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

[OldSolduer]

"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/hrm
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

Those rates will pretty much guarantee that little protection will  be afforded to the Cenotaph Guard IMO.

 

[ballz]

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.

I don't want to get into this debate as I think most people are covering my thoughts anyway... but I disagree with this.

If I understand it, there were 4x soldiers there. 2x guards and 2x mbrs "not on guard" talking to people, etc. In this case, Cpl Cirillo was shot and his fire team partner, unarmed and probably 10 feet away from the shooter, fled the immediate scene. The 2x pers who were not on guard duty remained and tried to help Cpl Cirillo.

While the twit that did this may have managed to get the first shot off at Cpl Cirillo and could very well have killed him, I suspect (knowing one of the guys that stayed and tried to help, and knowing many of the troops that were tasked on this [some are my platoon, some are my company]) that if all four were armed he'd have gotten his share of bullets returned his way and would have been unable to run away and continue his plan.

 

[McG]

^ That.

I feel like I am reading the for side of a Liberal attack add.  Soldiers with guns. In our cities. Not in my Canada. 

The suggested domestic scenario is no more complicated/difficult than expectations of restraint and de-escalation that existed in many of our post Cold War theatres where the threat has often been difficult to identify.  As for legal authority, if we can find legal authority for armed US customs officers on Canadian soil, then surely we can find the authority for Canadian service members.

 

[Remius]

^ That.

I feel like I am reading the for side of a Liberal attack add.  Soldiers with guns. In our cities. Not in my Canada. 

The suggested domestic scenario is no more complicated/difficult than expectations of restraint and de-escalation that existed in many of our post Cold War theatres where the threat has often been difficult to identify.  As for legal authority, if we can find legal authority for armed US customs officers on Canadian soil, then surely we can find the authority for Canadian service members.

Not sure why you would get that impression.  If we can have proper training for said soldiers sure but that won't happen.  And as I've stated, sentries cannot act quickly or effectively in the role they are doing, essentially very specific ceremonial drill, with loaded weapons.  And a c7 round is going to travel a lot farther than a 9mm round in downtown ottawa with 360 degrees of traffic and pedestrians  It's not a question of being a liberal or whatever, it's about effectiveness.  If you want to arm the minders you can but until you train them properly (unlikely) then you pay the price for cops to do what they do. 

Someone with a gun is going to be there to protect them so the end state is achieved.

 

[McG]

We train for environments as complicated as downtown Ottawa.  There are four trained service members on the guard duty and only two are engaged in the ceremonial role.  There is no reason to pay out near $50k a month to park a fire team of Ottawa constables at the monument when we already have the personnel in place.

 

[Jed]

We train for environments as complicated as downtown Ottawa.  There are four trained service members on the guard duty and only two are engaged in the ceremonial role.  There is no reason to pay out near $50k a month to park a fire team of Ottawa constables at the monument when we already have the personnel in place.

On the mark.

 

[Alberta Bound]

Just a couple points;

Not sure where the "armed" US Customs people are ? Take a closer look when you walk through that US preclearence at Canadian airports.

This whole thing is about the will to make it happen. Not far away is a substantial RCMP presence at Parliment. Why not have a member rotate to stand a post at the Memorial.

Or can you increase the MP contingent in Ottawa to cover this duty? Short term means 4 temp bodies  With radio contact with OPS or the RCMP.

Or increase the training to the sentries and arm all additionally with pistols and a proper ammunition for the duty. 

There are more efficient ways than paying OPS OT to stand there.

 

[McG]

Not sure where the "armed" US Customs people are ?   

It is coming: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/new-border-deal-canada-customs-agents-could-work-in-u-s-vice-versa-1.2996454

 

[Robert0288]

It is coming: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/new-border-deal-canada-customs-agents-could-work-in-u-s-vice-versa-1.2996454

That should be it's own complete thread.


Jed, I see where you are coming from, and I know that I would like to have at least a mag with me in case I need it.  You also put emphasis on properly trained.  And here is where I disagree.  I don't believe that Canadians, Politicians or DND are ready to put soldiers on the street with loaded firearms who are NOT properly trained in dealing with the situations they might come across in Canada that may require the use of force and be able to respond to the same manner as they expect from law enforcement.

To clarify, I'm not worried that they will be unable, I am worried that they will do so incorrectly.  Haggis brought up IMIM, the model for use of force that the RCMP and other law enforcement agencies use. Take a look at it.  Through out the IMIM you have 'Officer Presence, Tactical Repositioning, and communication.  Those 3 things can get you out of a lot of situations.  However as a sentry.  You can't use any of them until it's too late. 


One idea thing I do like, is add an additional person or 2 onto the RCMP detail at parliament, and have that as part of the rotation, like having individuals at the main gates.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I feel like I am reading the for side of a Liberal attack add.  Soldiers with guns. In our cities. Not in my Canada. 

