Armed security guards

[pignmud]

and I still remember when WA police got the approval for a second squad car so to patrol at night so they had one car North of river and one South at all times bahaha

Could leave you keys in the car in those days..

[bladeracer]

Wasn’t that long ago WA police were still carrying revolvers when autos were readily available (think about 15 years ago)

I would have thought main reason is jams.

My glock 17 jammed many times over years I used it. In life of death situations think id trust a revolver more.

That said my beretta has never jammed once’s out of few thousand rounds but that’s in conditions and no chance of ‘limp wrist’ causing jam

I think WA Police carried the Browning 1910 when I was a kid.

When I was a kid in WA (45 years ago) I never saw any police with guns. Think they had them but just never carried them. Was something serious if you even saw police with handcuffs on their belt.

I'm talking 1980 when I moved to Perth from South Hedland, I don't think I saw Police up north armed, though they probably were. Two 79 Div detectives that came when I was attacked with a knife in 1990 both had S&W revolvers, probably Model 19 2-1/2" - I was blinded with my own blood so I didn't get a real close look.

[Jt-2019]

Deffenatly cowboys

[Diamond Jim]

I shoot IPSC using alternatively a semi-auto and a revolver. I almost never shoot single-action with my double action revolver. Maybe extreme range shots when I am prepared to sacrifice time for accuracy.
I've never faced a life or death situation with a firearm and likely never will.That said, DA seems plenty accurate enough for any SHTF situation. Putting two rounds an inch or two apart at 5-15m as fast as you can pull the trigger should deter any miscreant.

[Chinballs]

That said, DA seems plenty accurate enough for any SHTF situation. Putting two rounds an inch or two apart at 5-15m as fast as you can pull the trigger should deter any miscreant.

Hahahaha. If you think a security guard who shoots once a year could put two shots an inch apart at point blank range even in a situation with no pressure you would be disappointed. No way the overwhelming majority of guards can do the same at anywhere near 15m shooting double action especially once you add in the stress of a situation that has lead to them having to fire their weapons.

[StraightWhiteMale]

Would come down to cost as the reason why. The cargo is always insured so nobody really cares. The gun may as well be a plastic cap gun as a visual deterrent because when is the last time a security guard had to fire a round whilst on the job(excluding training)?

[FNQ]

I’ve witnessed a few hold ups (all overseas) even had the misfortune of being in a couple.

What I’ve learnt is Securtiy rarely have the opportunity to get their weapons out of their holsters let alone fire a round. Most are all over within a few minutes tops leaving most people looking around saying “what the fark just happened!”

The whole idea of security (Armed or not) is no more then a deterrent.

[StraightWhiteMale]

I’ve witnessed a few hold ups (all overseas) even had the misfortune of being in a couple.

What I’ve learnt is Securtiy rarely have the opportunity to get their weapons out of their holsters let alone fire a round. Most are all over within a few minutes tops leaving most people looking around saying “what the fark just happened!”

The whole idea of security (Armed or not) is no more then a deterrent.

Spot on mate. My mum worked at comm bank in the mid 90s and got a pump action shotgun in her face and the so called security did nothing. Criminals this brazen are in and out in a flash.

[Diamond Jim]

One point, a failure to fire in a semi-auto means clearing the round and that takes seconds - longer if you don't shoot regularly and practice clearance drills. With a revolver you just pull the trigger again and move to the next round.

[Ricochet]

I am a security guard but not an armed guard.
From what I have heard from other guards the semi auto pistol vs revolver thing depends on the company you work for and what you get trained on. If the company you work for uses revolvers only and are paying for your training then you probably only get certified on a revolver and then can only use a revolver. It's like and like getting your driver's licence in in an automatic car, at least at first you can only drive auto.
If you get trained only with a semi auto then that's what you use.

If you get trained in both you can use either but it depends on what your employer supplies.

It may be a factor in semi auto vs revolver that single action is more accurate than double and also a mag capacity issue with potential casualties if a guard panics and empties a firearm butI don't think so. When trained for normal guarding we get it hammered into us about the legal hell the use of excessive force opens up. I can only assume that and armed guarding has got to include a session or two about the risks involved in discharging a weapon. At the end of the day I don't think the powers that be are too worried about someone emptying a mag as there is a hell of a lot of paperwork if draw the thing in the first Place, and guards are well informed they will be under more scrutiny and probably won't get the same backing police do in the same or similar circumstances.

[Boo]

A revolver has one big advantage, pull the trigger and it goes bang. No time wasting racking a pistol's slide, that's if you remember to do that while under pressure. I'm thinking of getting a 22 revolver when all the drama is over, just to see if I can get to hit something with it.

