Civil Air Patrol Providing "Security" At an Event?

[RADIOMAN015]

I know of some squadrons and two wings that has allegedly performed "security" for events, as listed in their news releases, even some printed in CAP Volunteer Now.

I'm wondering does National HQ have a specific policy regarding what CAP members can do at these type of events especially when the "security" duties come up

Is there (or has anyone doing a lot of these developed) a standard support engagement letter/email that needs to be sent to the event organizer that CAP is assisting that lists what we can and can't do   Is there some documents e.g. hold harmless agreement that CAP should also get

Now personally I like the idea of calling it a Safety or Courtesy Patrol, but even when one gets into duties like parking vehicles or so called crowd control, I wonder what CAP individual adult members and organizationally what potential liability there would be

I have no problem with CAP members walking around with a radio and calling in problems observed as part of a safety patrol or even helping out at the lost/found/information booth for the activity, or even initially coming to someones aid and calling in the paramedics.       

I think when one starts calling for volunteers for "security" details supporting external events to CAP, it has the potential of becoming a "wanna bee" cop activity

RM
     

 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Great Caesar's Ghost, your favourite word "wanna bee" again...

I actually found your post reasonably thoughtful until I got to that word.

We cannot do "security" as AF Security Police and/or civilian LE agencies can, as I am sure you know.  "Security" can encompass many things, such as safety and well-being.

Early in my CAP career, I was part of a "security" detail at an airshow on a civilian airfield.

I spotted some numb-nut lighting up a smoke near a refuelling point.

I asked him, "Sir, would you mind lighting up somewhere else; I really do not want to see this airfield and everyone on it go up in an explosion."

He responded with some invective that would not get past this board's filters.

I thought, "OK, then," and approached a nearby Sheriff's Deputy and told him the situation.  He just shook his head as if to say "the stupidity of mortal man," and then proceeded to show said numb-nut the error of his ways, including an offer of a stay in the county lockup.  I thanked the Deputy and that was the end of it.

At another airshow on an AF base, someone was lighting up underneath the wing of a C-5 Galaxy.  My squadron CC and I went over to the guy and said "please don't do that...this airplane is fully fuelled."  The guy was genuinely apologetic, saying "I'm sorry, I just didn't think," put his butt out and left the area.  End of story, everyone's reasonably happy.

I think most CAP personnel know that when an issue becomes a true security (i.e., potential criminal behaviour) issue, we hand off to the people with the badge, sidearm and cuffs.  If it's a health and safety issue, unless the CAP member is a licenced first responder/medical professional, we hand off to the nearest EMT/doctor/nurse/police officer and let them handle it rather than do something we are not equipped to do.

[BrannG]

I'm new here and even I see RM using "wanna-be" this and "wanna-be" that.. wth?! Can't someone just be supportive?

As for "security" duties, I was in a "security detail" with CAP once in Austin, Texas during an over night event, we had 5 patrols in the area over night keeping people out and road blocks into the area, however we didn't have anything except radios and could not detail or use force, simply politely inform the person they are in a restricted area, please turn around and use the radio to communicate with base ops who would inform local authorities as needed.

I am sure when CAP is signed up for "security detail" the agency who is asking us for assistance is informed of what we can and can not do. Once again, this is all part of the "Properly Informing Citizens" I was speaking of in another RM posting..

Do you have that little faith in the senior members who organize these events?! Also, before asking such a redundant question, how about getting a copy of the Scope of Work (Operations Briefing) for the event - I am 100% sure it states "Under no circumstances may any member of the Civil Air Patrol bare firearms, use force or detail" or something like that.

[NIN]

RM forgot to go down to Walgreens and pick up his meds this week.

[wuzafuzz]

I think when one starts calling for volunteers for "security" details supporting external events to CAP, it has the potential of becoming a "wanna bee" cop activity

Why would cops want bees?


Or has there been violence at spelling bees?

[RADIOMAN015]

I'm new here and even I see RM using "wanna-be" this and "wanna-be" that.. wth?! Can't someone just be supportive?


Do you have that little faith in the senior members who organize these events?! Also, before asking such a redundant question, how about getting a copy of the Scope of Work (Operations Briefing) for the event - I am 100% sure it states "Under no circumstances may any member of the Civil Air Patrol bare firearms, use force or detail" or something like that.

