can I use your cell phone? Many people will say yes to a request to use a cell phone or to give someone a quarter to use a pay phone. If you are dealing with a criminal you may be assaulted while reaching into their purse or coat to retrieve the phone or quarter.
Faking a medical emergency: You walk out to your car and see someone is laying on the ground clutching his chest. Many people would go over to try and help the person and this is admirable; however, if used as a distraction, you are now in close proximity to the perpetrator and are either on, or close to, the ground. This positioning limits your ability to maneuver or escape.
My car won’t start. Do you have jumper cables? If you have jumper cables, they are most likely in the trunk of your vehicle. Once you open the trunk and bend over to reach inside, you are off balance and can be thrown into the trunk of your own vehicle.
Can I help you with that heavy bag? Politeness and/or chivalry aren’t completely dead, but it is much rarer than it used to be. Maybe the young man asking if he can help you with the heavy bag is being polite. Maybe he just wants an excuse to talk or flirt with you and has no intention of harming you. Alternatively, maybe he is trying to lull you into thinking he isn’t a potential threat. Be wise and be wary of people who are too polite for the circumstances.
Stage 5: Attack: In an attack, the perpetrator’s objective is to completely overwhelm the victim by a combination of force and threats. The idea is to so scare the victim that he or she panics, freezes and fails to fight back. Remember, many victims of violent attacks do not submit because of force or injury, but because of threats.
Stage 6: Defeat: The final stage of the attack where the victim is compliant.
Disrupting the target selection process: Some General Guidelines for Personal Security
Accept: Accept the fact that anyone can be a victim of violence. While risk varies from person to person, anyone can be a victim. If one fails to recognize this potential, they will have no reason to plan. Thinking about violence can be scary. Keep things in perspective; most people aren’t out to harm others.
Assess: Try to view yourself as a perpetrator would. Practice “defensive victimology”. Ask yourself, if you were looking for a victim, would you look for someone like yourself?
Plan: Ask yourself “what if” questions. What are you willing to give up to a criminal and under what circumstances? At what point, if any, are you willing to commit to personal combat? The act of planning right now can make you more confident and lessen your reaction time during a critical incident.
Avoid: Avoid potentially dangerous situations. Be aware of your environment- train yourself to notice small details. If your car was locked when you left it there, it should still be locked when you return. If you feel that something is wrong, it probably is.
Act: If you see a dangerous situation, report it to the relevant authorities. By making the area safer for others, you will also make it safer for yourself. If confronted, deescalate the situation, distract the perpetrator and, if possible, escape.
Perspective:
The point of the above is not to make you afraid or fill you with anxiety. The reality is that most people have no intention of harming you. Still, criminals often plan their activities and as a law abiding citizen you are at an inherent disadvantage. You do not know the specific intentions of the people around you or the time and place where someone may choose you as a victim. By thinking, planning and deciding on a general course of action now, you should be better positioned to avoid trouble.
In my next two postings, I will address a couple of questions that I have been asked many times over the last several years: “Should I study martial arts?” and “Should I carry a gun?”
By: SA Watson
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Rational Choice, Personal Responsibility & Countermeasures
Personal security measures are, or at least should be, a matter of rational choice. Although I write about security and have years of training and experience, it is not my intention to tell you what to do. You see, it is my firm conviction that, if you are an able adult, then you are responsible for your own personal security. While this may seem like an obvious and common sense statement, my experience tells me that it is neither. I often hear otherwise intelligent people fervently argue that others are responsible for their personal security.
Here are some of the more common statements:
The Police are responsible for my protection:
No they’re not. The police do not exist to provide you with personal protective services. In fact, the police don’t even exist to catch criminals. The mission of the police is to maintain order; the apprehension of criminals is simply a means by which they accomplish that objective. Except in rare instances, the protection received by an average citizen from police activity is indirect. In other words, the police reduce the population of would be criminals via arrest. The result is fewer criminals walking the street, thus allowing you live in a safer community. These efforts should be applauded, but they cannot reasonably be called "personal" protection.