[bladeracer]

A revolver has one big advantage, pull the trigger and it goes bang. No time wasting racking a pistol's slide, that's if you remember to do that while under pressure. I'm thinking of getting a 22 revolver when all the drama is over, just to see if I can get to hit something with it.

If you have to rack the slide you screwed up. A sidearm is no good to you without a round chambered.

[Blr243]

I agree blade. Be prepared ,have excellent equipment, be strict with safety , be switched on , live to a ripe old age

[Boo]

Some consider a racked pistol to be unsafe, a revolver does not have that issue. To each his own I guess.

[bladeracer]

Some consider a racked pistol to be unsafe, a revolver does not have that issue. To each his own I guess.

I doubt anybody that is familiar with handguns would consider a cocked and locked auto to be unsafe.

[Boo]

One point, a failure to fire in a semi-auto means clearing the round and that takes seconds - longer if you don't shoot regularly and practice clearance drills. With a revolver you just pull the trigger again and move to the next round.

That's another point, it seems like fashion comes in it a bit too, revolvers are apparently thought to be old fashioned. If I could shoot a revolver OK then where protection is involved a wheel gun would be my choice.

[No1Mk3]

Interesting discussion as always regarding revolver vs auto, with many diverse opinions. In practical terms though, ie: real world situations and use, everyone who works with a firearm is moving to striker fired semi-auto because in a combat/life protection events the semi has proven itself to be the superior platform. Everyone who has survived several shooting events and trains others chooses to carry a semi, mostly in 9mm. I shoot both revolver and semi in a competition setting and after many years and 10's of 1000's of rounds cannot determine one type to be more reliable, or accurate, than another. The exception to that is long range deliberate fire, for which the single action function of a revolver works best, but no-one uses single action in a defensive shooting, Cheers.

[Blr243]

I had both types years ago ....don’t have cat h licence now. I think pistols have become more reliable. I can trust a revolver 100 per cent. And a pistol 99.9 per cent ...... I think there’s a lot of romance attached to the choice of a pistol over a revolver

[SAnewb85]

Lot of opinions in this thread about H6 training for armed security. My experience was-
I was an armed guard here in Adelaide for a couple years when the "gang of 49" silliness was happening.
Lots of armed robberies in pokies venues.

I can confirm that 95% of the training we received related to the legal justification of drawing and heaven forbid actually firing your side arm.
The other 5% was spent banging rounds down range. Over the course of 3-4 days I think I fired something like 800 rounds from a semi and a revolver at varying distances, low light, draw and fire scenarios and timed multiple targets.

Lucky for me I took advantage of the opportunity to claim range time/ammo on tax and was practising weekly.
Most of the other lads I worked with did the bare minimum to get and maintain their H6.
Im definitely glad that I worked on my own as I didnt trust any of the "bare minimum" types to safely have my back if the sh!t hit the fan.

[Ricochet]

Thanks SAnewb85.
I had guessed there would be sessions on the legal ramifications of even just drawing a gun, let alone pulling the trigger.

Another thing to point out is a lot of modern pistols are double action, so having a round chambered in one of those has little to no difference to having a revolver with it's cylinder loaded. In some cases safer as some of these pistols don't have an exposed hammer to get snagged on something and accidentally cocked but you also get a bit more of a visual indicator of if it's loaded and if the hammer is down or at the half cocked stage of the pull.

[Ziege]

I think that you will find the pistol is more of a fashion accessory than something they're intended to use. Having it is a deterrent and a means of passively suppressing/intimidating any would be criminals. If they're anything like the police, then they would be close to completely useless with the pistol outside of a few meters anyway, yet to see a cop (besides ones that actively compete) that can actually shoot, If I were ever in an area where police were going to fire on a suspect I would be diving for the densest cover I can find lest I be accidentally shot by said officer. same goes for security guards.

[SAnewb85]

I think that you will find the pistol is more of a fashion accessory than something they're intended to use. Having it is a deterrent and a means of passively suppressing/intimidating any would be criminals. If they're anything like the police, then they would be close to completely useless with the pistol outside of a few meters anyway, yet to see a cop (besides ones that actively compete) that can actually shoot, If I were ever in an area where police were going to fire on a suspect I would be diving for the densest cover I can find lest I be accidentally shot by said officer. same goes for security guards.

To call a cop/security guards handgun a "fashion accessory" is being deliberately absurd.

Granted, they definitely have a deterrent/intimidation factor and for the most part the crooks tend to choose a softer target, BUT anyone who carries one for work should actually have the b*lls to use it if necessary.

As an aside, I wish that Australia had open or concealed carry.
Make people who want to carry do the security guard equivalent course and away you go.
Price it so that its a decent investment for the citizen to weed out the idiots who want to play "operator" and be done.

