Base Security

[Recce41]

For about 2 weeks, wives are not allowed on Base Petawawa. They cannot pickup their Husbands from work, drop mail off, etc. Why ? for no real reason but people are over reacting. There is no real threat to most bases and most Canadians don‘t even know that we here an army let alone a terrorist. My wife a military spouse, a Canadian, and former member of the Military, cannot get on Base to get me from work.
Lets get real, if they canot get on base, issue dependent IDs like in Germany. It would not cost much to try to live to a norm.
My wive is not dark, black haired, dresed in a rap. She is light, Red hair, in jeans. She asked the Mps why and got different answers. They don‘t even know why. So if anyone can comeup with a real answers tell me. For even on most of my UN, Nato tours, people could come and go, even without ID.
Sgt J. CD, CDS com

 

[Gunner]

The direction from the DCDS was people entering a military establishment would have proper ID on them prior to entering a base. I don ‘t know why Petawawa would not allow your wife on base if she has the proper ID. Some people get carried away with security, etc. Some bases even have armed guards on their front gates. This is a Comds call to ensure his base/units remain operational.

Anyone know why Petawawa is locked down like Fort Knox?

 

[Soldier of Fortune]

Im not sure but maybe my other post that was locked might have some answers.

 

[colinj]

i know for a fact that it is like that at ASU Petawawa, but are the other bases like that? :dontpanic:

 

[the patriot]

I think we maybe seeing a shift back to the old days of "operational security". For the last little while there has been an "open base" policy where the public could freely roam around on all bases. The theory being that taxpayers have every right to see where their money is going. Well I guess the taxpayer should now understand that our soldiers‘ lives come first, not the public‘s annoying bloody right to know.

-the patriot-

 

[ender]

Yes, but there is such a thing as taking security to ridiculous extremes. For instance, last parade night there I was at the door of my unit checking peoples ID‘s. I know everyone in my unit on sight. It‘s pretty silly (to me) to demand indentification from your own section commander.

(Especially since the higher levels of government compeletly ignore operational security. According to the Access to Information Act, anyone can get a list of members in a particular unit, thier rank and thier position. If that doesn‘t compromise security, I don‘t know what does.)

 

[fortuncookie5084]

...I wondered if I had forgotten my ID card---a hideous temporary card that got half-questioned while I was on a base in another country because anyone with a scanner and a colour printer can make one (come on! Everyone needs modern ID cards)---would the piquet guy not have let me in for my tuesday night LHQ? I bet not.

 

[armybuck041]

Ever been to a base in england? One time on my way home from Kosovo we stopped at Brize Norton overnight and went to oxford to go on the piss. The gate was covered and patrolled by squadies with SA-80‘s. This was long before sept. 11. I realize there is no IRA threat here, but come on now. It‘s about time we started tightening up a bit. While I was in 2 CER, the base used to leave the back gate open, and there was nothing stopping someone from stealing trucks etc. right out of the compound. In fact most of the decking for the regt‘s ACROW bridge wooden decking was stolen by passers by on the highway.

I‘m sorry if ID checks are that inconvienient, but last time I checked we are Canada‘s "LAST" line of defence, it‘s about time we started acting like it!!

 

[ender]

Granted, but:

1) wives and relatives with a legit reason to go on base should be granted some kind of dependent card

2) if you know who someone is, checking thier ID for parade night is kind of silly.

 

[the patriot]

Ender,

It‘s quite possible that your section commander has watched "Face Off" far too many times and thinks that you traded faces with an Islamic terrorist (sarcasm). Yes, it does sound rediculous. I guess one just has to go through the various motions to ensure everyone‘s safety.

-the patriot-

 

[Infanteer]

Wanna hear rediculous, having to ID some eighty year veteran so he could get in to the Rememberance Day ceremonies; it was horrible watching one older gentleman with a rackfull of medals get turned away because he didn‘t have any photo ID on him....
So, a note to terrorists, if you wanna take down and installation, bring your drivers licence and your in the clear.

 

[ender]

Treating a vetran like that is disgusting.

 

[Infanteer]

Don‘t tell me that, tell the idiot in Area or Brigade HQ that thought that would be a good policy to keep military instillations secure.

 

[Gunner]

Infanteer, you had better rephrase your question

tell the idiot in Area or Brigade HQ that thought that would be a good policy to keep military instillations secure.

That‘s their job. It is also the job of the soldier checking IDs that if he runs into a problem to notify his superior. Hopefully, his superior would have some common sense and allow the veteran into the establishment. But if you let the veteran in to the establishment, are you going to let in someone who is, lets say, racially similar to the terrorists? If you don‘t you have just discriminated against a Canadian who has just as much right to enter the building as the jingling veteran.