Gee you must be walking around with your eyes closed in CAP regarding the "wanna bee" factor.   Add in a security detail and you've got a double wanna bee factor there

I think CAP's emergency service missions are very clear.  When you get into "security" type support (as in community service), it's very reasonable to expect a National policy defining what we can do.  In fact I don't think you should even be able to call it  "security" anything, especially if it is out of the typical ES mission charter (which specifically allows crash site security).   

So if a CAP member gets injured on a "security detail" who's paying the bills   (especially if its' some low budget non profit type association ).

IMHO this 'security" type activity can be a land mine ready to explode, if we don't pick very carefully who we provide support to and are very clear (in a formal document signed by CAP and the other supported organization)  that we are not security  (BTW I'd be more comfortable with helping military, federal, state, & local government agencies as opposed to a loosely defined non profit association (with basically no assets),  -- that's why there needs to be good guidance, especially IF a CAP member gets injured).

BTW did you ever notice that for the most part CAP tightens regulations/policies AFTER there's an issue/problem that explodes rather than being proactive :angel:

I personally have no interest in participating in on site security activities unless it is an AF authorized mission.  Even than, I'd prefer to be sitting in a nice warm or air conditioned mission base/hq just running the radio and taking life easy

RM   

   



     

         

           

[ZigZag911]

Observe and report.

Inform the public, especially of imminent hazards, e.g., "Pleae stay behind the rope, aircraft are taxiing beyond it".

That's about it.

[abdsp51]

I'm new here and even I see RM using "wanna-be" this and "wanna-be" that.. wth?! Can't someone just be supportive?


Do you have that little faith in the senior members who organize these events?! Also, before asking such a redundant question, how about getting a copy of the Scope of Work (Operations Briefing) for the event - I am 100% sure it states "Under no circumstances may any member of the Civil Air Patrol bare firearms, use force or detail" or something like that.

Gee you must be walking around with your eyes closed in CAP regarding the "wanna bee" factor.   Add in a security detail and you've got a double wanna bee factor there

I think CAP's emergency service missions are very clear.  When you get into "security" type support (as in community service), it's very reasonable to expect a National policy defining what we can do.  In fact I don't think you should even be able to call it  "security" anything, especially if it is out of the typical ES mission charter (which specifically allows crash site security).   

So if a CAP member gets injured on a "security detail" who's paying the bills   (especially if its' some low budget non profit type association ).

IMHO this 'security" type activity can be a land mine ready to explode, if we don't pick very carefully who we provide support to and are very clear (in a formal document signed by CAP and the other supported organization)  that we are not security  (BTW I'd be more comfortable with helping military, federal, state, & local government agencies as opposed to a loosely defined non profit association (with basically no assets),  -- that's why there needs to be good guidance, especially IF a CAP member gets injured).

BTW did you ever notice that for the most part CAP tightens regulations/policies AFTER there's an issue/problem that explodes rather than being proactive :angel:

I personally have no interest in participating in on site security activities unless it is an AF authorized mission.  Even than, I'd prefer to be sitting in a nice warm or air conditioned mission base/hq just running the radio and taking life easy

RM           

So basically anything you can do to do the bare minimum, wear a golf shirt, and drum up a PR spot. 

[FlyTiger77]

I personally have no interest in participating in on site security activities unless it is an AF authorized mission.       

Then don't participate.

[EMT-83]

To answer the original question, CAP members may not provide security services. You know, those pesky regulations that specifically prohibit such activity.

[krnlpanick]

To answer the original question, CAP members may not provide security services. You know, those pesky regulations that specifically prohibit such activity.

So what is crowd-control then?

[BrannG]

Gee you must be walking around with your eyes closed in CAP regarding the "wanna bee" factor.   Add in a security detail and you've got a double wanna bee factor there

I think CAP's emergency service missions are very clear.  When you get into "security" type support (as in community service), it's very reasonable to expect a National policy defining what we can do.  In fact I don't think you should even be able to call it  "security" anything, especially if it is out of the typical ES mission charter (which specifically allows crash site security).   

So if a CAP member gets injured on a "security detail" who's paying the bills   (especially if its' some low budget non profit type association ).

IMHO this 'security" type activity can be a land mine ready to explode, if we don't pick very carefully who we provide support to and are very clear (in a formal document signed by CAP and the other supported organization)  that we are not security  (BTW I'd be more comfortable with helping military, federal, state, & local government agencies as opposed to a loosely defined non profit association (with basically no assets),  -- that's why there needs to be good guidance, especially IF a CAP member gets injured).

