• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Time to Arm Cenotaph Guard? (split from Domestic Terrorism)

Extra police costs have little to do with legal gun ownership and CCW. It has a lot to do with illegal immigration, higher population density, eduction rates, local economics. The US is not uniform in it's crime/violence rates either, some county's have almost no crime, while some have huge amounts. take a look at this table and look at variance by county and this includes New York with very strict gun laws http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/crimnet/ojsa/indexcrimes/2012-county-violent-rates.pdf



The illegal immigrant population of the United States in 2008 was estimated by the Center for Immigration Studies to be about 11 million people, down from 12.5 million people in 2007.[2] Other estimates range from 7 to 30 million.[3][4][5] According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, in 2004, 57% of illegal immigrants were from Mexico; 24% were from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America;[6] 9% were from Asia; 6% were from Europe and Canada; and 3% were from Africa and the rest of the world.[6] (wiki) 
 
Schindler's Lift said:
I lived for 4 years in the States and personally if Canada ever adopted US style gun laws I'd be looking to emigrate. 
You would really leave Canada just for that?
 
Schindler's Lift said:
I hate to think what life will be like once the police need to not only conduct the policing they do now PLUS the additional policing required by having an armed citizenry.

Funny thing - as the firearms ownership rate soars in the US, the national murder rate plummets. The former is at an all-time high, and the latter is at a thirty-year low and still in decline.

Those jurisdictions with the least onerous ownership and carry laws have the lowest murder and other violent crime rates, and those with the greatest impediments to lawful ownership and carry have the highest. The latter include major cities with major gang and drug problems - the real driving force behind US murder rates. Lower rates of ownership among honest citizens serve to encourage gang activity.
 
Some of the latest ....
A month before a soldier was shot dead at the National War Memorial, a series of security incidents prompted an internal investigation into guards’ safety, the Citizen has learned.

A sentry at the war memorial had his gun grabbed by a member of the public, and “similar incidents” with the Ceremonial Guard at Rideau Hall prompted the Military Police review, a probe that was in its initial stages when the Oct. 22 shooting occurred.

Defence officials say they can’t specify what the other incidents were, but they say they were not serious. Some sentries at the memorial had reported incidents involving foul language.

In a Sept. 22 briefing, obtained through access-to-information laws, the Ceremonial Guard division told Military Police it had added a fourth sentry to the War Memorial team; before that, one sentry stood watch for two colleagues who flank the memorial.

The change was due to “Behaviour of the public at the Tomb (of the Unknown Soldier) with no security or NCC (National Capital Commission) guide,” according to a presentation slide.

“Now utilizing 2 (two) soldiers on watch/security duty. One member of the public grabbed a soldier’s rifle briefly. Similar incidents have occurred with CG (Ceremonial Guard) at RH (Rideau Hall) and NWM (National War Memorial).”

Capt. Indira Thackorie from the military’s commemorative events division told the Citizen the gun incident happened on Sept. 2, during frosh week celebrations, when someone touched a guard’s unloaded rifle. She recalled the incident as “not grabbing” the gun.

“There’s big difference between having somebody, like a student during frosh week, engage a soldier, and an actual security threat, like a life-threatening thing,” Thackorie said. “It’s honestly never been a higher threat than that.”

“We often get an escalation in people acting like fools on frosh week,” she said, adding that soldiers at the memorial received extra briefings on how to act after the program was extended beyond the summer for the first time last year. “It’s an ongoing issue.”

She pointed to tourists in London, England, who often try goading the silent Queen’s Guards into talking or flinching. Buckingham Palace and London police moved those guards behind fences last month for the first time since the 1970s IRA bombings, following a series of terrorist threats. Some have since been accompanied by armed police ....
 
Thanks for this update milnews.

Want my opinion? If you are stupid enough to attempt to grab a sentry's weapon then you are subject to two things:

1. A butt stroke. Attempting to grab a weapon from a sentry can be construed as a hostile act;

2. Then you should be arrested and charged and incarcerated for at least 24 hours.
 
milnews.ca said:

Sounds like the journalists cast a wide net into DND, likely for an overly broad ATIP on anything related to "negative Ceremonial Guard incidents." These certainly aren't the first times a drunk tourist has pissed on the Memorial or some idiots tried to grab a rifle or harass the Guards. Obviously, they're now trying to build a narrative of "see, you were warned the soldiers at the Memorial were in danger."
 
A good argument is made to arm Canadian Armed Forces personnel doing ceremonial guard functions.
Just arm the soldiers
Matt Gurney
National Post
16 Mar 2015

On Wednesday, CBC News reported that the Department of National Defence is in negotiations with the Ottawa Police Service. Defence hopes to reach an agreement whereby armed Ottawa police officers will protect the military personnel who stand guard at the National War Memorial and Rideau Hall, the official residence of the Governor-General of Canada. The police officers so assigned would not be drawn from on-duty patrols, but would be so-called "paid duty" officers, working extra shifts with the costs covered by the purchaser of the service. Typical uses of paid duty officers include traffic control around construction sites or keeping an eye on public events, such as sports games or concerts.

Oh, Lord. How Canadian. Hello, National Defence? Is there perhaps a more obvious solution to this problem than hiring off-duty cops to protect soldiers?

In the aftermath of the attack on the National War Memorial and Parliament Hill last October, many Canadians were surprised to learn that the C7 automatic rifles carried by Corporal Nathan Cirillo, who was killed, and his colleague at the memorial that day were not just unloaded, but disabled. Removing key mechanical components from the rifles leaves them inert, unable to fire even if you shoved live rounds into them one by one, by hand. This is, the military insisted, entirely consistent with the role of honour guards performing ceremonial duties. The troops are there as symbols of dedication and commitment both to our national institutions and our fallen soldiers. They're not actually guards in the literal sense.

And that's all well and good, in theory. Canada is a country blessed enough to know the rule of law. Our police forces are generally all we need to maintain order. The military may occasionally be called out to provide "aid to the civil power," but that typically means disaster relief. Shortly after the attacks in Quebec and Ottawa last year, a military official told Global News that Canadian soldiers had not been issued live ammunition while patrolling the streets of home since the October Crisis of 1970. "It is not the role of the Canadian Forces to be armed on the streets of Ottawa," he said.

On balance, I agree with him. Separating the functions of the military and the police is vital to any healthy, functioning democracy. That's true for legal reasons, for political reasons, for practical reasons and, yes, for symbolic reasons. Canadians don't want armed troops on their streets. Who would?

But even having granted all the practical realities and the important principles of the role of the armed forces in a free society, surely there's still some wiggle room. Canada is and must remain a free society, where the armed forces perform their very specific duties under well-understood procedures and only when ordered. But, for goodness sake, if we're going to put soldiers in a public place where we have a reasonable belief that they may be shot at, giving them the means to shoot back isn't going to turn our fair dominion into a military junta.

How reasonable is the belief that the sentries at Rideau Hall and the National War Memorial will be shot at? Who knows? CSIS and the RCMP have probably done threat assessments, but good luck getting that information out of them anytime between now and the 22nd century. The only insight the general public really has into the extent of the danger faced by the honour guards is that Defence takes it seriously enough to be considering signing a contract to have armed police guard the sentries. There may not be any imminent threat, but there is, clearly, concern. And awareness that what happened in October could certainly happen again.

No one wants that to happen again. And sending Ottawa police to guard the guards was a logical shortterm solution. I recall, several days after the attack, moving photos, such as the one above, of various dignitaries laying wreaths where Cpl. Cirillo fell, while military honour guards stood at their posts and rifle-toting police officers kept their eyes open for any threats. At the time, that made sense.

But assigning cops to guard soldiers on a full-time basis doesn't. Any member of our Armed Forces ought to be competent and trustworthy enough to carry a loaded weapon at home, else we shouldn't be sending them to represent our country and serve its interests abroad. And the soldiers selected to serve as sentries just aren't any soldiers. They're the best of the best. Where they may face danger, give them the means to protect themselves, just as we ask them to protect us.
 
How effective would a soldier be the to close with destroy the enemy after standing still for 3 hours?  Also with the range time we get do we really want troops shooting in potentially unsafe circumstances?
 
Sheep Dog AT said:
How effective would a soldier be the to close with destroy the enemy after standing still for 3 hours?  Also with the range time we get do we really want troops shooting in potentially unsafe circumstances?

They only stand for an hour.  I've mentioned this before and I'll say it again, arming the sentries would not have stopped what happened and would have likel just given a loaded weapon to someone.  having done this task more times than i care to admit, you are not in any position to have situattional awareness.  At Rideau Hall you have a gate or a wall behind you but at the cenotaph there is a 270% blind spot plus you are focussed on your task as a sentry.  Your weapon is either at the order (most of the time) or at the shoulder so your reaction time is severly hampered.  and even if you could be effective having 5.56 rounds fired from a C7 in downtown ottawa is a recipe for disaster.  Range time isn't the issue.  (Those soldiers likely have more range time than the cops or at least have the opportunity to do so), it's the type of range time.  Firing C7 to PWT 3 is somewhat different than an escalation of force in a dynamic situation with hundreds of bystanders nearby.  A cop with a pistol is better.  An MP with pistol somewhat less, and a reservist with a pistol (hopefully with the right training) should be a last case.  Armed sentries is the worst possible choice because in the end it won't achieve anything.

The cenotaph is not millitary property either so legally there's a whole bunch of problems that could arise.     
 
Crantor said:
Firing C7 to PWT 3 is somewhat different than an escalation of force in a dynamic situation with hundreds of bystanders nearby.  A cop with a pistol is better.  An MP with pistol somewhat less, and a reservist with a pistol (hopefully with the right training) should be a last case.

It matters not what cap badge or uniform they wear.  What matters is the level of training they receive in the proper use of force for domestic employment.  Standard CAF ROE would not suffice here.  Whomever is providing armed overwatch has to be fully trained to employ the Incident Management Intervention Model including the use of physical control and less than lethal intervention options.  This is not a job for soldiers, Regular or Reserve, unless they have all the appropriate training and legal authority.
 
The Military Police have a close protection cell for a reason.  May as well use them.
 
Haggis said:
It matters not what cap badge or uniform they wear.  What matters is the level of training they receive in the proper use of force for domestic employment.  Standard CAF ROE would not suffice here.  Whomever is providing armed overwatch has to be fully trained to employ the Incident Management Intervention Model including the use of physical control and less than lethal intervention options.  This is not a job for soldiers, Regular or Reserve, unless they have all the appropriate training and legal authority.

Completely agree.  Arming sentries won't achieve that.
 
Better option, just put a Sniper on a roof top over looking the area, have them in comm's with the guards, see a threat? pretty sure a .338 could solve it.
 
RoyalDrew said:
The Military Police have a close protection cell for a reason.  May as well use them.

Yes but not for this reason.  A task such as this is totally inappropriate for their training and purpose.
 
Split and merged this new round of discussion re: arming into the existing thread about the subject matter.
 
RoyalDrew said:
The Military Police have a close protection cell for a reason.  May as well use them.

Schindler's Lift said:
Yes but not for this reason.  A task such as this is totally inappropriate for their training and purpose.

Plus, they'd have to shave and wear uniforms. ;D
 
There is really no good reason not to arm properly trained soldiers for Ceremonial Guard positions other than:

a. possible negative perception by the public;
b. increased administration risk for the chain of command.

The majority of the public assume the soldiers are armed in any case unless informed to the contrary.

The difficulty is determining if  a particular soldier is properly trained and it the particular task risk assessment warrants these measures.
 
As for this idea ....
MilEME09 said:
Better option, just put a Sniper on a roof top over looking the area, have them in comm's with the guards, see a threat? pretty sure a .338 could solve it.
.... in line with this ....
Haggis said:
Standard CAF ROE would not suffice here.  Whomever is providing armed overwatch has to be fully trained to employ the Incident Management Intervention Model including the use of physical control and less than lethal intervention options.  This is not a job for soldiers, Regular or Reserve, unless they have all the appropriate training and legal authority.
.... until the government wants to say, "we're at war, so police aren't enough to protect our troops", this is looks to me like a policing job.  In a similar vein, welcome to Ottawa, the Land of Jurisdictions ....
The chair of Ottawa's Police Services Board said he’s open to the idea of posting armed officers to watch over the ceremonial sentries who stand guard at the National War Memorial as long as the Department of National Defence foots the bill.

The Department of National Defence is in discussions with the Ottawa Police Service to provide security for its unarmed sentries at the National War Memorial since it falls under the force’s jurisdiction, said Lt. Kirk Sullivan.

(....)

The details of a potential agreement are still being negotiated, but Eli El-Chantiry, the chair of Ottawa's Police Services Board, said the officers would have to be on paid duty. They would also have to be working on their off-hours, so the work would be considered overtime, he said.

"We would expect a full cost recovery, because really we are in no position to offer service without compensation, no matter who the request comes from," El-Chantiry said.

Any contract between National Defence and the Ottawa Police Service is subject to approval by the board, El-Chantiry said ....
 
"The details of a potential agreement are still being negotiated, but Eli El-Chantiry, the chair of Ottawa's Police Services Board, said the officers would have to be on paid duty."

Rates:
Constable $79.78/hr
Sergeant $90.46/hr
Staff Sergeant $98.93/hr
Vehicles $45.00/hr
Canine $50 flat rate in addition to the cost of the officer and vehicle
http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/contact-us/hire-police-for-an-event.asp

 
Back
Top