B.C. border guards leave posts after report of threat

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by fredr123

I would be even less proud if, after significant whining, these border guards were finally armed but still retreated. That would look even stupider. On the other hand, I wouldn't want them to stand and fight unless they were adequately prepared for it. I'm less than confident they will be prepared to that extent.

So in that light, there are two possible outcomes:
1. Border guards are armed and still retreat; or
2. Border guards stand and fight though inadequately trained and casualties occur

Why are you assuming that they wil not be properly trained?
cynical isn't it?

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by fredr123

See, I think this goes to a point I tried to make above but wasn't very clear.

Customs officers are treated by their employer as more akin to bank tellers than law enforcement agents. Customs officers would probably like to be treated more like law enforcement agents since some of their duties (such as arresting smugglers and enforcing the 4 million statutes they claim to enforce) no doubt fall within that category. Demanding to be properly armed and trained to do their job makes sense. Thus the union stance. I question the need to walk off the job so often now but I digress...

Changing from a customs officer to a border guard will require a paradigm shift. The way Customs uses force now is different from how police officers do. For the most part, force is used to control a subject during a lawful arrest or as self-defence. Disengaging when things get too dangerous is hammered into their psyche. A police officer doesn't have the luxury of disengaging. If they are doing their thing, they can't let the culprit win and will, when necessary, shoot the bad guy.

Such a shift will require, in my opinion, more than merely a new gun license and some shooting lessons. It should mean that the standards used for selecting border guards should be raised commensurate with the expectation of a higher level of skill and responsibility in the job. In no way do I mean to disparage current customs officers but I believe there are a lot of them out there that should not be allowed to meet this higher standard.

If that's the case, then you'll have a pile of officers no longer qualified to do their job and a number of spaces that need to be filled by uber-qualified individuals. You can shift those other officers around all you want but I'm not sure there are enough spaces for them. And on top of that the employer will have to deal with the Union response to suddenly having a bunch of its members out of work.

Filling the spots with uber-qualified people will put CBSA in competition with police agencies across the country. Ask the RCMP and CPS how easy it is to attract, train and retain qualified individuals.

So what would the cheap and easy solution to this be? Lower the standards. If this were to occur you would have a group of workers who potentially don't past muster carrying guns trying to do a job that they probably aren't qualified for. Not cool.

you are making alot of assumptions. From what I read it's takign them 4 years to do this and is costing many millions of dollars. They are not simply handing out guns here.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by White Doors

Why are you assuming that they wil not be properly trained?
cynical isn't it?

See my post directly above yours. While I doubt proper training will be given, I am hopeful it will. A Harper-lead government has a better chance of doing this than the former Liberal government so here's to fingers crossed.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by White Doors

you are making alot of assumptions. From what I read it's takign them 4 years to do this and is costing many millions of dollars. They are not simply handing out guns here.

In all fairness (and with a giant smirk on my face) you may be making the worst assumption of all: that the government will do things properly

[jolinar of malkshor]

[quote=fredr123;566582]I'm not convinced that giving the border guards guns would solve anything in this situation. I have doubts the clause that allows CBSA to withdraw their services if they feel in danger would ever be removed, even if they were armed. Even with guns, the CBSA officers could take off from the port just like we saw yesterday (and several times before).[QUOTE]

Once officers are armed, they will have to negotiate a new CBA and I am pretty sure the government will not allow them to walk off the job once they are armed due to safety reasons of that nature.

I'm also not convinced that having an armed border would prevent dangerous people from trying to enter our country. I have doubts that the government has the capacity to properly train and arm the thousands of border officers necessary to bring about the secure border so many people envision.

Having armed officers will prevent dangerous people from entering the country. (as long as they go through the port of entry). You won't have situations like this where they just wave the guy in (and that is there policy now. That is why they walk off the job. The government says that if a dangerous person attempts entry into Canada, they are to dis-engage and call the mounties. The problem is the mounties arrive hours later due to their own budget crunch and lack of officers.

As for the training, you are most certainly right. They do not have the capacity to train their officers now, let alone a more indepth training program along with a commitment to hire an additional 400 officers. There needs to be more money and additional regional training centres instead of one in Regaud Quebec that is 60 years old.

It will take a fundamental shift in thinking to change CBSA officers into border guards. To expect them to properly use a firearm and defend the border with force, if necessary, is a completely different job from what they are used to and trained for.

Your right regarding the old time officers. They were hired as tax collectors, that doesn't mean this can't be implemented over time. There are many officers that will qualify to use these firearms now. No one has said that every officer needs to be armed all at once.

Consider the intensity and quality of training that police officers go through in order to be properly prepared to handle dangerous situations where deadly force may be used. The average person probably wouldn't qualify through that training program. Hopefully the government, in handing out firearms to border officers, makes similar training necessary. Not doing so would be irresponsible. (The counter-example to all of this is probably Brinks or Securicor where they basically protect millions of dollars with poorly-trained loose cannons.)

Proper training will definately take place. If not they open up a can of litigation when untrained officers start abusing their powers.

Given what has happened in the past with the unions and employer involved, I could see a good deal of resistance to the more rigorous training. Already there is a fairly rigorous training process in place but older officers are grandfathered around those requirements. That shouldn't be allowed for anyone with a gun. What happens if it is found that a good 50% or so of the current border guards are unfit to carry firearms? Do they attempt to recruit better officers? Where do these higher-quality candidates come from? Or do they just lower the standards?

I would argue that more than 50% will not pass the requirements to carry firearms, however, like I said, no one says every officer needs to be armed now. You can't take one fo the largest law-enforcment agencies and turn it into a new entity over night. The ball starts rolling now and may end up at the bottem of the hill 10-15 years from now. It degfinately won't be completed in 4 years like someone else posted.

