The Dumbing down of Society!

Kia Ora,

When looking for the footage to add to my previous blog of the ape with the AK-47 after I was sent a copy, another clip came up.



Initially I thought it might be a spoof until talking to someone with more knowledge about this area than I who bascially said apes are a lot brighter than we give them credit for. They even said look up Bonobo as they are the smartest of the apes.

In recent years many people including myself have remarked about how society appears to be getting dumbed down by our education system.

Dr Dolf de Roos remarks about it in a fashion when giving his life story about how he arrived at decision to do an engineering degree. Basically he looked at medicine he didn't like blood so when looking at most other avenues & they were you had to follow a set path. Then he looked at engineering which was problem solving. Totally different type of thinking all together. In fact he maintains that helped him as an investor because been an investor is looking at problems & then finding a solution.

A good investor looks for problems.

We are seeing the same issue arising in the security industry here in New Zealand. The proposed new mandatory regulations will basically have as we are getting a team of little robots who don't or can't think outside the square & are actually trained in everything but security.

As I have said previously on leaving the military I completed a security course. Thing is the instructors were people who strived for excellence. Two of them being ex military taught in a military fashion so a lot of hands on training, red herrings thrown in(by a person often referred to in the army as Mr Red Herring) so people had to think.

Still meet people off those courses who say again & again how it was often the best training they have ever done. Not only that you can see those who come off a course with similar type of training are streets ahead of most graduates of security courses in New Zealand.

Having the requirements for a qualification written down on paper & taught in a classroom still does not qualify someone for the job on the ground. Neither does spending four hours in a gym a day. That sort of work out is only what most guards are able to dream about once they are on the workface.

Just yesterday in a financial newsletter I receive was this comment which I thinks sum it up nicely "Degrees & qualifications are important in organizations that don't actually produce anything". Good security will do its utmost to protect people & property so saving a business costs in the long run.

Most security if they stick to what is taught currently are just a presence no more no less who don't really care.

But then that is what the likes of CBD Business owner are used too & that is what they expect. They don't expect security to think for themselves.

We are following the US system but New Zealand has taken it a step further & it alone is destroying our ability to ever again compete on a world stage in business.

I have noticed a debate on Linkedin talking about what is great about New Zealand. Most of the points I have seen are now myths. That New Zealand no longer exists.

We still do have people with great ideas but as people keep discovering they usually have to go offshore for them to succeed. Or as the couple who started 42 Below said in their book "Every Bastard says No" to succeed in New Zealand you almost have to succeed offshore first.

Personally still plan to succeed here first, but the biggest hurdle is the New Zealand small mindedness as shown by the CBD Business owner. So have had to think of other ways of achieving it.

New Zealanders(generally ex military) are some of the top security people in the world but those people are only recognized outside New Zealand.

Now had they come to a good New Zealand security entity(there are some of us) then a solution to effectively secure(nothing is ever 100% secure but it would be a hell of a lot more secure than has been or currently is) the Christchurch CBD red zone would of been found.

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

How it all comes together!

Kia Ora,

Well I was going to put post up I have written on proactive security. First though came the comment from the CBD business owner. Couldn't really work out why a Christchurch CBD business owner would be upset with the exposing of how insecure the cordon really is.

That was not until another security professional suggested it is likely to be a security company. That would explain the small mindedness, lack of security knowledge & supposed outrage.

The first role of any security professional is to educate even it means exposing how badly run things are.

Though I am hard on the industry I see around me it is not all that bad. There are some good operators in a New Zealand context like the company I often do sub contract work for. Standards are so much higher than the norm you find in the industry. Then there are those that have brought high standards from the likes of Britain who like me get frustrated with the lack of recognition of higher standards & low standards that clients like to have provided for them. They base their security decisions on cost not on ability.

A reliable source tells me that the standards set for security by the likes of standards New Zealand are sufficient to be off an international standard. The problem is most running the training starting with ETITO(EIEIO) do not understand the standards fully. I would say they don't understand them period. At present many we are getting from courses seem to be have been taught three things.

How to sleep on duty(everyone gets tired & many whiplash at one time or another) but going to sleep an hour or so into your shift during the day is not on.

How to not carryout security.

How to argue you should be able to use drugs in the security industry or just use them.

