Min
Member
what handgun would you carry??
9mm, .40, .45, etc
Revolver or semi-auto
9mm, .40, .45, etc
Revolver or semi-auto
If you got a job as an armored truck or security guard
- Thread starter Min
- Start date
- Status
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
I would carry what the company told me I could carry.
Giving a choice, I would probably carry a 1911 .45, or a S&W 66 .357, or a Glock 23 .40.
rcmodel
Giving a choice, I would probably carry a 1911 .45, or a S&W 66 .357, or a Glock 23 .40.
rcmodel
jaysouth
Member
You would likely carry what the company issued you.
BattleChimp Potemkin
Member
rcmodel is on the spot with that. Its up to them what caliber you can carry in many occasions. Before my current desk job, the outfit I worked with was really wonky and, while allowing more freedom, were very strange in what could be used:
No .357 but you could carry .41 Mag or .44 Special.
No .45 Auto but .40 and .357 Sig was okay.
No "mouse gun calibers" but .380 and .32 Long was accepted (they were THAT specific on calibers).
They were at least kind enough to issue carry ammo, but practice stuff was purchased by the employee for the once a year qualifications (scariest time of my life considering the sweeping and pure foolishness of many of the other guards). The ammo usually given for carry was White Box JHP. Heck, one guy on the group carried .357 Sig, they didnt even give him JHP, 125gr. FMJ. Scary.
Check a list of approved calibers, but also GUNS too. The outfit we had said that you can carry a Glock (paid for by yourself) or they issue you a Smith model 13 (police trade in) or a Ruger P94 (beat to crap and very very worn, issued before the company even began). They stipulated even what kinds of guns you could have:
No Tanfolgios or EAAs, but a CZ was okay.
No Taurus, but in the handbook, the list of "encouraged" guns included a Taurus PT92.
1911s were not allowed as the administration running the company believed them "too unreliable with the amount of clones and parts available" (puke), however a FEW Para's were listed as okay (not that one could afford one on the amount paid for the job, but also no .45 models
).
Hi-Powers were allowed, but according to the rules, ANY single action gun was to be decocked and carried empty chamber, but no such rule for DAO or DA.
All weapons carried could NOT have night sights or ANY modifications (ZOINKS!), even a Hogue Handall on a early gen Glock was considered a modification.
Mags were to be loaded only to 10 rounds or 10 round mags used. Only 1 extra mag was alowed, but one could carry as many speedloaders as long as it didnt interfere with movementD).
Personally, I carried the 13 for a while, then bought a police trade in Smith 4006. They even took out of my check and I got to keep the 13 when I left (the 4006 was mine to begin with). When I left, the company pretty much was bought out by Loomis (good thing as I heard they were very restrictive on equipment, aka, you purchased it on their dollar so they told you what to buy).
ITs all up to them, but alot of the companies lately have been issueing/equipping/encouraging their members to get Glocks. I would assume that is due to control simplicity and easy to get/repair parts. Older Smith 3rd Gens and revolvers (Mostly Ruger GP100s and Smith 10s) are the norm for alot of other companies.
No .357 but you could carry .41 Mag or .44 Special.
No .45 Auto but .40 and .357 Sig was okay.
No "mouse gun calibers" but .380 and .32 Long was accepted (they were THAT specific on calibers).
They were at least kind enough to issue carry ammo, but practice stuff was purchased by the employee for the once a year qualifications (scariest time of my life considering the sweeping and pure foolishness of many of the other guards). The ammo usually given for carry was White Box JHP. Heck, one guy on the group carried .357 Sig, they didnt even give him JHP, 125gr. FMJ. Scary.
Check a list of approved calibers, but also GUNS too. The outfit we had said that you can carry a Glock (paid for by yourself) or they issue you a Smith model 13 (police trade in) or a Ruger P94 (beat to crap and very very worn, issued before the company even began). They stipulated even what kinds of guns you could have:
No Tanfolgios or EAAs, but a CZ was okay.