 

[centurion]

Originally posted by Gunner:

the jingling veteran.

[ 26 November 2001: Message edited by: Gunner ][/QB]

Such a quaint, respectful phrase. Conjurs up thoughts of court jesters! I‘m sure the thousands would love to be connected with that image. Sorry, that‘s not how I see them.

 

[Infanteer]

Sir, I guess I should clarify my problems with the policy and your response to my statement.

The problem I had was that the policy was not really applicable to the Militia bases located in urban areas, and I have the sneaking suspicion that the commanders of these units weren‘t given much leeway by high-ups. My CO gave the security briefing to the doormen, and I think he was right when he said that the rule seemed more applicable to our mega bases out in the toolies...(I digress, this is a whole other issue.) The policy of having a pass to enter DND property is totally unsuitable for a small local milita armoury, therefore this half-*** policy was pitched out in an effort to make up for this fact.

Anyways, I felt the regs surrounding entry to the base went unneccessarily too far. And it was not me who turned the veteran away, it was an NCO who did it under the eyes of an officer in charge, who said there was nothing he could do. In my opinion, this was poor judgement, as the old veteran posed no obvious threat to the property or the people within the armouries.

So, my problems with your statement are two fold:
1) Letting the veteran in over anyone else is not descrimination. First of all, we wouldn‘t descriminate against anyone on ethnic grounds, and I hope you weren‘t implying that we were. It was across the board; no exceptions, except for soldiers of the regiment. However, I feel that the that the veterans had just as much right to freely walk in as the serving members. The scrutiny of the general public was warrented, due to recent events, but I don‘t think that veterans should be stuck into the catagory of general public.

2) The ID check was useless. Just because a person presents a valid drivers license means there not a threat?!? I think this just put a useless burden on everyone and hassled the civilians who actually made the effort to come down a pay their respects, something we are seeing less and less of these days. I can understand checking peoples bags carefully searching people who act suspicious, but bugging some 80 year for a drivers licence he probably hasn‘t seen in ten years for the sake of public security is just plain silly.

So, I feel that this was just another example of a bureaucracy spitting out frivolous orders in order to make it look like their actually doing something. If anyone who actually implemented the policy was on the ground, they would have changed their mind.
I, for one, executed some initiative and just shuttled these veterans in, without checking their ID, so they could get on with remembering their comrades they left behind so long ago.

 

[Infanteer]

P.S.
What I guess I am trying to say is, I think the security concerns could be more effectivly addressed by having the CO say "Sergeant X, make sure the building and the people within are secure."
Using a little leadership from the ground up, the NCO actually working at the task could have gained a more clear idea of what was and what was not neccessary to ensure the security of the people and the building.

 

[Gunner]

Access control is measure 22 of Security Alert Level 3. It states that all visitors to a base or unit will be subject to a 100 % ID check including briefcases, etc. It was implemented by the DCDS, supported by the CLS. Direction was given to your Comd by Comd LFWA. Comd 39 CBG directed your CO to implement access control. There was no mix up or confusion. It is not a half xxx policy it could be that there are issues that you are not aware of. It has been awhile since I was in a Reserve unit, but, we always had a duty Cpl/Bdr at the door to check visitors to the armoury. Up until Thanksgiving weekend most bases across Canada were open bases inwhich anyone could drive on them and go look at whatever they wanted, so I don‘t know what you mean by bases being to security conscious, unless you are on the island. Esquimalt follows different rules due to the presence of ships.

In response to your points. A veteran is a visitor to the unit, therefore he must receive an ID check. If he doesn‘t have ID, the unit does not have to provide access. You would be surprised how much a deterent a simple ID check will be. You seem to forget that your building has all types of weapons and weapon systems that numerous organizations would be quite happy to get their hands on.

You are relatively inexperienced and are not in a position of authority. Until that time some things may not make sense to you (sometimes they don‘t always make sense to me). When you do become a leader you will have to make decisions based on the information that you have at hand. Your decision may not make sense to some of your soldiers but it may benefit the majority.

 

[corporal]

IT is our (the military) gen apathy and the apathy of the country with respect to security that is laughable. when i was in the service the ability of someone anyone to get on a military establishment was very easy indeed, the thought that someone could get access to uor hardware is appaling we (the military) should be the height of security,we should also be training to a razors edge, not just when the budget could afford,but as an individual soldier prepared wiyhin reason to respond to almost any crisis,but due to the gov lack of effort,and the fact that the higher ups in the chain of command have their hands tied by the politicians it will never change until something terrible happens. :fifty:

 

[ender]

Gunner,
So would you have turned the Vetran away?

Infanteer,
I wasn‘t intending any critisisim of your actions, and I don‘t think any of us were. The call was up to officer in charge, who, in my opinion, blew it.