As I finished the last post in reply to the comments from the CBD Business owner I received an email in regards to the second round of submissions for the new mandatory training requirements for the security industry.

It looks like nothing has been learnt & the same old, same old is about to be put in place with the same low standards.

Then I received an email from a highly experienced international security operator that to me puts it in a highly amusing light.



Even though it would appear to be a fake it shows one thing. At present most of those instructing in security in New Zealand are represented by the soldiers & the students by the Chimp. Monkey see Monkey do. Like what we are encountering some of the students like the Chimp are brighter than the current instructors.

It is all part of the dumbing down of society people are seeing. Lately I have had the privilege to also work with people with a bit of life experience but no qualifications apart from on the job training. No contest they beat the ones from the current courses hands down. The ability to think is been taught out of people in the current slavery system on which the education system is based.

I don't think anyone disagrees that some sort of training is required. Most of it though needs to be on the work face than on a little tick in the box course.

What there needs to be is a base security course for all areas but taught by those with a view to teaching to a higher level. It also requires recognition of experience & previous higher level training. Add in courses for specific areas after some experience is gained but again most training needs to happen in the industry as each area or site is different.

All the system they propose is, is a rort for someone to make a lot of cash to carryout a course which has no real relevance to the industry or how it operates.

At present the industry is viewed poorly & much of it comes back to the poor training provided. One police officer made the comment that in Auckland 50% of those they arrest in Auckland at present are actually in the security industry. Some of their comrades seemed to bring that attitude to Christchurch & led to issues leading up to our wrongful arrest.

The other issue that goes hand in hand with the training is the requirement to have regulations providing a formula on the number of security needed for events & for health & safety reasons. Currently it is left to the client to dictate that leaving security open to assaults(as winessed the other night) or worse(as experienced at times).

This is part of the education of our society. I have lost count of how many times in last few years I have been asked by members of the public if it is bodyarmour/stab vest I am wearing which upon confirmation I am, to be told that you "don't need that in New Zealand" or Christchurch. It just shows how out of touch the New Zealand public are with their communities.

As one Christchurch police officer said about a year ago. Virtually every person they now arrest has a knife on them without a lawful purpose.

Having at times confronted people with iron bars, knives, pieces of wood, had firearms discharged in our direction on at least two occassions it seems the Christchurch I live in is quite different than those who bury their head in the sand.

One last point to the CBD Business owner is obviously they also don't understand the use of social media in marketing a business. It pays to be contraversial & its even better as in my case when the facts back your assertions.

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

CBD Business owner lacks Security Knowledge!

Kia Ora,

Well I have received a very upset un named reply to my last post so it will not be published since they know they are wrong by not publishing their name.

But I will quickly refute their false accusations.

First they claim that the fence was only ever there for a controlled worksite not for security. Totally incorrect. Fence was erected to aid security. By having a fence up it allows individuals to be arrested immediately as they are in a fenced/enclosed area.

Not only that the CERA webstie tells you how secure the CBD is in particular due to the fences & other aids. In fact the answer by authorities to information we supplied about breaches(from sub contract work in the CBD Red Zone) was to erect more fences but that doesn't work by itself. It is obvious the CBD business owner hasn't looked if they have been inside the cordon as too where fences were erected. If they had, they would of asked why? They certainly aren't there for a controlled worksite.

Criticizes the company as not been good enough. Fact: The reason I first got my individual licence then formed two companies as was informed that was my best option since my standards were too high for security in New Zealand. Just because they are used to extremely low standards is not my fault.

They claim it would need actual security expertise to make the place secure.

Funny have that expertise from been in the military(highest level of security-used to give lessons on this form of security) & PSD in Iraq (second highest level of security). Not my fault NZ doesn't practice good security & doesn't like good security yet.

As many of those I have worked with in the military & Iraq have said to me. Look NZ is just not ready for real security yet. Keep it humming along & when it happens they will not have a clue what to do so you & others will be in a position to step up.

It is not just me either someone with a lot more international experience in high levels of security including as a consultant in dangerous areas, yet when back here for a break his experience is ignored & gets offered work as a guard only.

CBD business owner shows their lack of knowledge of real security where the likes of myself practice it. Many even more highly skilled security operators than myself have returned to NZ to again head offshore because of the lack of recognition of real security experience & knowledge.