The Security people are there to protect me:
No they’re not. Private security personnel are agents of their employer and/or client. They exist to prevent or mitigate losses to the organization for which they are working. Just as with the police, the protection you receive from private security personnel is indirect; their activities displace crime from the particular facility they are assigned to protect. If you happen to be located at that facility then you are the beneficiary of that protection. Still, that is not the same thing as security personnel existing to protect you as an individual.
Bystanders will protect me:
Don’t bet the farm on that one. While the presence of other people provides a level of protection, that protection is based on the perception that other people will intervene. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen.
My Husband or boyfriend will protect me:
I've heard this statement from several female friends, family members and acquaintances. In all fairness, most men will protect women. Still in cases of extreme violence, the male will typically be the first target. If the male companion is taken out of commission before he realizes what has happened, he will be of little protective value to the female.
The bottom line: If you exclusively rely on others to protect you; you may be disappointed.
Developing Countermeasures
In previous posts I discussed developing a security mindset, understanding your own perceptions of danger and conducting a personal risk analysis. If you have been following these steps, you now have some questions to answer for yourself:
(1.)What high risk behaviors or activities do I engage in?
(2.) Am I willing to give these behaviors up?
(3.) If not, what can I do to mitigate my chances of being a victim?
In general, you have four basic choices for how to address risk:
Accept the Risk:
If you have seriously looked at your own high risk behaviors and activities and decided that you either cannot or do not want to change them, then you have accepted the risk. The downside of acceptance is that you are not trying to prevent the event from occurring. Still, if you can accept the potential consequences of such a decision than acceptance may be a good strategy. Keep in mind that we accept various risks every day. When we ride in an automobile there is the risk of getting in an accident, but that doesn’t stop most of us from riding in or driving cars.
Avoid the Risk Altogether:
If you have decided that one of your behaviors or activities is so fraught with danger, that it is not worth doing anymore, then the focus of your personal security program, regarding that particular issue, will be to cease the behavior or activity. The downside to this approach is if you apply it too often your quality of life will suffer and you will be afraid to engage in many of the things that give you fulfillment.
Transfer the Risk:
If after examining your risks, you decide that you still want to engage in a specific high risk activity, but don’t want to mitigate the risk or just accept the potential consequences, you can transfer the risk, however this means relying on others to protect you. As noted above, this can yield disappointing results.
Mitigate the Risk:
Mitigation occurs when you have reviewed your risks and decided that you still want to engage in a particular high risk activity, but don’t want to just accept the potential consequences or rely on others to protect you. In this case you would want to take steps to lessen or mitigate the risks you determined as high. Mitigation is the bread and butter of the security discipline and involves techniques to make yourself, your residence and other areas of your life a harder target from criminals. The next several postings will address some best practices in mitigating personal risk.
Remember as an able adult, your personal security is fundamentally your responsibility. As you think about your own high risk behaviors and activities, remember that personal security measures should come about as the result of a rational thought process; not blind fear or the attitude of “it can’t happen to me”.
By: SA Watson
Monday, September 1, 2008
Risk Analysis
The fundamental building blocks of a security program are the same whether one is talking about an organization, a nation or an individual; it is only the scale and complexity of the undertaking that changes. In the last two postings, I discussed the role of mindset and perception in the development of a personal security program. Once one has begun to adopt the basics of a security mindset and has examined how personal perceptions impact their view of danger, it becomes necessary to conduct a risk analysis.
A Simplified, Individual Risk Analysis Process:
The phrase “risk analysis” may sound overly complex and, at the organizational level, it can be. In fact, there are multiple books written and various methodologies developed for conducting a risk analysis. Fortunately, all of these techniques share some commonalities that we can apply to our everyday lives. For our purposes here the risk analysis process consists of the following steps:
1. Asset Identification: Determine what are you trying to protect. For most people the answer will be their physical well being, but the same question is applicable if you are protecting property, information or any other thing of value.