BTW did you ever notice that for the most part CAP tightens regulations/policies AFTER there's an issue/problem that explodes rather than being proactive :angel:

I personally have no interest in participating in on site security activities unless it is an AF authorized mission.  Even than, I'd prefer to be sitting in a nice warm or air conditioned mission base/hq just running the radio and taking life easy

RM   

         

Well.. if you think that poorly of the Civil Air Patrol, my only question is this - why are you a member? You seem to be a very poor example of what being a member of CAP means.

If you don't agree with a mission, don't go and don't post crap bring down the organization and the membership. That simple. If you were man enough to post your unit on here, I am pretty sure your CO would in fact be hearing a lot about your posts on here. But not man enough to man up, but man enough to talk against CAP, than honestly, I know why your no longer in the Armed Services. Honor seems be a concept you don't understand. As someone who was in fact commissioned in active duty, I would be appalled to have you in any unit I was in.

On a less bashing note, there is a reg on who covers the bill, AND there is in fact a law.. For the reg - look at CAPR 900-5 (look under Section E "SENIOR MEMBER AND CADET ACCIDENT, LIFE AND MEDICAL BENEFITS—AUTOMATIC COVERAGE ", which relates to CAPF 80. The law you want to look up is 5 USC § 8141 - CIVIL AIR PATROL VOLUNTEERS. I guess you don't do your homework before asking questions.

Also, did you know (my guess is no) that if you are disabled or die on any mission ordered by the United States Air Force, you are covered by the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA), not sure what means? Look it up -> http://www.dol.gov/compliance/laws/comp-feca.htm or use the power of Google. As of today that means that if you are disabled or die, you or your spouse or next of kin gets about 350k..

Hows that ego now?

[GroundHawg]

My squadron does "security" aka parking at our local county fair every year. We get to set up a free recruiting booth, and the county gives the squadron enough money to keep the lights on for the rest of the year. The cadets get to be outside working for an entire week, get into the fair for free one night, get free food (its free for a reason), the squadron gets TONS of recruits during the fair, and the county has a competent experienced parking detail that works for a song. Im not seeing how this is not a win win win win for everyone. We have done this for almost 20 years now and this is the first time Ive ever seen or heard anyone complain or think this would be a bad idea.
Just think of how much better off people would be if they spent half as much time being positive than worrying about the negatives...

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Gee you must be walking around with your eyes closed in CAP regarding the "wanna bee" factor.   Add in a security detail and you've got a double wanna bee factor there

There's a difference in walking around with your eyes closed and seeing things that aren't there.  I believe the term is hallucinating.

I personally have no interest in participating in on site security activities unless it is an AF authorized mission.  Even than, I'd prefer to be sitting in a nice warm or air conditioned mission base/hq just running the radio and taking life easy

Unless, of course, you have an Incident Commander on scene who decides to exercise his/her option to allocate personnel as s/he sees fit for the successful resolution of the mission.  I was expecting to fly Scanner on one practice mission, but the IC decided he needed me at the Comms desk.  I was a First Lieutenant, he was a Lieutenant Colonel.  I sure wasn't going to say "no," not unless I wanted to be kicked off his mission and not be called in future for others.

I think most of us who are aircrew have experienced less-than-comfortable missions...like ELT hunting at night in the middle of winter.  BTDT.

And, of course, those on the GT side have slogged through mud, snow, nasty terrain, etc. to look for an aircraft crash, missing person, etc.

Those on the Mission Support side have also made do with comm trailers, vans, etc. which aren't warm and cosy or air conditioned.

[capmaj]

And RADIOMAN..... Don't forget. When the Great New England Air Show comes to your home squadrons base in August...... DON"T GO AS A CAP MEMBER! You will probably be asked to provide 'security' in the form of crowd control...or a/c watch..... or FOD watch, etc.

DON'T work the show!

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Unless, of course, you have an Incident Commander on scene who decides to exercise his/her option to allocate personnel as s/he sees fit for the successful resolution of the mission.  I was expecting to fly Scanner on one practice mission, but the IC decided he needed me at the Comms desk.  I was a First Lieutenant, he was a Lieutenant Colonel.  I sure wasn't going to say "no," not unless I wanted to be kicked off his mission and not be called in future for others.

Had the IC been a 2d Lt or a CAP NCO the result would be the same. When we activate ICS, position is what matters. If the National Commander checked in to my ICP as a resource, I would expect him to perform his assigned duties.

