1 / 20

NON-LETHAL WEAPONS USE IN PRIVATE SECURITY

NON-LETHAL WEAPONS USE IN PRIVATE SECURITY. Aleksandar Pašagić General Security d.o.o., Zagreb, CROATIA, aleksandar@ generalsecurity.hr. 4 th International Conference Ergonomics 2010. Operating environment. Types of operating environment for a security officer :

renardo-brophy
Download Presentation

NON-LETHAL WEAPONS USE IN PRIVATE SECURITY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NON-LETHAL WEAPONS USE IN PRIVATE SECURITY Aleksandar Pašagić General Security d.o.o., Zagreb, CROATIA, aleksandar@generalsecurity.hr 4th International Conference Ergonomics2010

  2. Operatingenvironment Types of operatingenvironment for a securityofficer: lowthreathighthreat Availableoptionsvaryaccording to the demands of the environment

  3. Use of forcecontinuum 1) securityofficer’s presence 2) verbalcommands 3) hands on/physicalrestrainttechniques(including the use of a batonwhereapplicable) 4) OC spray/EMI device(whereapplicable) 5) firearm(whereapplicable) Options are always a compromisebetweeneffectiveness and liability Number of incidentscorresponds to the inverse use of forcecontinuum Escalatingforceimpliesincreasedliability

  4. Public image – importantissue for privatesecuritycompanies Objectives: • project a civilized image • distance the companyfromexcessivelyaggressive image • avoidnegative publicityassociatedwithviolence

  5. Public image – importantissue for privatesecuritycompanies Objectivesachievedthroughreductionin use of force

  6. Non-lethalWeapons Compromisebetweeneffectiveness and minimal use of force: Non-LethalWeapons Definition: “… weapons … explicitlydesigned and primarilyemployed … to incapacitatepersonnel or materiel, whileminimizingfatalities, permanentinjury to personnel, and undesireddamage to property and the environment” - United States Department of DefensePolicyDirective 3000.3, Policy for Non-LethalWeapons, July 9, 1996 Alternative terminology – Less-LethalWeapons

  7. NLW classescurrentlyavailable to privatesecuritycompanies: Impactweapons Chemical complianceweapons Electricalcomplianceweapons

  8. Impactweapons Advantages: - effective - cheap - simple to use

  9. Impactweapons Disadvantages: - lackof damage control - associated negative image - noteverywhere legal

  10. Chemical complianceweapons Advantages: - relativelycheap - perceived as non-threatening - goodsafetyrecord - simple to use

  11. Chemical complianceweapons Disadvantages: - perceived as non-threatening - inconsistentresults - limitedin close quartersapplications

  12. Electricalcomplianceweapons Advantages: - consistentresults - no lastingharm Disadvantages: - highcost - escalation of force problem Generallyconsidered the future of NLWs

  13. Electricalcompliancedevices – Taser International X26

  14. ElectricalComplianceDevices – principles of operation Probe application

  15. ElectricalComplianceDevices – principles of operation Drive-stunapplication

  16. Effects of EID Severityscale 0 – No observedadverselevel 1 – Effectsnotnormallyrequiring medical treatment for fullrecovery (incl. intendedeffect) 2 – Effectsrequiring medical treatment, but are not life threatening nor poserisk of disabilityafterrecovery 3 – Life-threateningeffects, lethality, significantrisk of disabilityafterrecovery Severityscalecanbeusedto assess the efectiveness of a NLW system

  17. Major areas of concernwithEID 1. Ocularinjury 2. Seizure 3. Ventricularfibrillation 4. Fallinjuries Potential for unintentional discharge

  18. Escalation of forceproblem Perceivednon-lethalityleading to more frequent use of NLW Increasedprobability of inappropriateapplication Reducedsense of responsibility

  19. Conclusion NLW are a useful set of tools to bridge the gap betweenunarmedresponse and lethalforce NLW positively influence the public image of privatesecuritycompanycompared to firearms or impactweapons but Securityofficereducationin use of NLWscrucial Education on context of use, notonlytechniques Inappropriate use of NLWsleads to negative public image and potential legal claims

  20. Thankyou for yourtime Aleksandar Pašagić aleksandar@generalsecurity.hr www.generalsecurity.hr

More Related