2. Consider Loss Events: What are you trying to protect yourself from? At first it may seem that everyone should be concerned about the same things, but this is not necessarily the case. A college student would likely be less concerned with robbery because traditionally, college students don’t have very much money and thus are a poor target for robbers. On the other hand, an owner of a small store making night deposits at his bank may be very concerned with robbery. So ask yourself, what types of crime am I specifically concerned about?
3. Consider Risk: What is the probability that I will become a victim? Much, but not all of this, is determined by lifestyle. Do you travel alone to high crime rate areas? Do you often place yourself in situations where you have little or no control over your surroundings? The answers to these questions and ones like them will help you determine which behaviors you engage in that raise your risks and which behaviors lower your risks.
4. Consider Vulnerability: Ask yourself, if someone tried to commit a crime against me, how likely is it that they would be successful? Do you follow predictable routines? Do you leave doors unlocked at your residence? Can you physically defend yourself? If so, how well? Do you have a weapon? If so, is it accessible and can you legally use it? Are you psychologically prepared for personal combat? Remember that when assessing vulnerability, people tend to either downplay their vulnerability to the point where it is ignored or just assume that they are completely incapable of defending themselves. The reality is almost always somewhere in between these two extremes.
5. Consider Potential Impacts/Costs: If someone successfully committed any one of the crimes you identified against you, what would the costs be? Monetarily? Physically? Emotionally? Psychologically?
6. Consider Countermeasures: A countermeasure is a means of preventing or reducing the chances of a crime occurring or, barring that, a plan to limit or mitigate the impacts of the crime. When considering countermeasures, ask yourself what, if any, of your high risk behaviors are you willing to change? How can you reduce your vulnerability and thus make yourself a harder target for criminals?
In the next posting, I’ll discuss developing and implementing countermeasures in more detail.
By: SA Watson
A Simplified, Individual Risk Analysis Process:
The phrase “risk analysis” may sound overly complex and, at the organizational level, it can be. In fact, there are multiple books written and various methodologies developed for conducting a risk analysis. Fortunately, all of these techniques share some commonalities that we can apply to our everyday lives. For our purposes here the risk analysis process consists of the following steps:
1. Asset Identification: Determine what are you trying to protect. For most people the answer will be their physical well being, but the same question is applicable if you are protecting property, information or any other thing of value.
2. Consider Loss Events: What are you trying to protect yourself from? At first it may seem that everyone should be concerned about the same things, but this is not necessarily the case. A college student would likely be less concerned with robbery because traditionally, college students don’t have very much money and thus are a poor target for robbers. On the other hand, an owner of a small store making night deposits at his bank may be very concerned with robbery. So ask yourself, what types of crime am I specifically concerned about?
3. Consider Risk: What is the probability that I will become a victim? Much, but not all of this, is determined by lifestyle. Do you travel alone to high crime rate areas? Do you often place yourself in situations where you have little or no control over your surroundings? The answers to these questions and ones like them will help you determine which behaviors you engage in that raise your risks and which behaviors lower your risks.
4. Consider Vulnerability: Ask yourself, if someone tried to commit a crime against me, how likely is it that they would be successful? Do you follow predictable routines? Do you leave doors unlocked at your residence? Can you physically defend yourself? If so, how well? Do you have a weapon? If so, is it accessible and can you legally use it? Are you psychologically prepared for personal combat? Remember that when assessing vulnerability, people tend to either downplay their vulnerability to the point where it is ignored or just assume that they are completely incapable of defending themselves. The reality is almost always somewhere in between these two extremes.
5. Consider Potential Impacts/Costs: If someone successfully committed any one of the crimes you identified against you, what would the costs be? Monetarily? Physically? Emotionally? Psychologically?