[RADIOMAN015]

And RADIOMAN..... Don't forget. When the Great New England Air Show comes to your home squadrons base in August...... DON"T GO AS A CAP MEMBER! You will probably be asked to provide 'security' in the form of crowd control...or a/c watch..... or FOD watch, etc.

DON'T work the show!

The squadrons I am familiar with have not been asked to provide any type of security/parking, crowd control, FOD walk services for any of the shows in the wing for many years.  That is handled strictly by AFR & ANG personnel at the respective shows, backed up by a large state police contingent that makes arrest if necessary or just throws the problem people off the base.   The last show in that wing were parking and roving patrol support was provided was four or five years ago and one of the unit's supervising senior member involved actually pulled the cadets off the detail due to safety concerns (weather was too hot, no relief from base personnel, etc).   BTW NH wing last year even had a problem getting its' own personnel to provide staffing for parking support at the Portsmouth-Boston Air Show, and had to ask other nearby wings for assistance.  it is not an easy volunteer mission, especially if the weather is very hot/sunny.

Again I'd like to point out that I have no issue with CAP providing legal authorized support to any organization we choose to help.   The issue is should National provide a standard written agreement format that must be adhered to, and covers contingencies (e.g. we can pull our people off if safety is a concern) , including provisions if our members are injured, disabled, or a liability issue arises .   I do strongly believe that any assistance provided to other organizations need to be in writing to protect us and eliminate any misunderstandings of what we can and can't do.     Also many states regulate "security" (guard services), and even non profits providing these type of services need to be licensed and supervised (in my state it is the State Police), so using the term "security" could be problematic.   

Air shows in my opinion are the VERY BEST venues for CAP to display what we do best and try to recruit both cadets & senior members and inform the public what we do for them.    So a recruiting booth along with aircraft displays, is an outstanding use of resources to an "interested" public.      In the past that show has had  400,000+ people attend.   This year there's no major military team (TBirds, BAngels), so I would guess that attendance might be down to 300,000.   CAP is not providing any support to the base for this show.     Air shows are like birthday presents to PAOs  :clap:      BTW I'm hoping by then the new uniform changes that allow us to wear grey or tan shorts with our blue golf shirts will be implemented   :angel:
RM     
 

   

   

[Flying Pig]

When I was a cadet in the early 90s I was working the March AFB Airshow.  I was at our booth that we had set up when an F-14 pilot walked over to our booth and asked if the squadron could spare two cadets to watch his jet while he stood at his booth and talked to people.  Seems he caught people shoving trash in vents, and found a guy with a screw driver actually trying to access a panel (If youve ever spent any time in Moreno Valley, CA youd understand!) 

I ended up doing it, and so did two other cadets.  We just stood around the jet and made sure people werent being stupid.  At the end of the day, we got patches, t-shirts and got to sit in the jet.  After hours, after the airshow was over.  Then when we were done, the B-1 bomber crew who was parked started getting into some friendly inter-service "banter" with the Navy pilots.  As a result of that, we were invited into the cockpit of the B1 so the Air Force guys could show us "what a real aircraft looked like"  They gave us patches, and a t-shirt with the Sq name with a picture of a mushroom cloud that said "No sense running you will only die tired" (My mom never let me wear it to school  )

So as a young CAP "Security Guard" I fared quite well.  My past Sq also provides "Security" at the local warbird airshow at Madera Airport also.  Just crowd control, walking around making sure people arent places they shouldnt be, or climbing on some guys multi-million dollar Hawker Hurricane while hes in the Porta-Potty.

Never been any issues.  CAP members are told not to "confront" people.  However, asking someone to follow the rules isnt "confronting". 

[Eclipse]

Security is a law enforcement function, even when done by private resources.  CAP is not allowed to perform law enforcement functions, period.

The nomenclature is irrelevant as long as the participants understand the ROE.

What we are allowed to do is "observe and report".  Period.

What anyone from the attendees think we are doing or capable of is irrelevent.  We have our ROE, and they don't need to know where the
boundaries are, as long as we do.  In most cases, for the average person, a uniform, of any kind, and the request to stay back, is enough, when it's
not, CAP member call the LEOs on the radio and then continue with their assigned duties.

Parking cars and directing large groups of people to stay where they belong is not "security".

Next non-problem.

[754837]

Great point, RM, concerning states regulating security.  In my state, "security" people are required to be trained, certified, and licensed by the state POST Commission. They must also be insured.  Failure to do so is a misdemeanor crime.