When the shtf and seconds count, cops are minutes away....... i believe in that statement to my very core.

[Bugman]

Interesting that the talk about revolvers and semi auto handguns was brought up. I just saw security vision on the channel 7 news of an assassination attempt on
some fellow in Sydney, and the gunman jumped out of a rear door of a car, took aim one handed, fired off quite a few shots and apparently just wounded the victim who then ran off. Anyone who uses handguns knows that two hands will result in more accuracy. Me thinks the idiot with the gun has been watching too many "gun toting legends" in the Hollywood movie world.

[Ziege]

When the shtf and seconds count, cops are minutes away....... i believe in that statement to my very core.

minutes away? when has this ever been the case? more like a few hours and maccas and 7-11 stops away

[Member-Deleted]

This thread... what a joke :p I'd to keen to hear the opinion of lawyers who have dealt with such cases. So many people here are trying to put the fear of God into people. I will put it down to poor past representation and not enough cases to settle and set a precedent.

Firearms are not a "deterrent," they are not there to threaten people. They are there to end the threat of an aggressor should you reasonably believe that you or another person are in danger of grevious bodily harm or death. Anybody with the slightest bit of experience shooting could tell you when shooting a revolver or even a da/sa semi-auto, it is for more accurate and controlled to fire in a single action manner. Double action under stress could lead to less of a controlled shot and throw the barrel off target. I strongly recommend all shooters; civilian, security, police or military to subscribe to "Active Self Protection" on YouTube, they breakdown situations caught on camera, they do excellent work.

If you reasonably believe that you are in danger, you pull your firearm and you defend yourself if you have to. Compliance can work out for you but you are putting your fate in the hands of the aggressor(s) and quite often that doesn't work out. It is far more unreasonable to put your life in the hands of someone like that instead of defending yourself. You will be scrutinised in court but that is what the court is there for (sometimes) to come up with evidence and facts to determine whether laws were broken and/or the defendent had a genuine defence.

[bladeracer]

This thread... what a joke :p I'd to keen to hear the opinion of lawyers who have dealt with such cases. So many people here are trying to put the fear of God into people. I will put it down to poor past representation and not enough cases to settle and set a precedent.

Firearms are not a "deterrent," they are not there to threaten people. They are there to end the threat of an aggressor should you reasonably believe that you or another person are in danger of grevious bodily harm or death. Anybody with the slightest bit of experience shooting could tell you when shooting a revolver or even a da/sa semi-auto, it is for more accurate and controlled to fire in a single action manner. Double action under stress could lead to less of a controlled shot and throw the barrel off target. I strongly recommend all shooters; civilian, security, police or military to subscribe to "Active Self Protection" on YouTube, they breakdown situations caught on camera, they do excellent work.

If you reasonably believe that you are in danger, you pull your firearm and you defend yourself if you have to. Compliance can work out for you but you are putting your fate in the hands of the aggressor(s) and quite often that doesn't work out. It is far more unreasonable to put your life in the hands of someone like that instead of defending yourself. You will be scrutinised in court but that is what the court is there for (sometimes) to come up with evidence and facts to determine whether laws were broken and/or the defendent had a genuine defence.

For target shooting, cocking the hammer first is definitely more precise, for combat shooting it's unlikely to be relevant.

In IPSC I always started with the hammer down in double-action autos. It doesn't take a lot of practice to get used to the first trigger pull being different from the rest.

Or use a Glock where it's always the same pull.

[Member-Deleted]

In IPSC is that because it was just more effective to shoot the first round in DA rather than taking the time to cock the gun or rack the slide? I'm unsure of the rules for IPSC as I've only watched, never participated in IPSC.

[bladeracer]

In IPSC is that because it was just more effective to shoot the first round in DA rather than taking the time to cock the gun or rack the slide? I'm unsure of the rules for IPSC as I've only watched, never participated in IPSC.

It was because I prefer to shoot IPSC as a practical competition, as in real world combat shooting. I prefer to carry a DA auto with the hammer down on a loaded chamber, safety on. The safety never slowed me down so I never bothered practicing with the safety off. Safety is dropped as you draw then you just start firing, exactly the same as a cocked-and-locked SA auto, but with the additional safety offered by the very long first trigger pull.

[Member-Deleted]

What semi-auto pistol do you use? Also do you have any experience in the security/police/military arena's?

[bladeracer]

What semi-auto pistol do you use? Also do you have any experience in the security/police/military arena's?

Mine was a CZ85 clone made by Tanfoglio, 17+1 of 9mm Para. I stopped pistol shooting in 2003.