Hello Class According To Our Protective Operations Handbook

Hello Classaccording To Ourprotective Operations A Handbook For Sec

Hello class, According to our Protective Operations: A Handbook for Security and Law Enforcement textbook on page 3, it states "In protective work, the mission is to move the principle from point A to point B without Incident". Although this does sound easy and pretty straightforward, there is an endless amount of variables that will determine how security reacts and responds. While reading through our textbook, there were multiple things that were different about police work compared to protective services, but the one that stood out to me the most was the concept of retreating instead of trying to engage or apprehend an enemy who is carrying out an attack. While protecting someone, the priority is getting them to a safe place unharmed, while in police work, the objective is to arrest the person committing a crime.

It really is a textbook example of two different mindsets that are used for different purposes. A protective plan should include a clear and specific Use of Force policy. According to chapter 2 on page 5 of our textbook, it explains that "within this section they would expect to find the rules and regulations to which they are held accountable during the performance of their job". This policy covers things such as shooting a moving vehicle, regulations for providing medical aid, and a variety of other information. It is so important that everyone that is a part of the protective services team be well-versed in use of force policies to avoid any negative consequences that could stem from improper actions.

Protecting the principle is always the #1 priority above all else. -Trevor Works Cited Glen McGovern, Protective Operations: A Handbook for Security and Law Enforcement, Chapters 1&2, Pages 3&5, Good afternoon for this week's discussion I will speak on the principles of protection, what a protective plan should include as well as considerations between the law enforcement mindset and executive protection mindset. Finally, considerations for protecting the principal. As discussed in our reading the principles of protection range from all potential hazards and reducing risks from intentional injury, unintentional injury, embarrassment; and unauthorized release of information to include the principal's schedule.

In simpler terms, it generally covers any form of injury on a person whether it be on purpose or an accidental hazard. Being publicly humiliated or blackmailed. As described, this would include the individual's schedule or PPI (personal protected information) from being released publicly. A plan for this subject should include nearest fire, police departments, hospital, exfil/alternate plans for extraction out of the area, a risk assessment of the area, and information on the principle you are protecting and who are working with. Certain differences that would be different from the law enforcement side of the house to protective security would be that in the eyes of a law enforcement official, they are tasked with the safety of the whole public's well-being whereas on a security detail the focus is primarily on the individual protected.

A scenario of this would be if there was an immediate threat to the principal: in a law enforcement mindset, you de-escalate the situation in the most efficient manner to protect the public by facing it head-on, whereas from a protection perspective, although similar in function, you prioritize moving the principal away from the threat or threats to minimize potential harm to the principal and allocate forces to handle the threat if needed. Several factors that you would have to take into consideration when protecting the principal include the area in which you are working, assessing any known or possible threats in the area, and conducting red cell assessments of the target so you understand why the principal is a target and to identify security gaps.

You can also include routes if you are moving from area to area, or the type of detail that might be needed for a specific mission for the principal.

Paper For Above instruction

Protection strategies and security planning are essential components of safeguarding individuals, especially high-profile figures or principals. The core principle of protective operations is to ensure that the principal can move from point A to point B without incident, despite the myriad variables that could influence security outcomes (McGovern, 2023). Effective protective security entails comprehensive planning, risk assessment, and a clear understanding of the differing mindsets between law enforcement and executive protection.

Principles of Protection and Protective Planning

The primary goal of protective operations is to minimize threats and prevent harm, which encompasses all potential hazards—intentional or unintentional injuries, embarrassment, or unauthorized disclosure of personal information (McGovern, 2023). A comprehensive protective plan must be tailored to this principle, integrating risk assessments, contingency strategies, and clear protocols for the use of force. These protocols must be aligned with organizational policies to avoid legal or operational complications.

Key components of a protective plan include identifying emergency services such as nearest hospitals, fire, and police departments, as well as planning evacuation routes and alternate escape plans. Additionally, understanding the individual’s schedule and personal protected information (PPI) helps mitigate potential threats related to espionage or blackmail. Protective teams must remain vigilant for both known threats and potential vulnerabilities, often conducting red cell assessments to anticipate and neutralize adversarial tactics (McGovern, 2023).

Differences Between Law Enforcement and Protective Services

Law enforcement officers and protective agents serve distinct functions, shaped by differing priorities and operational doctrines. Police are tasked with safeguarding public safety and maintaining order, often engaging directly with perpetrators, including making arrests when appropriate (McGovern, 2023). In contrast, protective services prioritize safeguarding specific individuals; their primary objective is to move the principal to safety with minimal confrontation, emphasizing retreat and evasion over engagement.