I had warned that NZ was not ready for a terrorist attack(still isn't it needs to start practising proactive security again to counter terrorist attacks) or in that matter as has shown a large natural disaster. We practice procedures that are just not relevant in a real large emergency situation but can't get out of that mindset.

CBD business owner claims I miss the point. It is definitely the other way around. Effective security could be provided & not at the cost they are looking at. Yes it would cost but it is right now. Having been part of the military involved in emergencies, I know that any use of the military has to be paid for. Yes someone is billed for the military providing manpower(surprised me too when I first learned of it during an emergency).

Private security would cost less in the long run. That is why PSD's are used so much in Iraq & Afghanistan. Why the UN is considering using PSD's for intervention. As they free the military up from some tasks & though well paid actually cost less than having a standing army. It is what NZ will have to look at with recent military cutbacks.

It is quite evident from their rant that the only big mouth with a small mind(their words) is this CBD business owner. The cordon is not a controlled worksite but a security cordon. Typical New Zealand small minded thinking here. I know they will be under stress having a business there but they need to deal with the facts not the myth put out there.

Just because they have never been exposed to real security is no reason to try to shoot the messenger.

As stated & again they miss the point, my last post did not show any weaknesses in the system not already known. In fact it was breached again today but the person was not removed or seen by the volunteers or police but by a worker in the Red Zone. Before they comment they need to learn to read.

The point is their business like everyone elses is not secure. Despite the assurances given they are.

If you are not prepared to put your name to a comment it will not be published especially if a rant based on myth not facts.

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

How secure is the Christchurch CBD Red Zone really?

Kia Ora,

In short its not & never really has been apart from first week or so whilst people gathered themselves.

We entered the Red Zone about a week & a half after the February 22nd wee shake to carryout a security task.

First few days we were there the police were everywhere soldiers manned most of the fences & yet still we could see people breaching the cordon. Over the first two weeks we caught or spotted about ten breaches at night & the day shift just lost count.

One issue was as more & more fences become unmanned people just pulled them aside or climbed them(one day 8 trucks & people were seen to enter retrieve their goods from businesses & residence in a drop zone, nothing was initially done even though police were informed).

One that was manned the soldiers thought the cars flicking their lights on full were looking for the girls who used to occupy that street. They were quickly put right in that what the cars were doing was the same tactic as the looters in the residential areas out east were doing. Trying to see if anyone was manning the gate or sleeping so they could breach. Out east they were trying to see if people were home.

As time went on especially after the bridge near us was closed we saw less & less police down our end & they withdrew the officer at a post nearby where we were going on our patrols to report anything we seen.

With the street next to us, which we had to travel to check some of the three buildings we were there to keep an eye on, suddenly closed off due to likelihood of falling material then the bridge the other side due to our checks becoming closed off we suddenly had to range quite wide to keep up the security. It did mean travelling outside our designated area but the police were always informed why we were doing that when stopped. Not that it was much use as out of town police they had no idea of the areas on the Maps detailing your area of work.

After four weeks we were withdrawn but were back shortly after as one of those buildings was looted. The looters came up the river by boat. But then we had been telling people we had seen tracks of someone walking up the river bank. One guy was even caught by our team who had been told by authorities to walk up the river bank(though he obviously wasn't supposed to get as far as he did).

During the day contractors who have too, due to heavy machinery or trucks not been able to turn around, open the cordon fences. Because those fences are not manned as much as they have been it is common for cars to follow trucks in.

Not to mention that those on the check points got slack & were more interested on what is on their Ipod or MP3 than getting out of their deck chairs to stop people from entering even on foot as one person told me they did one night. Another woman was able to walk the length of the red zone to her place of work during the day.

In the last two weeks a group of tourists have been caught by someone working inside the redzone walking around. In exchange for not calling the police they had the tourists take them back to where they got in. Fence was pulled up & everyone was crawling under it within 100 metres of a check point. It is actually a common point people are gaining access.

Sources tell me one burglar only got caught because it was so easy to get in & avoid poice patrols he went back a third time only to be caught by a patrol not roving around with their lights on full going at warp factor 9(which was unusual).