6. Consider Countermeasures: A countermeasure is a means of preventing or reducing the chances of a crime occurring or, barring that, a plan to limit or mitigate the impacts of the crime. When considering countermeasures, ask yourself what, if any, of your high risk behaviors are you willing to change? How can you reduce your vulnerability and thus make yourself a harder target for criminals?
In the next posting, I’ll discuss developing and implementing countermeasures in more detail.
By: SA Watson
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Perception
It has always amazed me how two people can look at the same data points and come to opposite conclusions. Recently, I was speaking to a Chemistry professor and we somehow got onto the topic of workplace liability. I was surprised to learn that the professor considered the potential for litigation against academics to be a very serious matter. Wanting clarification, I asked “Do professors often get sued?” She explained that she knew of a case in where a student was injured during the course of a laboratory experiment and, alleging negligent training and supervision, subsequently sued the school and the instructor. Now I understood where she was coming from; having witnessed such an event at close range, she took this issue very seriously. As I considered this brief conversation more closely, I realized that, like the professor’s reaction, mine, too, was based on my own experience. Since my own educational background was heavily focused on politics, history, criminal justice and education courses, science labs would be the last thing to come to my mind when thinking about litigation threats to higher education professionals.
The same thing happens when people think about personal security. The old saw that a conservative is simply a liberal who got mugged, while funny, has some truth to it. We all view the world around us through the prism of our own experience. Some people, viewing a large group of armed security or police personnel, will feel safe based on the level of perceived protection. Other people, seeing the same level of security, will feel anxious and come to the conclusion that the presence of such high levels of security must indicate an even higher level of danger.
As individuals with an interest and concern for our own and our family’s personal security, we cannot underestimate the importance of our perceptions. Our perceptions of danger are influenced by a number of factors, but here are some of the more common ones.
Experience:
Our personal experience and the experiences of others we see become our reality. A teacher friend of mine once told me how she left her purse inside her running vehicle (doors unlocked) and when she came back a few minutes later, she discovered it was missing. She then sheepishly added that I probably thought that was pretty dumb. In fact, I did not think it was dumb at all. Why? Because she is a teacher and not a security professional. From her perspective and experience there was a strong probability that her purse would be exactly where she left it when she returned to her vehicle. Her previous experience had, until that time, bore that theory out.
Personally, I would never decide to leave my vehicle running and unlocked with my wallet or some other asset in plain view. Then again, I have spent 17 years working in the security field and have seen thousands of thefts and related incidents. My previous experience bore out the theory that an open door is an open invitation.
The reality is that if you have ever been the victim of a crime, you are unlikely forget it and if you have been the victim of a violent crime you will never forget it. When creating a personal security program, you must remember to take a serious look at your own experiences.
Environment:
Related to experience is environment. We become used to and comfortable in the places where we live and visit often. For example, I have been to Cambodia three times now and each time I go, someone asks me why I would go to such a “dangerous place”. I tell them the truth; I feel much more comfortable in Cambodia than I do in many major US cities. Having travelled to high crime areas of Newark, New Jersey, Detroit, Michigan and New Orleans, Louisiana (to name a few) I just can’t get all that worked up about danger in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Des Moines, Iowa and similar low crime rate areas. It is not that one can’t get mugged, assaulted or murdered in these places; one can. Rather, as people get used to their own environments, their danger threshold adapts to match their surroundings. When considering your personal security program, consider your threshold of perceived danger.
Age:
Age is another contributing factor in our perception of danger. Young people, especially young men, tend to ignore warning signs of danger and often times unwittingly encourage criminal incidents. As people get older, the overall trend is to become more cautious and thus more adept at avoiding danger. Young people generally do not perceive danger as readily as older people do, yet the young (especially men) are most likely to be both victims and perpetrators of violence.
