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

[George Wallace]

It sucks that people won't be able to wander the Memorial at will, but I think it's time to start using the barriers that are laying all around it. Better they be put together, than laying in the jumbled mess shown in the photos.

If you don't want to arm the guards, there should be armed Parks Service or police personnel patrolling the outer perimeter acting on their own or at the direction of the Guard if someone tries to breech the perimeter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bW4bRcEVEk

Just my  :2c:

One of the people being interviewed that day was a 'construction worker' who said he got his crew out of the area right away quick.  I think he and his crew were actually working on repairs to the memorial and that is why those barricades that you are talking about are there.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

One of the people being interviewed that day was a 'construction worker' who said he got his crew out of the area right away quick.  I think he and his crew were actually working on repairs to the memorial and that is why those barricades that you are talking about are there.

That well may be George. My point, that I'm trying to get discussion on, is setting up a barrier far enough away that if someone tried to breech or climb it, the authorities, whether police, Park Canada or the Guard themselves, would have some time to try and react. One warning to stand fast and cease, the next to shoot. Signs on the barriers should be explicit. If someone is worried about the cost, let the Military Police do the security detail.

 

[cupper]

HM, I think we were getting balled up Use of Force vice Authorization to carry, and ended up arguing past each other. But your points are well taken none the less.

But it does raise a question in my mind about where the authority to authorize the arming of CF personnel come from? Going through the NDA and other related pieces of law and legislation, the best that I can determine is that the authority rests in the Governor in Council. But is it merely the statement in Part II Section 14 of the NDA

PART II
THE CANADIAN FORCES

Constitution

Marginal note:Canadian Forces

14. The Canadian Forces are the armed forces of Her Majesty raised by Canada and consist of one Service called the Canadian Armed Forces.
R.S., c. N-4, s. 14.

or is there something more specific?

 

[George Wallace]

That well may be George. My point, that I'm trying to get discussion on, is setting up a barrier far enough away that if someone tried to breech or climb it, the authorities, whether police, Park Canada or the Guard themselves, would have some time to try and react. One warning to stand fast and cease, the next to shoot. Signs on the barriers should be explicit. If someone is worried about the cost, let the Military Police do the security detail.

I see your point, and similarity to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in the US, where a two man Guard is mounted, and third is 'overwatch' and keeps the public at bay behind a barrier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-dBwdeJSGo

 

[Edward Campbell]

That well may be George. My point, that I'm trying to get discussion on, is setting up a barrier far enough away that if someone tried to breech or climb it, the authorities, whether police, Park Canada or the Guard themselves, would have some time to try and react. One warning to stand fast and cease, the next to shoot. Signs on the barriers should be explicit. If someone is worried about the cost, let the Military Police do the security detail.

I would oppose any barrier to public access to the cenotaph or the Tomb; barriers defeat the real, important purpose of the place, which is not to mount a guard.

 

[cupper]

How is the guard made up? Isn't there a 3rd there to assist the other two? Arm that one with a side arm. I would also go with some unobtrusive barriers to limit the public access, much like Arlington.

There isn't much in the way of barriers at the Tomb of the Unknowns, a simple velvet rope like you see at the bank line or movie theatre. At least that was the way things were when I was last there a couple of years ago. (Seems that I was incorrect, based on the Vid that George posted while I was prepping mine) But it is definitely not somewhere where one could get away with jumping the rope, or even arseing about. The Guard will stop and loudly request that you stop, or be silent and respectful. And there are enough signs making this clear enough. (As is quite clearly shown in Georges vid)

The only time that Arlington is really secure is after hours, when the whole cemetery is closed and locked down.

And the Guard is armed, but in the same way as our Guard is deployed, they are not provided with ammunition. In fact this would be problematic as the sentries undergo a weapons inspection as part of the changing of the guard.