Just recently whilst in the vicinity of the cordon someone asked how to get to an intersection they shouldn't be able too, to get into the red zone to recover items. They had no pass, no helmet or high viz. The intersection is nomally on the edge of the cordon but not a point of entry. So obviously someone had found a breach & they were going to enter to retrieve their goods. All we told them was they had to go to the Art Gallery to get a pass. But on talking to someone else working on the edge of the cordon it seemed the directions to that corner was often asked.

Like a regular highway into the Red Zone it seems & everybody knows about it.

It was actually the same area where tourists breached & the two I caught when going to visit someone. No one acted on the information we gave previously to stop breaches so waste of time telling anyone.

It was obvious though the older police officers understood what we were doing in the way of proactive security, since we could not actually patrol the buildings we were looking after, that many police now don't understand the nature of been proactive. Driving around at speed with your headlights on full(especially in fog) & sidelights blazing is not proactive. Its nothing.

Apparently there are a number of postings on Youtube of business owners & residences getting in to get their goods avoiding police easily.

Then there is the new volunteer force to patrol the outer perimeter of the CBD. From observations passed to me pretty much what I expected.

Next to Useless!

Much what you get with the community watch programme. Some very good people & most who have no idea what suspicious activity is. There used to be a crew out Hornby way that were very very good but they left for same reasons for my comment above.

They haven't as yet picked up the breaches in the fences others have seen as they go past. It is really a feel good patrol not a security patrol.

Overall the security situation inside the red zone is extremely poor. A tagger had even left their mark on the fourth story of a badly damaged & dangerous building. One large tag was obviously after the September earthquake, the other next to it though referred to the February shake.

One reason some people have said that we were wrongfully arrested in there was by our proactive security actions were showing up the police as we dominated our area & the locals in the red zone were noticing it(& telling us about it).

We certainly weren't perfect & restrictions initially meant we could not patrol around the most vulnerable building.Therefore we did proactive patrolling on bikes around the edges. We had to ignore those restrictions & enter a major drop zone after a good police patrol who were trying to do their utmost to keep the place secure asked us to stop patrolling one area. Our only option was to take a walk into a drop zone.

Putting up fences all over the place & not manning them doesn't provide security in New Zealand either.

The best option in future disasters in cities in New Zealand is put in good local security patrols(yes there are alot of poor security but it is usually known who are the good security) to patrol say on bikes or on foot in designated areas co ordinated by one group. Not just give it to one company & let them bring in out of town guards. Use security too to man the fences. Again it free up resources.

One thing is locals tend to know the local problems & likely routes in. End of the day it frees up police to concentrate on other tasks. Yes there will be bad eggs but there are in any organization. I know one other security organization had similar problems after catching some looters early on they suddenly become the enemy/suspects. It was we are meant to be here & are helping you. At times it has seemed even now there is more emphasis on those legitimately working there than actual looters.

Another issue that freeing up police will take care off is what was observed in this disaster. They came to help but many of them had never experienced an earthquake little lone the ones Christchurch is getting & like many they were shocked when a good one hit. In fact we called later shakes the attitude adjusters. For many locals it was "here we go again so lets get it over with".

None of this information will help those breaching anymore as it is generally known in Christchurch that claims the cordon is working are not true. In fact when we returned to the red zone after the looting it was the locals who were able to tell us how it happened & which building had been looted. Others in the wider Christchurch community have also been able to tell us details when we had been told to keep quiet about it.

So the red zone secure? Not likely!

It is no wonder so much looting has been discovered. Claims that much of it probably happened in the first few weeks or is mainly by workers are wide of the mark from what I or others have observed.

The easy pickings early on were out in the eastern suburbs.

As one Maori Warden informed us the inner city was more targeted inititially everytime the cordon was reduced. Looters were hitting those premises in the newly opened area, he was catching them making them drop their goods then letting the next police patrol know where the goods were. That also allowed them to start getting eyes on the CBD & where the weaknesses were.

It seems that virtually everyone that wants to knows how insecure the cordon really is except Civil Defence now CERA, the police, the military, Operation Suburb & the new volunteers. It really is a circus!

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

So is it Fraud or sheer incompetence by Government Department?

Kia Ora,

Well in follow up to a recent post about the new security licensing regime here in New Zealand have noticed something else that are in the process of bringing to authorities attention.

Whilst everyone is heated up over the poor renewal process, overlooked has been the fees area.