Gender:
Gender and gender roles are also important factors in our perception of danger. Generally, men are dual socialized as both protectors from and perpetrators of criminal activity. Which side becomes dominant depends on the influences and opportunities a young man has in his life. In terms of perception, most men tend to think they can handle themselves in a violent confrontation and based on this assumption are likely to take chances that most women would not.
Women, on the other hand, even in today’s world, are generally socialized to be protected members of society. As a result of this socialization, many women perceive danger in situations that most men would never consider dangerous.
Perceived ability to protect oneself:
Related to age, gender and experience is the perceived ability to defend oneself. People who think they have a strong ability to defend themselves are less likely to perceive and act upon danger signs. Those who are not as confident in their ability to defend themselves are more likely to rely on their ability to read danger signs and proactively remove themselves from potentially harmful situations. Curiously enough, those who think they can physically defend themselves best are more likely to have to test that assumption.
When developing your personal security program you’ll need to be honest with yourself. How do you perceive yourself and the potential sources of danger around you? Knowledge of your own perceptions will help you properly assess your own risks and vulnerabilities.
In the next post we will discuss the risk analysis process and how it can be applied to individuals.
By: SA Watson
The same thing happens when people think about personal security. The old saw that a conservative is simply a liberal who got mugged, while funny, has some truth to it. We all view the world around us through the prism of our own experience. Some people, viewing a large group of armed security or police personnel, will feel safe based on the level of perceived protection. Other people, seeing the same level of security, will feel anxious and come to the conclusion that the presence of such high levels of security must indicate an even higher level of danger.
As individuals with an interest and concern for our own and our family’s personal security, we cannot underestimate the importance of our perceptions. Our perceptions of danger are influenced by a number of factors, but here are some of the more common ones.
Experience:
Our personal experience and the experiences of others we see become our reality. A teacher friend of mine once told me how she left her purse inside her running vehicle (doors unlocked) and when she came back a few minutes later, she discovered it was missing. She then sheepishly added that I probably thought that was pretty dumb. In fact, I did not think it was dumb at all. Why? Because she is a teacher and not a security professional. From her perspective and experience there was a strong probability that her purse would be exactly where she left it when she returned to her vehicle. Her previous experience had, until that time, bore that theory out.
Personally, I would never decide to leave my vehicle running and unlocked with my wallet or some other asset in plain view. Then again, I have spent 17 years working in the security field and have seen thousands of thefts and related incidents. My previous experience bore out the theory that an open door is an open invitation.
The reality is that if you have ever been the victim of a crime, you are unlikely forget it and if you have been the victim of a violent crime you will never forget it. When creating a personal security program, you must remember to take a serious look at your own experiences.
Environment:
Related to experience is environment. We become used to and comfortable in the places where we live and visit often. For example, I have been to Cambodia three times now and each time I go, someone asks me why I would go to such a “dangerous place”. I tell them the truth; I feel much more comfortable in Cambodia than I do in many major US cities. Having travelled to high crime areas of Newark, New Jersey, Detroit, Michigan and New Orleans, Louisiana (to name a few) I just can’t get all that worked up about danger in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Des Moines, Iowa and similar low crime rate areas. It is not that one can’t get mugged, assaulted or murdered in these places; one can. Rather, as people get used to their own environments, their danger threshold adapts to match their surroundings. When considering your personal security program, consider your threshold of perceived danger.
Age:
Age is another contributing factor in our perception of danger. Young people, especially young men, tend to ignore warning signs of danger and often times unwittingly encourage criminal incidents. As people get older, the overall trend is to become more cautious and thus more adept at avoiding danger. Young people generally do not perceive danger as readily as older people do, yet the young (especially men) are most likely to be both victims and perpetrators of violence.
Gender:
Gender and gender roles are also important factors in our perception of danger. Generally, men are dual socialized as both protectors from and perpetrators of criminal activity. Which side becomes dominant depends on the influences and opportunities a young man has in his life. In terms of perception, most men tend to think they can handle themselves in a violent confrontation and based on this assumption are likely to take chances that most women would not.