[Flying Pig]

Yes, if your being hired and paid as a security firm. Asking CAP to help park cars, make sure people stay on that side of the rope, and please dont walk on the wing of that P-51 isnt security.  The misdemeanor is hiring yourself out for compensation without being licensed. 

Your right.....but Apples and Oranges as it relates to CAP. 

[krnlpanick]

I think maybe this is relative to this conversation

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_003_506DC1944BAC9.pdf

Crowd-control is generally a passive security responsibility comprised of making sure that no one is being an idiot, intentionally or otherwise. If an idiot is spotted, they are asked to please refrain from being an idiot, if they comply then all is well, if not a call is made to LEO and the cadet(s) simply observe unless there is a safety reason not to.

I would also mention that passive security and crowd control are specifically mentioned in the above document in relation to emergency/disaster or crash site tasks. I see no reason that the same process does not extend to non-emergency situations where there are large gatherings of people and we are asked to help

When requested by proper authorities, CAP members may provide passive crash site security and/or crowd control duties during an emergency/disaster situation.  When on such a mission, the senior CAP member present will ensure the above restrictions are understood and will contact the nearest law enforcement officer if assistance is required.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Especially when it comes to something that most of us should be almost second natured around like an airfield.

[BrannG]

I think maybe this is relative to this conversation

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_003_506DC1944BAC9.pdf

Crowd-control is generally a passive security responsibility comprised of making sure that no one is being an idiot, intentionally or otherwise. If an idiot is spotted, they are asked to please refrain from being an idiot, if they comply then all is well, if not a call is made to LEO and the cadet(s) simply observe unless there is a safety reason not to.

I would also mention that passive security and crowd control are specifically mentioned in the above document in relation to emergency/disaster or crash site tasks. I see no reason that the same process does not extend to non-emergency situations where there are large gatherings of people and we are asked to help

When requested by proper authorities, CAP members may provide passive crash site security and/or crowd control duties during an emergency/disaster situation.  When on such a mission, the senior CAP member present will ensure the above restrictions are understood and will contact the nearest law enforcement officer if assistance is required.

EXACTLY! Nice regulation find! See RM, all your issues are addressed. As for a "statement of liability" or whatever you'd call that, once again, with EVERY mission (at least in Texas) we get a Operations Briefing or Scope of Work that is shared with ALL parties related to the mission, and it is very clear on what we can do, will do, how we do it, why we do it and what is NOT allowed. I am sure that covers it without any missing pieces.

[krnlpanick]

Also FWIW RM - this is also referenced in CAPR 60-3 Section 1-23. If you are GES qualified you should already know this information. I know when I took the GES test last week there was at least one question on the subject of aid LEO - there was also a question on the test as to what insurance CAP members are covered by for different types of missions, ie FTCA vs CAP Liability Insurance. If you are GES qualified I would really hope you would already know all this information however - as it is much more applicable knowledge to have in the field than how to handle reimbursable expenses (also covered under GES) or if the Command Center has A/C.

I also think that you need to spend a great deal less time trolling CT for your own sick amusement - feel free to head over to /b/ if you want to troll and get it out of your system there. Every post I have seen from you thus far has been a blatant troll and frankly I am sure I am not the only one who tires of your antics - and I've only been here for a couple weeks!

All that said, if you don't agree with the CAP missions, values, or program as a whole - there are plenty of other civilian organizations out there that will allow you to do exactly what you want to do without the military element that you so despise in CAP.

Let all of us "Wanna Bees" be and find something more befitting to your ideas, everyone will be a great deal happier.

[Extremepredjudice]

/b/ would out troll RM.

[krnlpanick]

/b/ would out troll RM.

Understatement of the year 

[Major Lord]

I find the idea that people can see flying around LEO's in CAP aircraft, at the direction of LEO's, as not being "Police Agents" within the  legal meaning of the term, shear sophistry. This has no bearing on what is meant by "Security". That being said, for the most part, civilian "security" means the process of observation and reporting. No one in their right mind would suggest that CAP members should make the transition from passive "security" to active "protection" . Cleaning FOD off of a flight line and standing at the rope at an airshow is about as passive as it gets. CAP argues that directly supporting Law Enforcement is okay, as long as it is "passive" , is a clear indication that CAP's possible concern in Security issues ( and in Posse Comitatus Act Issues) stems from the possibility of direct intervention. Having been in the direct intervention side of things for many years, there are frankly very few in CAP that I would want to see involved in such things. Most just don't have the training or the mindset, and would only get other people hurt. The question of direct action or intervention is only an issue insofar as it might relate to members of the public hurting or endangering CAP members, Senior or Cadets, in which case, my professional recommendation is to open a class A bottle of first class Whoopazz, and leave the offending member of the public bleeding and crying, waiting for the real police to come and take the neer' do well away in irons.