The alternative, I suppose, is to make a tough business decision and keep things going the way they are currently. Give the officers minimal training and protection (to keep costs down) and deploy RCMP or local police the odd time a real threat occurs. This way is much cheaper given the high cost of properly training border guards. I'm not sure I would continue down this path though...

Again, the RCMP are barely able to staff themselves, there is no way that they could man each port. The RCMP are to diverse (as far as operation go) as it is. Leave the border security up to the border officers.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by fredr123

See my post directly above yours. While I doubt proper training will be given, I am hopeful it will. A Harper-lead government has a better chance of doing this than the former Liberal government so here's to fingers crossed.

Yes, your point is much clearer now.

I agree on all accounts; the worst thing we can do is provide firearms to border agents who have not been properly certified.

It will take more training, better candidate selection, as the job has more responsibility. Border agents without the guns remind me of the everyday security officers, and we all know how much training THEY need.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Filling the spots with uber-qualified people will put CBSA in competition with police agencies across the country. Ask the RCMP and CPS how easy it is to attract, train and retain qualified individuals.

I have a problem with this. Remember how the RCMP responded when they were given a bigger role in the Terrorism War?

The same thing might happen here.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Border agents without the guns remind me of the everyday security officers, and we all know how much training THEY need.

[/QUOTE]

Do every day security officers require a minimum of a diploma to have a job? (same as police) Do everyday security officers have to attend a 13 week training program in Reguad Quebec? Are every day security officers certified in the use of pepperspray and baton?

If you consider border guards as everyday security guards then you so are DOT officers, conservation officers, bylaw officers, county constables.

IMO there is no comparision.

[CaramonLS]

Browna, I think your example about Bank Tellers is a bit off.

If your bank received a threat that it was going to be robbed, would you be coming to work?

[Azure]

Do every day security officers require a minimum of a diploma to have a job? (same as police) Do everyday security officers have to attend a 13 week training program in Reguad Quebec? Are every day security officers certified in the use of pepperspray and baton?

If you consider border guards as everyday security guards then you so are DOT officers, conservation officers, bylaw officers, county constables.

IMO there is no comparision.

I'm not talking about certification or training. I'm talking about the job itself. For a border agent WITHOUT a gun, he is like a security officer.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not talking about certification or training. I'm talking about the job itself. For a border agent WITHOUT a gun, he is like a security officer.

Oh, ok. So what your saying is they are pretty much as useless as the mall security guard without the proper tools.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Oh, ok. So what your saying is they are pretty much as useless as the mall security guard without the proper tools.

Exactly.

[Superflyer]

Originally Posted by jonesy

report: bad guys plan to come to canada
response from canadian border guys: help, run away, retreat!

Makes me proud.
Oh well, at least we have a lot of land to retreat back into.

Are you sure this happened in B.C. and not Quebec

[fredr123]

Do every day security officers require a minimum of a diploma to have a job? (same as police) Do everyday security officers have to attend a 13 week training program in Reguad Quebec? Are every day security officers certified in the use of pepperspray and baton?

While that might be true of new CBSA recruits, how many of the current officers don't have a diploma or degree? How many haven't had to go to Regaud at all or at least not in the last 10-15+ years? How many have obtained exepmtions from pepperspray and baton training?

Probably not a large percentage but still too many. And chances are the group that didn't have to go through any of that probably holds more senior positions. Just sayin'...

[fredr123]

Wimps!

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Wimps!

###### does that make me sick. That is the kind of **** I am talking about. The liberals don't give jack**** about our countries security. I hope they never get back into office.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by fredr123

While that might be true of new CBSA recruits, how many of the current officers don't have a diploma or degree? How many haven't had to go to Regaud at all or at least not in the last 10-15+ years? How many have obtained exepmtions from pepperspray and baton training?

Probably not a large percentage but still too many. And chances are the group that didn't have to go through any of that probably holds more senior positions. Just sayin'...

That can be said for any organization. You can't tell me that police officers that have been on the force for 30 years plus have had to go through the same hiring proceedure as new recruits. Most police that on the force that have over 20 years service, don't have a degree or diploma. If they do it's usually because they got it after they were hired onto the force.

Also, so what that it has been 10-15 years since they have been to Reguad. Do you expect them to go back after a certain time period? We all know that on the job training is far superior than in class training. I would argue...use Reguad to train use of force, firearms training and proper arrest procedures only. The rest can be learned on the job.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

That can be said for any organization. You can't tell me that police officers that have been on the force for 30 years plus have had to go through the same hiring proceedure as new recruits. Most police that on the force that have over 20 years service, don't have a degree or diploma. If they do it's usually because they got it after they were hired onto the force.

Also, so what that it has been 10-15 years since they have been to Reguad. Do you expect them to go back after a certain time period? We all know that on the job training is far superior than in class training. I would argue...use Reguad to train use of force, firearms training and proper arrest procedures only. The rest can be learned on the job.

On the job training? Use of force training needs to be done on the job and on an ongoing basis. But it isn't and probably won't be. Why? $$$$$$$$$$!!!!!

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by fredr123

On the job training? Use of force training needs to be done on the job and on an ongoing basis. But it isn't and probably won't be. Why? $$$$$$$$$$!!!!!

Use of force certification needs to be done every three years. And if it isn't you don't work. Unless....like you said....you are an old timer and need to be accomidated.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Use of force certification needs to be done every three years. And if it isn't you don't work. Unless....like you said....you are an old timer and need to be accomidated.

I meant on the job training more along the lines of a shift a month or something where you actually practice your skills. Any idea how often CPS or the RCMP spends working on such practice?