Women, on the other hand, even in today’s world, are generally socialized to be protected members of society. As a result of this socialization, many women perceive danger in situations that most men would never consider dangerous.
Perceived ability to protect oneself:
Related to age, gender and experience is the perceived ability to defend oneself. People who think they have a strong ability to defend themselves are less likely to perceive and act upon danger signs. Those who are not as confident in their ability to defend themselves are more likely to rely on their ability to read danger signs and proactively remove themselves from potentially harmful situations. Curiously enough, those who think they can physically defend themselves best are more likely to have to test that assumption.
When developing your personal security program you’ll need to be honest with yourself. How do you perceive yourself and the potential sources of danger around you? Knowledge of your own perceptions will help you properly assess your own risks and vulnerabilities.
In the next post we will discuss the risk analysis process and how it can be applied to individuals.
By: SA Watson
Friday, August 15, 2008
Mindset
It’s been years now, but I still remember Mr. Patterson, or as we middle school aged Karate students called him, “Sensei Patterson”, telling us:
“The way you practice is the way you are! Don’t expect to be able to do this in real life if you don’t practice hard now!”
In the many years since, I’ve dabbled in the study of martial arts on and off as the ebb and flow of my life has changed. I’ve had many instructors in many styles, and even though I’m still no expert, I enjoy the feeling of a hard practice; the camaraderie of helping others achieve their goals and, in turn, being helped as well. Nonetheless, as enjoyable as these aspects of training are, they are just the window dressing; Sensei Patterson’s statement still rings true “The way you practice is the way you are!”. In other words, a right mindset followed by right action is the key to success in martial arts and in life.
After seventeen years serving as a security professional with and for various organizations, I’ve seen evidence that this concept is the foundation upon which all successful security programs are based. Unfortunately, I’ve also seen the following common, but wrong security mindsets:
The Checklist Mindset:
The Checklist Mindset says that the mere presence of a security program is, by itself, adequate to prevent incidents. It isn’t. While several elements go into the make up of a security program, it takes committed people to prevent harmful events. As an individual, you too must be committed to your own personal security program to make it work.
The Denial Mindset:
The Denial Mindset says that because the odds of a critical incident occurring at any given location or to any particular person are low, there is no reason to plan or to inconvenience ourselves with security procedures. People who hold this mindset are usually correct about one thing; the odds are low, unfortunately, the exception more than makes up for the rule. In the event of a critical incident, a lack of planning or a breakdown in procedures will take an already chaotic situation and make it worse.
Defeatist Mindset:
The Defeatist Mindset says that “If someone really wants to_______________, they’ll find a way.” While there is some element of truth to this statement, there is an unsubstantiated assumption as well. The assumption is that no amount of security can deter a hostile actor. This is only true for highly motivated or highly irrational adversaries. Most criminals aren’t highly motivated; if they were, they’d be doing something productive. They are also generally rational people; given the choice between an easy target and a difficult one, they will typically opt for the easy one. The most negative thing about this mindset is that it is often used to justify inaction against all potential adversaries.
Not My Job Mindset:
The “It’s not my job” mindset says that security is only the concern of professionals. Consider the events of a several months ago; the FBI arrested of several people in New Jersey on terror related charges. A video store worker, in the course of normal business noticed that a tape, brought in by his customers, showed information related to terror activities. If that video store worker hadn’t reported what he saw, there may have had another terrorist attack on US soil. Now consider; what do you see and do every day that may impact the safety of your family or community?
I’m Too Busy Mindset:
The “I’m too busy” mindset is closely related to the “It’s not my job mindset”. This mindset says that the amount of activity one is engaged in is so great that short-cuts are acceptable. “After all”, says the person who holds this mindset, “I’m busy and besides, what are the odds?” While security procedures should be as user friendly as possible, there is some inconvenience that is inherent in having to protect people, information, reputation and property. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need to lock our doors or be concerned about fraud and violence, but we do not live in a perfect world. The time “saved” by ignoring security can result in greater losses.
There are, of course, many other wrong mindsets, but there is also a right mindset:
The Right Mindset:
Bad things happen to someone, somewhere everyday. Today may be our turn. By taking reasonable steps to prepare, we can help to prevent or, at least, mitigate harmful events. Even if we are not security professionals, we can take reasonable steps to protect ourselves, our families, our workplaces and our nation. After all, “How we practice is how we are!”
By: SA Watson
“The way you practice is the way you are! Don’t expect to be able to do this in real life if you don’t practice hard now!”
In the many years since, I’ve dabbled in the study of martial arts on and off as the ebb and flow of my life has changed. I’ve had many instructors in many styles, and even though I’m still no expert, I enjoy the feeling of a hard practice; the camaraderie of helping others achieve their goals and, in turn, being helped as well. Nonetheless, as enjoyable as these aspects of training are, they are just the window dressing; Sensei Patterson’s statement still rings true “The way you practice is the way you are!”. In other words, a right mindset followed by right action is the key to success in martial arts and in life.
After seventeen years serving as a security professional with and for various organizations, I’ve seen evidence that this concept is the foundation upon which all successful security programs are based. Unfortunately, I’ve also seen the following common, but wrong security mindsets:
The Checklist Mindset:
The Checklist Mindset says that the mere presence of a security program is, by itself, adequate to prevent incidents. It isn’t. While several elements go into the make up of a security program, it takes committed people to prevent harmful events. As an individual, you too must be committed to your own personal security program to make it work.
The Denial Mindset:
The Denial Mindset says that because the odds of a critical incident occurring at any given location or to any particular person are low, there is no reason to plan or to inconvenience ourselves with security procedures. People who hold this mindset are usually correct about one thing; the odds are low, unfortunately, the exception more than makes up for the rule. In the event of a critical incident, a lack of planning or a breakdown in procedures will take an already chaotic situation and make it worse.
Defeatist Mindset:
The Defeatist Mindset says that “If someone really wants to_______________, they’ll find a way.” While there is some element of truth to this statement, there is an unsubstantiated assumption as well. The assumption is that no amount of security can deter a hostile actor. This is only true for highly motivated or highly irrational adversaries. Most criminals aren’t highly motivated; if they were, they’d be doing something productive. They are also generally rational people; given the choice between an easy target and a difficult one, they will typically opt for the easy one. The most negative thing about this mindset is that it is often used to justify inaction against all potential adversaries.
Not My Job Mindset:
The “It’s not my job” mindset says that security is only the concern of professionals. Consider the events of a several months ago; the FBI arrested of several people in New Jersey on terror related charges. A video store worker, in the course of normal business noticed that a tape, brought in by his customers, showed information related to terror activities. If that video store worker hadn’t reported what he saw, there may have had another terrorist attack on US soil. Now consider; what do you see and do every day that may impact the safety of your family or community?
I’m Too Busy Mindset:
The “I’m too busy” mindset is closely related to the “It’s not my job mindset”. This mindset says that the amount of activity one is engaged in is so great that short-cuts are acceptable. “After all”, says the person who holds this mindset, “I’m busy and besides, what are the odds?” While security procedures should be as user friendly as possible, there is some inconvenience that is inherent in having to protect people, information, reputation and property. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need to lock our doors or be concerned about fraud and violence, but we do not live in a perfect world. The time “saved” by ignoring security can result in greater losses.
There are, of course, many other wrong mindsets, but there is also a right mindset:
The Right Mindset:
Bad things happen to someone, somewhere everyday. Today may be our turn. By taking reasonable steps to prepare, we can help to prevent or, at least, mitigate harmful events. Even if we are not security professionals, we can take reasonable steps to protect ourselves, our families, our workplaces and our nation. After all, “How we practice is how we are!”
By: SA Watson
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)