 

[cupper]

I see your point, and similarity to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in the US, where a two man Guard is mounted, and third is 'overwatch' and keeps the public at bay behind a barrier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-dBwdeJSGo

Just a point of clarification, between changing of the guard ceremonies, there are only two sentries on duty. The additional sentry in the video is part of the sentry pair that will be going on duty, not standing overwatch. The short clip appears to be taken right at the start of the ceremony, where the Guard Commander explains what is about to happen, and requests that the audience stand and remain silent and respectful.

Another interesting point as an aside, the 3rd US Infantry Regiment "The Old Guard" is the only unit in the US military that is allowed to pass on parade with bayonets fixed.

 

[JS2218]

Photo from CBC News

To me, it seems contradictory to be guarding the guards, who don't have ammunition or the ability to defend themselves, with other guards, who do have ammunition.  We definitely need to consider the sentry policy; at the very least, why not arm the Sentry Commander, who is usually a Snr NCO or officer anyway?

 

[OldSolduer]

How about an unobtrusive sentry for the sentries? We have a number of trained close protection personally do we not? Why not employ a few of them there?

 

[dapaterson]

How about an unobtrusive sentry for the sentries? We have a number of trained close protection personally do we not? Why not employ a few of them there?

Close Protection are "several on one" - a small group to protect a potential high value target for the enemy (look for photos of the CDS and JAG being moved into an armoured vehicle earlier in the week).  We do not have the numbers or the need to employ them covering sentries, nor would their skills be what is necessary.

 

[tomahawk6]

A police presence should be sufficient to deterr future gunmen.If you look at the Brits armed police are always around parades,barracks,ect.Sentries should have a magazine issued to them.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I agree with dapaterson: the duty is sort of thing for which our own Military Police branch people are adequately qualified. They can also remind other CF members passing by the National War Memorial that it is a saluting zone.

 

[Pieman]

Striking photo of all the flowers around the memorial.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just my opinion again....

1.  There should have been video surveillance along with a minimum team of 4 plain clothes police defending the area to identify the threat and engage it before they were capable of attacking the honour guard.

2.  Once the threat was raised I have enough trust in our soldiers to give them bullets, so that they can participate in 'guarding' the area. 

I don't think building the defensive plan around neutralizing a team of up to 8 attackers is outside what should have been expected.  I think since one untrained whackjob got a unmolested shots off on two unarmed honour guards it's safe to say the plan was significantly less than that.

Again, regardless of what historical norms were, whomever authorized the previous plan needs to be called onto the carpet.


M.

 

[dapaterson]

Video surveillance: Assuming you want it actively monitored and not just recording (which, as the RCMP revealed, is currently done) means probably a staff of four to provide 7 days a week 8 hours a day coverage.

Plainclothes: Again, assuming 4 per day covering 7 days a week 8 hours a day means a staff of eight to provide coverage.

Conservatively estimating $100K/year per person for pay and benefits, that's $1.2M a year additional you want to spend for this function that only started recently.  I suspect the RCMP, Ottawa Police or the CAF have better things to do with that sort of funding.


Soldiers doing "sentry" such as what is done at the War Memorial are not maintaining all around SA.  They are either standing at ease, eyes front, weapon at the order arm position, or at the position of attention, doing a little marching back and forth, weapon at the shoulder.  Have you stood at ease for any length of time with your weapon at the order arm?  Could someone come behind you and grab it?  If so, and your weapon is loaded, instead of carrying a seven shot lever action 30-30, the attacker now has a 30 round automatic rifle.  Similarly, if they attack from behind (as some reports indicate happened here) they have now upgraded their weapon.


Have you ever been to the site in question?  Have you reviewed the sight lines, traffic patterns, approaches etc?  Do you have up to date intelligence information?  Or are you just another internet armchair quarterback?

 

[George Wallace]

Just my opinion again....

1.  There should have been video surveillance along with a minimum team of 4 plain clothes police defending the area to identify the threat and engage it before they were capable of attacking the honour guard.