No Taurus, but in the handbook, the list of "encouraged" guns included a Taurus PT92.
1911s were not allowed as the administration running the company believed them "too unreliable with the amount of clones and parts available" (puke), however a FEW Para's were listed as okay (not that one could afford one on the amount paid for the job, but also no .45 models
).Hi-Powers were allowed, but according to the rules, ANY single action gun was to be decocked and carried empty chamber, but no such rule for DAO or DA.
All weapons carried could NOT have night sights or ANY modifications (ZOINKS!), even a Hogue Handall on a early gen Glock was considered a modification.
Mags were to be loaded only to 10 rounds or 10 round mags used. Only 1 extra mag was alowed, but one could carry as many speedloaders as long as it didnt interfere with movement
D).Personally, I carried the 13 for a while, then bought a police trade in Smith 4006. They even took out of my check and I got to keep the 13 when I left (the 4006 was mine to begin with). When I left, the company pretty much was bought out by Loomis (good thing as I heard they were very restrictive on equipment, aka, you purchased it on their dollar so they told you what to buy).
ITs all up to them, but alot of the companies lately have been issueing/equipping/encouraging their members to get Glocks. I would assume that is due to control simplicity and easy to get/repair parts. Older Smith 3rd Gens and revolvers (Mostly Ruger GP100s and Smith 10s) are the norm for alot of other companies.
I had applied for an armored car guard job and was hired. I never went to work as I got my fire department job the very next day. Any way they had S&W 686 but carried only issued 38 spl ammo. No other options for guns. Now 6 years later I see a variety of revolvers and semi autos unknown calibers.
mgregg85
Member
That rule just smacks of absolute stupidity if you ask me. I guess I don't see the point of it. If I was carrying a hicap pistol I would load the mags to their full capacity no matter what their rule book says.
I just got a job working unarmed security now that I am back here in michigan. I'm wondering, are there any legal repercussions for carrying(it is against company rules, I know they could fire me). I just want to know if they could try to get me in legal trouble if they ever found out.
Sistema1927
Member
Honestly, if I had to get a job as a security guard or an armored truck driver, I would probably shoot myself first.
Might be fine for others, but not my cup of tea.
Might be fine for others, but not my cup of tea.
The Lone Haranguer
Member
I wouldn't go that farSistema1927 said:
, but $9-$11 an hour is not much money considering you (usually) have to get the state "guard card" at your own expense and the responsibility of deadly force to protect money that is not yours.To answer the question, of the guns I have now, probably my Glock 19.
mljdeckard
Member
These horrific rules all protect you DEAD LAST, if at all.
freakshow10mm
member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,951
I'd carry whatever was allowed, preference being a 357 Mag for a wheelgun or a .45 Auto for a pistol. I'd be fine with a 9 or 40 though.
armoredman
Member
I did it for 8.5 years, two differant outfits, carried a Smith 10-5 with Wells Fargo, required to use 158gr LRN. Eek.
With ATS, I carried my Witness 40 with two spare mags, 135gr JHP ammo. They didn'treally care what it was, as long as it worked well, and you could shoot it straight. Issue from them was a Smith 686 4 inch.
With ATS, I carried my Witness 40 with two spare mags, 135gr JHP ammo. They didn'treally care what it was, as long as it worked well, and you could shoot it straight. Issue from them was a Smith 686 4 inch.
doc2rn
Member
I would buy a thunder ranch .45 ACP revolver. You need a revo because shooting out the SHTF slots will jam an auto on most armoured vehicles. Even though the danger point is entering the vehicle in a public lot.
Kind of Blued
Member
If I had a job as an armored truck, I'd probably just carry whatever my owners needed me to haul around town.
If I was the driver of said truck, I would probably carry a Glock 19 with some spare 33-round magazines dangling underneath my armpits.
If I was the driver of said truck, I would probably carry a Glock 19 with some spare 33-round magazines dangling underneath my armpits.
