Skip to main content

PSOs at airport?

Image
By scooby
Anyone heard official (or unofficial) reaction to the PSOs, in uniform and with their automaic weapons and Glocks at the San Jose Airport to pick up another PSO from a trip?
http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_16181816?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

Comments

Anonymous said…
They are too worried about keeping their jobs. Almost 2/3 will be let go in less than 2 years when the Superblock pu deinventory is completed.
10/01/2010 5:21 AM
thief said…
Can't imagine that this wouldn't be thought of as Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.
10/01/2010 6:56 AM
Anonymous said…
Is it common practice for LLNL to send armed escort to pick up a fellow employee at the airport?
Was he in possession of something that possibly required extra security?
10/01/2010 7:05 AM
Anonymous said…
Lab PSO are basically private security guards when not on LLNL sites. However, before the LLC took over, LLNL use to have a small plainclothes UC Police detail at the Lab - their primary job was state law enforcement and criminal investigations involving LLNL property. Since they were actual sworn armed California peace officers they also handled VIP and Executive Protection duties off-site. This included protecting or escorting high profile/risk employees to and from off-site locations like the airports or public meetings venues. That's all gone away when the UC Police were deactivated at LLNL.

PSOs can still go off-site, but they have the same authority and arrest powers as "Mall Cops" or bank guards when not at the Lab.

Remember that lots of high profile well known celebrities travel with private security body guards all the time - many are armed and have concealed guns on them. But in the case of an anonymous lab employee, uniformed heavily armed PSO in a public place would draw more attention to them, so one has to ask about the wisdom of sending escorts in the first place.

Bottom line - What the heck were they and their supervisor in Lab Security thinking?!
10/01/2010 3:18 PM
Anonymous said…
These guys, if the story was true, were cleared by TSA and airport police to be armed in the airport. If they chose to keep the reasons from the press, there must have been a good reason (from a security standpoint). If you don't like it, complain to your congressperson. Stop whining - nobody you know got shot.
10/02/2010 10:30 PM
Anonymous said…
Rehearsing for Halloween?

Does Miller need that much protection offsite?
10/03/2010 9:44 AM
Anonymous said…
PSOs at the airport had all the rights and privileges of you, the average citizen. Once they left the lab they were private citizens in possession of automatic weapons at the airport, and with a marked security vehicle illegally parked at the curb, with emergency lights flashing. They were lucky TSA or local law wasn't awake to challenge them by demanding they disarm themselves, etc.
10/03/2010 7:47 PM
Anonymous said…
For me it all comes down to one question: Who and/or what required such security measures?
10/12/2010 12:12 PM
Anonymous said…
What this really tells you is the level of security at our airports. These guys walked around with weapons and no one challenged/questioned them. You want to talk about fraud, waste and abuse ? What about some buildings at LLNL putting flat screen tv's in hallways that no one watches ? Now that's a waste of ca$h.
10/13/2010 10:02 AM
Anonymous said…
Uh - - - have you noticed that after this "incident" the Security Organization has been playing managerial musical chairs. Me thinks that someone in a lofty place has been attempting to salvage their highly paid position . . .
10/13/2010 8:52 PM
Anonymous said…
Here's my problem with it. PSO's are non sworn, private security guards. No more or less authority to arrest or protect than the armed guy at the movie theatre or bank. They are issued a firearms permit to carry out there duties of securing the lab. So, you had civilian security guards carrying fully automatic (3 round burst at least) weapons into an airport area. They have no more authority to do that than you or I. They were illegally carrying their loaded NFA weapons in public. As far as I am concerned, someone needs to answer for this legally. If the principle at the airport was so important as to require armed escorts, we have the secret service, FBI, DOE, and any number of sworn law enforcement agencies available to provide this service, legally. Lab PSO's are not high speed low drag swat cops. They are security guards designed to keep bad guys out, and the important stuff in the lab. Them even leaving site (unless it's actually in the course of protecting the lab) with their NFA class 3 rifles is most likely in violation of State of Ca. laws.
10/14/2010 4:30 PM
Anonymous said…
It astounds me the level of comment on this thread by people who obviously have no knowledge of the incident in question or of the rules and laws governing the activities of security personnel involved. All of those issues are easily resolved by referring to to the appropriate Federal regulations and DOE orders in compliance with such. Jeez, people, do your homework! And no, I am not going to do it for you! The incident was appropriately handled and merits no further discussion. Get over it! Seriously, do you really think TSA would let armed security guards do this without prior arrangements being made and approved? Jeez!!
10/15/2010 9:42 PM
Anonymous said…
I personally think that these PSO's take themselves far too serious. This is not the first problem with them offsite. I have witnessed them come flying down Almond Ave and stop in the middle of the road and pull out their weapons right infront of the daycare center. I happened to have my 2 year old daughter walking with me. It would be one thing if they were actually at one of the leased buildings at Almond School but right infront of the daycare in the middle of road?????
10/15/2010 11:51 PM
Anonymous said…
There's a major shuffle going on right now in Safeguards and Security so that certain Managers responsible for this incident can keep their high paying salary and at the same time make it look like action was taken. The Labs don't hold their overpaid Managers accountable. If they wanted to really save jobs and cared about people they should let these bozo's go. Instead it's business as usual.
10/17/2010 9:42 PM
Anonymous said…
You people astound me. Listen secretaries, they're not PSOs it's SPO and it is short for Security POLICE OFFICER. Yes they do have statutory powers of arrest, they can make arrests without warrant and their authority allows them to do it off site. Matter of fact of all the felonies and misdemeanors they are empowered to enforce none of them state only as long as the offender stays on site. I seem to recall there being a lot of happy employees at the lab on 9/12/2001 because of them. They are the shield that protects your nit picking backsides if there is a threat of mayhem to your life at work. They are also the ones asked to throw themselves into the breach to stop those who would do us harm from getting a hold of stuff that would make our counties unlivable for 50,000 years. Next time maybe you should just be happy they are there, willing to put up with your pettiness in order to protect you and your loved ones.

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
-- George Orwell
10/19/2010 4:32 PM
Anonymous said…
10/19 4:32 pm: Bravo!! Well said. You are of course correct about the SPOs both at LLNL and at LANL. These folks put their lives on the line to protect the pansy asses of the scientists and secretaries. Too bad they don't recognize or appreciate it. They are in much more daily danger than they realize.
10/19/2010 9:19 PM
Anonymous said…
Q. Are you sure, or have the laws changed?

Used to be the UC Police had the power to arrest, but the Lab officers did NOT. In case of protest or need for mass arrest the Lab Officers would detain until the UC Police could arrest.
1/22/2011 10:36 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more