2.  Once the threat was raised I have enough trust in our soldiers to give them bullets, so that they can participate in 'guarding' the area. 

1.  There is video surveillance of the area.

2.  There are Ottawa City Police constantly in the vicinity.

 

[Jed]

Just my opinion but if I was King for a day this is what I would do:

Give improved training to reservist and regular soldiers (not just MPs) in the use of hand guns: Paying close attention to the applicable LEO Canadian laws and qualify a certain number and maintain their qualification. I would then allow concealed carry and then put it to the CO for command discretion on when this tasking would be authorized.

This would save a lot of rare MP human resources yet provide better security in these strange new times we live in.

This would give a bit better security against Lone Wolf attacks and some of the tasked soldiers would be more comfortable knowing at least someone was around as back up.

They are even giving Fish cops sidearms now so what is the problem? Many people out there just expect you to have a weapon of some sort when you are in a uniform, especially if you are in areas that may be subject to unexpected threats.
 

 

[George Wallace]

Just my opinion but if I was King for a day this is what I would do:

Give improved training to reservist and regular soldiers (not just MPs) in the use of hand guns: Paying close attention to the applicable LEO Canadian laws and qualify a certain number and maintain their qualification. I would then allow concealed carry and then put it to the CO for command discretion on when this tasking would be authorized.

This would save a lot of rare MP human resources yet provide better security in these strange new times we live in.

This would give a bit better security against Lone Wolf attacks and some of the tasked soldiers would be more comfortable knowing at least someone was around as back up.

They are even giving Fish cops sidearms now so what is the problem? Many people out there just expect you to have a weapon of some sort when you are in a uniform, especially if you are in areas that may be subject to unexpected threats.

The costs of what you propose are prohibitive.  First there are not enough handguns to issue to the Reserves and Reg Force, then follows the costs of ammunition to train them to the standard necessary to carry arms at functions.  Then comes the "Conceal" part of your argument:  Where would one conceal a weapon in their DEU?  Arming military in civilian clothes to protect sites like the National War Memorial would compound the problem with Police not knowing who is who when all the guns come out.  As for saving valuable MP resources, you have only robbed Peter to pay Paul and now other resources have to be tasked; again a huge monetary cost.   

 

[Haggis]

Give improved training to reservist and regular soldiers (not just MPs) in the use of hand guns: Paying close attention to the applicable LEO Canadian laws and qualify a certain number and maintain their qualification.

To what standard would we train them?  Keep in mind that mainstream CAF pistol training methodology (i.e. non SOF, MP, CP, NBP) is about 30 years behind how LEO are trained.  Marksmanship training is only part of it.  Knowing when to shoot is probably more important than knowing how to shoot.

 

[expwor]

To what standard would we train them?  Keep in mind that mainstream CAF pistol training methodology (i.e. non SOF, MP, CP, NBP) is about 30 years behind how LEO are trained.  Marksmanship training is only part of it.  Knowing when to shoot is probably more important than knowing how to shoot.

Not only that, with use of force you are to use the least amount of force needed.  Are sentries who get armed also going to get pepper spray, tasers, batons, as well as handcuffs...well you see my point (I hope) If only armed with a loaded rifle, you guarantee deadly force will be used on a suspect (yes suspect, guilt is proved in court)  But the suspect may not have escalated to the point deadly force is needed.  Also consider other spin offs, a gunman may grab a civilian and use him/her as hostage/human shield.  Are sentries trained to deal with that.  What if a sentry shoots and a round ricochets off a building and injuries /kills a civilian
Use of Force is more than just knowing how to use a weapon.  It is also knowing the legal framework for Use of Force, and the various options available to a Peace Officer (firearms, pepper spray, taser, baton etc) when force is required.  The training is extensive. Is the CF willing to spend the money on training sentries to legally be qualified in Use of Force
Just thinking outloud

Tom