Devonai
Member
These days, I carry what the Air Force tells me to carry, the M9. If I had my way I would also have an M4 carbine, but they're not authorized for private security (yet).
When I worked for Brinks about a hundred years ago, they issued the S&W 64. Backup weapons were not sanctioned, but were common nonetheless. I carried my Beretta 92 in a shoulder holster underneath my uniform shirt. I was highly motivated, to say the least.
When I worked for Brinks about a hundred years ago, they issued the S&W 64. Backup weapons were not sanctioned, but were common nonetheless. I carried my Beretta 92 in a shoulder holster underneath my uniform shirt. I was highly motivated, to say the least.
RichardInFlorida
Member
A lot of states have laws (or at least regulations) the specify the caliber and/or type of firearms allowed.
For example, here in the state of Florida (IIRC), a uniformed security guard can carry a 9mm semi-auto or a .38 SPL revolver. There are certain provisions (i.e. 'more unusual regulation') for shotguns/.223 rifles.
In Georgia, the law was that a licensed security guard could carry any handgun with a caliber equal to or less than .38. That of course included .357, .38, and 9mm, but also a variety of other firearms also. I knew one guy who carried a Sig P220 in .38 Super. (He had the hardest time finding magazines for that thing.) I don't know if this is still the law in GA.
--Richard
For example, here in the state of Florida (IIRC), a uniformed security guard can carry a 9mm semi-auto or a .38 SPL revolver. There are certain provisions (i.e. 'more unusual regulation') for shotguns/.223 rifles.
In Georgia, the law was that a licensed security guard could carry any handgun with a caliber equal to or less than .38. That of course included .357, .38, and 9mm, but also a variety of other firearms also. I knew one guy who carried a Sig P220 in .38 Super. (He had the hardest time finding magazines for that thing.) I don't know if this is still the law in GA.
--Richard
I'll skip the pistol.......and sling the AK across the front of my chest (Or a 12ga pump gun carried the same way).......at least that way I am on par with what the opposition might be carrying.
But seriously.........
I shoot well with my HK USP45, and it is nothing less than 100% reliable. I would have no problem carrying that on a duty belt....12+1 rds of .45 in the gun, and two more 12 rounders on the belt.
But seriously.........
I shoot well with my HK USP45, and it is nothing less than 100% reliable. I would have no problem carrying that on a duty belt....12+1 rds of .45 in the gun, and two more 12 rounders on the belt.
Ridgerunner665
Member
I have done both jobs you mention...I carried a 40 S&W both times (Glock...as bad as I hate to admit that)...but that was "a few" years ago...now I would be carrying my 1911 if it was allowed (45acp)
leadcounsel
member
mgregg85 asked:
In general employment law, the company sets out rules that the employee must follow for a couple of reasons:
1) If you fail to follow the rules, they have cause to fire you (even in "employment at will" states, it's always cleaner if the employer can say you violated their policy to negate any chance for a discriminatory lawsuit
2) If you fail to follow their policy and that failure leads to some neglegent act, the company can sever legal responsibility from you by saying that you were acting outside the scope of your employment.
Taking the two above reasons for weapons policies and applying them to the security job facts: Let's suppose the company only authorises a 9mm semiautomatic and you decide to carry a .44 magnum with the hottest load you can find. One day you come out of the bank carrying a bag of money and there is an armed robber with a ski mask holding up your truck. Being the hero you are, you draw down and fire several times and blast him away, thereby saving your co-workers and saving your company $100,000. Unfortunately, one of your bullets misses the robber and goes through a couple of car doors and strikes Sally, a single mother of three, killing her. Now Sally's estate is sueing you and your company for a negligent act.