I have zero problem with trained troops doing their job anywhere in Canada with loaded weapons, including in our streets.  That said ....

.... if we can find legal authority for armed US customs officers on Canadian soil, then surely we can find the authority for Canadian service members.

.... if government is reluctant to call this what many see it as, and if they're already talking to police about the work, I don't see an appetite to say out loud, "we, in Canada, are so much in danger and under threat that we must change the rules so that soldiers, not police, need to protect us."

 

[The_Falcon]

Just want to point out to those bringing up using a LE use of force response model, and having that + other defensive tools as reasons why our sentry's can't be armed, well there are probably a couple of thousand armed security (mostly doing armoured transport), and the only tool they get issued with is a pistol.

Police need additional tools and tactics because they are typically expected to de-escalate situations and arrest people so they can be brought to justice. The reason people want armed guards at the cenotaph is not much different than the reason a Brinks guard is armed, and that is solely to protect their life, due to the job they are doing.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just want to point out to those bringing up using a LE use of force response model, and having that + other defensive tools as reasons why our sentry's can't be armed, well there are probably a couple of thousand armed security (mostly doing armoured transport), and the only tool they get issued with is a pistol.

Police need additional tools and tactics because they are typically expected to de-escalate situations and arrest people so they can be brought to justice. The reason people want armed guards at the cenotaph is not much different than the reason a Brinks guard is armed, and that is solely to protect their life, due to the job they are doing.

Those are great points.  I'd like to think a trained soldier is as qualified to carry a pistol as a brinks guard.

Soldiers are very public targets for extremists.  The fact that this Cpl was shot in the back and he couldn't have defended himself in this scenario whether he had live rounds or not isn't relevant.

 

[Jed]

Those are great points.  I'd like to think a trained soldier is as qualified to carry a pistol as a brinks guard.

Soldiers are very public targets for extremists.  The fact that this Cpl was shot in the back and he couldn't have defended himself in this scenario whether he had live rounds or not isn't relevant.

I would like to point out that everyone is using 20/20 hindsight on this one particular situation as to what would have happened if the Cenotaph's guards were armed. I guarantee the next event will have different circumstances then this event. Maybe the next time something happens the bad guy will be more obvious before taking the first shot. Maybe if the guards had a concealed carry pistol they would have used them prior to a shot second shot being fired.

One thing for sure is if you have no adequate means of self defence you will continue to remain just as vulnerable to attack.

 

[Haggis]

Just want to point out to those bringing up using a LE use of force response model, and having that + other defensive tools as reasons why our sentry's can't be armed, well there are probably a couple of thousand armed security (mostly doing armoured transport), and the only tool they get issued with is a pistol.

They also wear body armour, have the freedom to maintain 360 degree awareness while working and have mobile armoured cover available.

Police need additional tools and tactics because they are typically expected to de-escalate situations and arrest people so they can be brought to justice. The reason people want armed guards at the cenotaph is not much different than the reason a Brinks guard is armed, and that is solely to protect their life, due to the job they are doing.

My belief is that, if anyone was to be armed at the NWM,it should be the "guardian angel" who is there to look after the sentries.  S/he should also have the tools to deal with any and all threats from a drunken lout to an obnoxious tourist up to and including an armed extremist. A pistol alone won't do all that.

 

[Jed]

They also wear body armour, have the freedom to maintain 360 degree awareness while working and have mobile armoured cover available.

My belief is that, if anyone was to be armed at the NWM,it should be the "guardian angel" who is there to look after the sentries.  S/he should also have the tools to deal with any and all threats from a drunken lout to an obnoxious tourist up to and including an armed extremist. A pistol alone won't do all that.

Probably most Canadians, at least civilians, agree with you. A bet the majority of soldiers standing guard duty disagree though.

 

[Remius]

Probably most Canadians, at least civilians, agree with you. A bet the majority of soldiers standing guard duty disagree though.

I have done it and I have trained people to do it.  I happen to agree with Haggis.  while the young private or corporal standing there might feel some degree of safety having a mag full of ammo on him, he's much safer with the "guardian angel" concept for a variety of reasons already listed and many that are not.

 

[Jed]

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.

 

[dapaterson]

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

 

[The_Falcon]

They also wear body armour, have the freedom to maintain 360 degree awareness while working and have mobile armoured cover available.

The first point yes, the second two, not always. For example when I worked with Brinks, many "runs" involved simply the messenger (person carrying the money/valubles) and the driver. With Brinks drivers never leave the vehicle, which meant the messenger would be by themselves, and depending on the location may be focused on something like opening a safe/atm. Also in the majority of robberies the crews were intercepted and blocked from getting into their trucks, so the ability to use the truck as cover is fairly limited (there are also security features that make getting in quickly rather difficult).

 

[The_Falcon]

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

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.