In a threat scenario, law enforcement typically aims to de-escalate conflicts and apprehend offenders, whereas protective agents focus on rapid movement of the principal away from danger—sometimes resorting to stealth and concealment rather than confrontation (Andreas, 2009). This divergence underscores the importance of tailored tactics and differing use-of-force policies. Protective teams must be adept at threat assessment, route planning, and coordination with local authorities to ensure safety.

Protecting the Principal: Strategies and Considerations

When protecting a high-profile individual, detailed advance planning is vital. This includes conducting threat assessments, analyzing area vulnerabilities, and establishing secure routes. Protective teams employ intelligence gathering to understand why the principal is targeted, whether for political reasons, personal vendettas, or criminal motives. Play-acting threat scenarios through red cell assessments helps identify security gaps and improve response protocols (Hampton, 2019).

Operational considerations include maintaining situational awareness, coordinating with local law enforcement and emergency services, and ensuring secure communication channels. The protective detail must also plan for contingencies such as medical emergencies or sudden hostile encounters. Route selection, timing, and advance reconnaissance are critical components of successful protective missions.

Comparison of Border Control Strategies: The U.S.-Mexico Versus Northern Borders

The strategic shift in border enforcement policies was catalyzed by post-9/11 security concerns, shifting focus toward preventing terrorism infiltration and controlling illegal immigration. The “Prevention through Deterrence” strategy implemented along the U.S.-Mexico border aimed to make illegal crossings more dangerous and discouraging through increased enforcement, technology, and penalties (Andreas, 2009). This approach was a departure from previous policies focusing primarily on apprehending individuals after crossing.

The southern border experiences significantly higher migration volumes, drug trafficking, and smuggling activities compared to the northern border. The southern border's extensive length and high traffic volume require more extensive enforcement resources—approximately 30 times more Border Patrol agents than the northern border (DHS, 2018). This discrepancy has resulted in increased challenges in controlling illegal crossings, processing migrants, and preventing contraband movement.

Public health concerns, such as disease transmission and injuries during illegal crossings, are substantial on both borders. However, the southern border's higher volume of crossings leads to more significant health risks including COVID-19 transmission in overcrowded crossings and fatalities during perilous journeys (Hampton, 2019). The northern border, with fewer crossings, faces distinct challenges like the movement of refugees and increased migrant flows from other countries, prompting updates to border strategies as observed in DHS's periodic reviews (DHS, 2018).

Enemies and Public Safety Concerns

The concept of an “enemy” in border enforcement is multifaceted. Initially, the focus was on terrorists attempting to exploit border vulnerabilities; over time, this expanded to encompass criminal organizations involved in drug trafficking, human smuggling, and illegal immigration enforcement (Andreas, 2009). From a national security perspective, threats include potential terrorism infiltration, while from a public safety standpoint, the health risks, injuries, and fatalities associated with illegal crossings are paramount.

Malpractice and abuse by border agents pose additional threats, including excessive use of force, corruption, and violations of legal protections for migrants. Reports indicate that some agents engage in improper conduct, such as unwarranted searches, injuries during apprehension, or denying aid to vulnerable individuals (Hampton, 2019). These issues undermine the legitimacy of enforcement efforts and highlight the importance of oversight and accountability mechanisms.

Both the southwestern and northern borders face similar health and safety issues, though the scale differs. Increased border traffic at the southern border results in higher incidences of injuries, overdoses, and disease transmission. Conversely, the northern border experiences challenges related to refugee flows and different smuggling tactics. The DHS continuously reviews and updates border security strategies to adapt to changing threats and operational realities (DHS, 2018).

Conclusion

The complexities of border enforcement require dynamic, multi-layered strategies tailored to geopolitical, social, and security contexts. The evolution from post-9/11 counterterrorism efforts to comprehensive immigration control underscores the importance of balancing security with humanitarian considerations. Robust protective operations, whether securing an individual or national borders, depend on meticulous planning, threat assessment, and adherence to legal and ethical standards. Recognizing the differences between law enforcement and protective services enhances the effectiveness of security operations, ultimately contributing to safer communities and nations.

References

• Andreas, P. (2009). Border games: policing the U.S.-Mexico divide (2nd ed.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• DHS. (2018). DHS announces strengthened northern border strategy. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/12/dhs-announces-strengthened-northern-border-strategy
• Hampton, K. (2019). Zero protection: How U.S. border enforcement harms migrant safety and health. Physicians for Human Rights.
• McGovern, G. (2023). Protective Operations: A Handbook for Security and Law Enforcement. Pages 3-5.
• W. A. Ewing. (2014). "Enemy territory": Immigration enforcement in the US-mexico borderlands. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 2(3).