Now the first part that appears could be fraudulent is the issue of transfer fees. Most would say but we have always had to pay transfer fees.

Yes there have always been transfer fees to transfer a COA(Certificate of Approval) from one license holder to another. Under the new regime though the COA belongs to the guard so therefore there is no one to transfer the COA too.

The other issue that appears to be fraud by double dipping is the fee licence holders are to pay for the number of COA's working for them.

It actually flies in the face of how security works in New Zealand especially in the crowd control area.

To have enough work people need to in the New Zealand Security industry work for several companies at the same time.

Now if you were licensed under the old system with a COA you needed to ask permission of the license holder to do so & in the crowd control area you didn't need to have a COA at all.

Crowd control has been until now a core group who have security as their livelihood & a lot of on call people for bigger events. When short it has been use recruitment agencies to supply what are effectively labourers, or groups such as martial arts clubs or sports clubs as way of fund raising. None of whom really know what they are doing in sometimes potentially quite dangerous situations.

Under the new system the guard holds the COA & therefore could be working (as I was in the early days with my own individual licence as opposed to a COA) as an employee for up to six companies. So when the Ministry of Justice wants a return of those working for a license holder the Ministry could be collecting the same fee six times over for one person. Effectively committing a form of fraud called double dipping.

Removal of the ability to work for several companies at a time would cause major issues as it would effectively mean many events would not be able to go ahead. New Zealand already operates in the security sphere well below par & this would just drive it down even further.

If they want revenue gathering ideas they are better to look at the training regime.

First point is get ETITO(better known as EIEIO because they are a joke) out of security industry involvement. They don't know anything about security or training.

Next remove the minimum four month course for funding requirements. Put in an effective system for recognition of prior learning &/or experience. That is much better than present system where those with less experience or training are often assessing those with more.

That would allow a three week base security course to be set up using military system of training (BHL/BHE) as it works for a practical industry. In fact I have seen it used in current system & those who come from courses using it are much higher in level of competency.

Following the three week basic course it would then be followed by the courses in areas you wish to work in. Some courses would only be one to two days.

Each new area can be endorsed on your records since the actual COA is no longer a card but a certificate. The photo ID has a number which police etc could check through the computer system.

Overall recent issues show the lack of real consultation or understanding of the industry by those who put the legislation together or are trying to implement it.

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

Ban the Burqa?

Kia Ora,

Extremely busy at present but aim to have regular posts again.

One issue that has come up in the last week is that of the wearing of a Burqa or at least face veils by Muslim women in New Zealand.

Some points raised have been farcical.

It transpires that two bus drivers in Auckland refused to allow Burqa wearing women onto their buses.

In my opinion the bus company involved has been so Politically Correct they have issued the drivers a written warning which isn't really warranted.

At the same time though they have taken the unions suggestion & are going to introduce a security module to driver training prior to the Rugby World Cup.

Really it shows out of touch New Zealand is with the wider world. But some security person here will offer a module. First part of any security module should be drivers being allowed to refuse people getting on a bus where they don't feel safe.

As a secular country & in the interests of security like everyone else who covers their face, those with face veils should have to remove them on boarding a bus, catching a Taxi, entering any commercial premises or dealing with anyone in authority such as police or even security.

That just fits with been in New Zealand.

Whilst in say Kuwait the use of a Burqa is common place & if visiting we must accept it as part of life.

In fact whilst in Kuwait awaiting a flight out one woman in a Burqa made a very deliberate flirting gesture which you couldn't do in normal western dress. So it is not always so bad. Just had to do a quick look for the cameras as being the foreigner in the equation I would of been arrested since it wouldn't of happened if I had not been there or so the reasoning goes.

This security module for bus drivers though is what concerns me. Apart from the points above what are they going to teach?

Just seeing a face doesn't stop them being a suicide bomber. I believe I have mentioned it before in these posts that whilst working in Iraq we were made aware of a website set up for applications to be a suicide bomber over half the applicants were young boys & women.

The only security solution for a suicide bomber is a bullet between the eyes.

In the US city of Newwark, New Jersey they have ordered an armed security guard to be at all restaurants after a drive by shooting. In New Zealand we would organize a group hug.

For real security for the Rugby World Cup, New Zealand needs to come into the real world.

www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz