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

[Jed]

I was not aware that Pte/Cpls were experts in the field of security and threat analysis, nor that they got a vote in military decisionmaking.

When did it become "politically incorrect" to defer to the expert knowledge and experience of LEOs?

I wonder if sometimes senior leadership have access to more information and make informed decisions.

Correct on all points. The opinion still should be heard though, as highlighted by your prompt counter points.  I certainly respect and defer to the LEO community for their knowledge and expertise. The community does have a pretty strong bias though and tend to see themselves as the only people that can provide protection.

 

[Jed]

Pretty sure on that point Jed is referring to the fact there is quite a vocal segment of the population that has a very extreme dislike for anyone (including LEOs) to be armed with anything more potent than a wiffle bat.  It would be seen to be unPC by this group to have soldiers performing actual guard duties in public with full use of force equipment.

Correct on my thinking.

 

[Remius]

I was pretty sure that was your opinion Crantor. I don't think it is the majority opinion of those soldiers actually standing guard or those likely to do this or a similar task in the future though.

There is a pretty loud and vocal voice for your point of view from the civilians and LEO community in Canada. The other point of view borders on 'Politically Incorrect' for today's society, but that point of view needs to be heard.

I wonder sometimes if opinions from senior soldiers on this matter are often coloured by the need for increased administration risk and responsibility to actually allow troops to be armed in situations like this.

the thing is that YOUR opinion hasn't explained why having the sentries armed is more effective than having an armed "guardian angel" as it were.  I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on that.  It has nothing to do with administration or risk it has everything to do with what is more effective.

look at this pic and tell me what's more effective and tell me how those sentries are safer with ammo and without an armed guardian.  The fact is that they are not.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=guard+sentries&safe=active&biw=1680&bih=881&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RqYJVb3TDKnbsAT3wILwDQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#safe=active&tbm=isch&q=guard+sentries+rideau+hall&imgdii=_&imgrc=p92xiH5elLr9sM%253A%3BhLYl4i9GQqrNuM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.cbc.ca%252F1.2991645.1426157952!%252FcpImage%252FhttpImage%252Fimage.jpg_gen%252Fderivatives%252F16x9_620%252Fottawa-shooting-20141025.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cbc.ca%252Fnews%252Fcanada%252Fottawa%252Fnational-defence-should-pay-for-sentry-guards-ottawa-police-board-chair-1.2992697%3B620%3B349. 

99% of the shenanigans that go on there and at rideau hall are tourists that get too close, or kids that try and touch the rifle.  People are less likely to do it when a cop is there. I say this because i've experienced it, i've had people behind me beside me and I couldn't tell what was what unless it was far away and in my line of sight and i certainly had less awareness of what my sentry partner was experiencing.  Commissionaires at RH were damned near useless.  If teh House Sgt was nearby he at least could intervene and sometimes teh mounties at the House would to.  At the cenotaph, the guys in 3B would intercept most issues but even then that wasn't always something to discourage people (especially ex and current serving members who were/are the worst offenders) 

 

 

[GR66]

Curious.  What happens if the guards are armed.  Are they armed simply for self defence or do they now have a security tasking?  What happens if they witness a non-terrorist type crime in conducting their duties?  An assault between a pair of drunken university students?  A purse snatching?  A hit and run of a pedestrian crossing the street?  Would there be issues of the member being sufficiently trained to intervene in any of these circumstances?  Would there be an outrage if they didn't intercede in one of these circumstances?

 

[Jed]

the thing is that YOUR opinion hasn't explained why having the sentries armed is more effective than having an armed "guardian angel" as it were.  I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on that.  It has nothing to do with administration or risk it has everything to do with what is more effective.

look at this pic and tell me what's more effective and tell me how those sentries are safer with ammo and without an armed guardian.  The fact is that they are not.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=guard+sentries&safe=active&biw=1680&bih=881&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RqYJVb3TDKnbsAT3wILwDQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#safe=active&tbm=isch&q=guard+sentries+rideau+hall&imgdii=_&imgrc=p92xiH5elLr9sM%253A%3BhLYl4i9GQqrNuM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.cbc.ca%252F1.2991645.1426157952!%252FcpImage%252FhttpImage%252Fimage.jpg_gen%252Fderivatives%252F16x9_620%252Fottawa-shooting-20141025.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cbc.ca%252Fnews%252Fcanada%252Fottawa%252Fnational-defence-should-pay-for-sentry-guards-ottawa-police-board-chair-1.2992697%3B620%3B349. 

99% of the shenanigans that go on there and at rideau hall are tourists that get too close, or kids that try and touch the rifle.  People are less likely to do it when a cop is there. I say this because i've experienced it, i've had people behind me beside me and I couldn't tell what was what unless it was far away and in my line of sight and i certainly had less awareness of what my sentry partner was experiencing.  Commissionaires at RH were damned near useless.  If teh House Sgt was nearby he at least could intervene and sometimes teh mounties at the House would to.  At the cenotaph, the guys in 3B would intercept most issues but even then that wasn't always something to discourage people (especially ex and current serving members who were/are the worst offenders) 

I agree with your observations on how things transpire around the Cenotaph.  I make my comments so they will plant the seeds that there are other more economical and expedient ways of providing personal protection for our troops than:

a. Full LEO visible presence;
b. Troops with full Battle Rattle;
c. Expensive Overwatch by LEO or CAF assets; and
d. Nothing new here, puff your chest out and put on your mean face.

 

[Jed]

A true short story:

Three 3 man survey crews are tasked to survey along the prelim route of the Alaska Highway:

Most everyday the crews are followed by Grizzlies about 100 yards back;

The crew chief asked that at least one member could carry a rifle for possible self protection; Request denied.

The Engineer in charge and party chief were checking the line and were closely followed by 2 grizzlies.

The next day the three crews were allowed to carry one rifle for protection.


Morale of the crews went way up despite the additional weight burden of packing a rifle.

No Grizzlies were harmed in the subsequent months.

I expect some means of self protection would have the same affect for any troops standing guard.

 

[The_Falcon]

Curious.  What happens if the guards are armed.  Are they armed simply for self defence or do they now have a security tasking?  What happens if they witness a non-terrorist type crime in conducting their duties?  An assault between a pair of drunken university students?  A purse snatching?  A hit and run of a pedestrian crossing the street?  Would there be issues of the member being sufficiently trained to intervene in any of these circumstances?  Would there be an outrage if they didn't intercede in one of these circumstances?

Simple they get the same line that Brinks et al get in their training, the firearm is for personal protection (and possible protection of those in the immediate vicinity such as a partner or bank employee) only. Getting involved in anything beyond that liability is on yourself. For example the armed security officer who got involved in altercation in a McDonalds in the East end of Toronto a few weeks ago and is looking at possible manslaughter charges (not sure what the current status is), or the Brinks guard who assisted with the arrest of Patrick Shand, who subsequently died due to positional asphyxiation.  While no one was charged criminally, everyone involved was sued by the family.

 

[Remius]

A true short story:

Three 3 man survey crews are tasked to survey along the prelim route of the Alaska Highway:

Most everyday the crews are followed by Grizzlies about 100 yards back;

The crew chief asked that at least one member could carry a rifle for possible self protection; Request denied.

The Engineer in charge and party chief were checking the line and were closely followed by 2 grizzlies.

The next day the three crews were allowed to carry one rifle for protection.


Morale of the crews went way up despite the additional weight burden of packing a rifle.

No Grizzlies were harmed in the subsequent months.

I expect some means of self protection would have the same affect for any troops standing guard.

If grizzly bears ever threaten the sentries that could be an option to explore. 

 

[dapaterson]

If grizzly bears ever threaten the sentries that could be an option to explore.

I can imagine the TV ad now:  "Grizzlies.  In our streets.  With salmon."

 

[Jed]

If grizzly bears ever threaten the sentries that could be an option to explore.