You company has a great legal defense team. Unfortunately for you the defense team recommends severing ties with you because you acted outside the scope of your employment, thereby reducing the companies legal fees and legal responsibility. So your company prompty fires you for a material violation of company policy that, they say, if it had not been violated, could have resulted in a different outcome for Sally. In their infinite wisdom, a 9mm would have been a better choice than the .44 magnum. And you company presents this defense to the judge and he allows the company to severe ties with you in the courtroom AND grants their motion to dismiss the case against the company on grounds that you were personally negligent and liable in your acts because it was outside the scope of your employment as it clearly states in your contract.
Now, you are all alone in court with your own lawyer paid for out of your own pocket staring at a private civil lawsuit and possibly criminal charges of negligent homicide, without the deep pocket wiz defense team provided for by the company.
So - is it worth breaking company policy so you can carry a marginally better gun?
Absolutely not. Carry only what they authorize and follow their rules to the letter or get a different job.
One other note, you can probably make more money delivering pizzas than protecting banks' money. It's not worth $10 and hour to be an armed escort for an attractive target for violent thieves. Ever seen the movie HEAT?
In general employment law, the company sets out rules that the employee must follow for a couple of reasons:
1) If you fail to follow the rules, they have cause to fire you (even in "employment at will" states, it's always cleaner if the employer can say you violated their policy to negate any chance for a discriminatory lawsuit
2) If you fail to follow their policy and that failure leads to some neglegent act, the company can sever legal responsibility from you by saying that you were acting outside the scope of your employment.
Taking the two above reasons for weapons policies and applying them to the security job facts: Let's suppose the company only authorises a 9mm semiautomatic and you decide to carry a .44 magnum with the hottest load you can find. One day you come out of the bank carrying a bag of money and there is an armed robber with a ski mask holding up your truck. Being the hero you are, you draw down and fire several times and blast him away, thereby saving your co-workers and saving your company $100,000. Unfortunately, one of your bullets misses the robber and goes through a couple of car doors and strikes Sally, a single mother of three, killing her. Now Sally's estate is sueing you and your company for a negligent act.
You company has a great legal defense team. Unfortunately for you the defense team recommends severing ties with you because you acted outside the scope of your employment, thereby reducing the companies legal fees and legal responsibility. So your company prompty fires you for a material violation of company policy that, they say, if it had not been violated, could have resulted in a different outcome for Sally. In their infinite wisdom, a 9mm would have been a better choice than the .44 magnum. And you company presents this defense to the judge and he allows the company to severe ties with you in the courtroom AND grants their motion to dismiss the case against the company on grounds that you were personally negligent and liable in your acts because it was outside the scope of your employment as it clearly states in your contract.
Now, you are all alone in court with your own lawyer paid for out of your own pocket staring at a private civil lawsuit and possibly criminal charges of negligent homicide, without the deep pocket wiz defense team provided for by the company.
So - is it worth breaking company policy so you can carry a marginally better gun?
Absolutely not. Carry only what they authorize and follow their rules to the letter or get a different job.
One other note, you can probably make more money delivering pizzas than protecting banks' money. It's not worth $10 and hour to be an armed escort for an attractive target for violent thieves. Ever seen the movie HEAT?
give
Member
have to agree,getting paid 11 bucks an hour to guard money is crazy if it was my job and we got held up the only thing they would be getting from me is the money,lol
cliffy
member
.45 ACP or screw the job
Gee, I said it all in my title. cliffy
Gee, I said it all in my title. cliffy
Treo
member
In Colorado armed gaurds are allowed .38 revolvers or a 9mm or 40 S&W semi auto.
If you are licensed as a unarmed security guard and you are caught W/ a weapon it's a 500.00$ fine , you will very likely lose your CHP and you will be fired.
I considered going armed for the pay raise until I found out it was standard policy to fire any guard who used a gun in the line of duty.
Oh well I graduate in a year.
If you are licensed as a unarmed security guard and you are caught W/ a weapon it's a 500.00$ fine , you will very likely lose your CHP and you will be fired.
I considered going armed for the pay raise until I found out it was standard policy to fire any guard who used a gun in the line of duty.
Oh well I graduate in a year.
bukijin
Member
12g shotgun
- Status