;D It makes my point with respect to troop morale though. If you want to know what I think we should do with respect to what we do at the National Cenotaph, have a look at my 'If I were king for a day' comments at the start of this thread.

 

[Jed]

I can imagine the TV ad now:  "Grizzlies.  In our streets.  With salmon."

I just spilt my coffee. 

 

[Remius]

;D It makes my point with respect to troop morale though. If you want to know what I think we should do with respect to what we do at the National Cenotaph, have a look at my 'If I were king for a day' comments at the start of this thread.

This is assuming there is a morale problem in that regard.  I can assure you that people are lining up to do this task knowing full well they will not have ammo in their mags.

But it also proves the whole "guardian angel" concept.  2 guys working while one, with the gun, watches for threats.

And yes, grizzlies in the streets with salmons is a recipe for chaos.

 

[dapaterson]

[mandatory Simpsons quote]

We're here!  We're queer! We don't want any more bears!

[/mandatory Simpsons quote]

 

[Blackadder1916]

And yes, grizzlies in the streets with salmons is a recipe for chaos.

http://www.food.com/recipe/grizzly-grilled-salmon-172773

 

[Jed]

This is assuming there is a morale problem in that regard.  I can assure you that people are lining up to do this task knowing full well they will not have ammo in their mags.

But it also proves the whole "guardian angel" concept.  2 guys working while one, with the gun, watches for threats.

And yes, grizzlies in the streets with salmons is a recipe for chaos.

No doubt about that. We have the best troops.

 

[Tibbson]

I know my reference may be a bit dated but I did find a CF guide for domestic ops dated from the late 90's https://info.publicintelligence.net/CA-DomesticOperations.pdf which stated:

93. The CF will not develop any capability for which it does not have a mandate. Specifically, training for law enforcement duties such as crowd and riot control shall not be conducted. The CF will not acquire equipment (including ammunition) for specific use in the civil law enforcement context (such as the required hollow point ammo in MHO).  This policy must not be confused with the fact that the CF possesses certain equipment which has been acquired for operational and training reasons.  Such equipment may have application in CF assistance to law enforcement operations.

94. ECSs and other force generators are responsible for conducting use of force training for domestic operations as judged necessary and prudent to meet any anticipated need. Such training will be carried out with standard combat equipment and weapons, and with strict emphasis on the policy and legal limitations which apply to domestic operations. (Therefore simply handing a Cpl a wpn is not sufficient)

The doc also goes on to speak of "The classes of support for assistance to provincial/territorial law enforcement agencies" not replacement of law enforcement agencies.  Jurisdictionally this is a matter for OPS, not the CAF and under our policies OPS would have to request support from DND to provide guard services.  Even the MPs don't have an overriding jurisdiction there because while the monument itself "belongs" to, I believe, Directorate of History and Heritage, (which falls under DND) the property itself is administered by the National Capital Commission which takes it out of MP jurisdiction.

As I understand it anyway.

 

[Haggis]

I agree with your observations on how things transpire around the Cenotaph.  I make my comments so they will plant the seeds that there are other more economical and expedient ways of providing personal protection for our troops than:

a. Full LEO visible presence;
b. Troops with full Battle Rattle;
c. Expensive Overwatch by LEO or CAF assets; and
d. Nothing new here, puff your chest out and put on your mean face.

You forgot one option - terminate the sentry task entirely.  That is, by far, the most economical option.

 

[Jarnhamar]

We could always hire brinks guards to protect unarmed soldiers. I'm sure they're a less expensive option than police.

 

[mariomike]

We could always hire brinks guards to protect unarmed soldiers. I'm sure they're a less expensive option than police.

Or, maybe Garda. This took place recently on the Danforth.

Off-duty guard grabbing food kills 2 at McDonald's
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/28/2-killed-at-east-end-mcdonalds

 

[Jarnhamar]

I bet Dan Menard from Garda would give his old buddies from the CF a really good rate  ;D