Major Lord

[Extremepredjudice]

/b/ would out troll RM.

Understatement of the year 

Sorry, I meant they would eat RM whole. 

[abdsp51]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

[Eclipse]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

The problem, though, is that unchallenged, this stuff becomes part of the searchable information on the board and the interwebs.

Someone doing a superficial search on the topic may well believe the idea(s) have merit, and the next thing you know it's "I read it on CAPTalk."
Bad on people who go that route, but it is, what it is. 

Bad ideas, unchallenged, are the basis for a lot of wive's tales in CAP and elsewhere.

[abdsp51]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

The problem, though, is that unchallenged, this stuff becomes part of the searchable information on the board and the interwebs.

Someone doing a superficial search on the topic may well believe the idea(s) have merit, and the next thing you know it's "I read it on CAPTalk."
Bad on people who go that route, but it is, what it is. 

Bad ideas, unchallenged, are the basis for a lot of wive's tales in CAP and elsewhere.

True

[Extremepredjudice]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

The problem, though, is that unchallenged, this stuff becomes part of the searchable information on the board and the interwebs.

Someone doing a superficial search on the topic may well believe the idea(s) have merit, and the next thing you know it's "I read it on CAPTalk."
Bad on people who go that route, but it is, what it is. 

Bad ideas, unchallenged, are the basis for a lot of wive's tales in CAP and elsewhere.

How about "We need empirical evidence to support this, rather then your unsupported claim. Without data to support your claim, we must reject it as false, and just a conspiracy theory."

[RADIOMAN015]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

The problem, though, is that unchallenged, this stuff becomes part of the searchable information on the board and the interwebs.

Someone doing a superficial search on the topic may well believe the idea(s) have merit, and the next thing you know it's "I read it on CAPTalk."
Bad on people who go that route, but it is, what it is. 

Bad ideas, unchallenged, are the basis for a lot of wive's tales in CAP and elsewhere.

So please answer this question:

Assume that there's no AF/CAP mission number assigned, and is not a CAP mission, no IC structure just support agreed to by the local squadron commander.

A senior member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the adult member and he is hospitalized for 3 days, and will be out of work for 30 days.   The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills and cover the person's disability for lost wages

A cadet member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the cadet member and he is hospitalized for 5 days, and may be out of school for 30 days, and may have some permanent disability.  The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills, and address the permanent disability    

So is it going to be
A.  Tough luck CAP member, let your insurance handle it, no personal disability insurance, oh well.
B.  The Non Profit Organization CAP is supporting that day, insurance carrier contacts the member/member's guardian to come to an agreement start payments.
C.  Civil Air Patrol pays.
D. Combination of Above

What I'm saying is don't we need to know formally when we are supporting another organization on a ANY community type support (but in particular support called "security"), who's is going to pay for what if something goes astray

Now I personally think a good lawyer will get both CAP Inc and the non profit we were supporting that day to pay those bills.  Wouldn't be surprised if the project officer and even the direct unit leadership got pulled into as part of the lawsuit.  (of course unless some hold harmless waivers were passed around and the member or if a cadet parents were stupid enough to sign it).     

Surely I hope this NEVER happens, likely it won't BUT that's why we have insurance, right

RM


       

[a2capt]

Even challenged, it's still searchable. If they don't bother to read the whole thread, it's still "the first thing" they see.

For a Wing PAO and Comm Officer awardee, it sure does come off as a case of Jekyll and Hyde.  I'd have a hard time being in the same room where the justification on the CAPF 120 was read aloud.

[Eclipse]

...that's why we have insurance, right.

Wrong.  The insurance you are discussing is for external liability, not internal injury, etc.

There is no internal personal injury insurance coverage for members involved in "C" missions, or any other CAP activities which take place during the
normal course of CAP business. 

FECA coverage only kicks in during A & B missions, and notwithstanding what they might do at NBB, CAP-USAF will not approve A or B status for Air Shows.

This is also a useless and unanswerable question, since you've chosen to select a deranged and asset-less perpetrator to do you apparent bidding.
This same deranged individual could just as easily attack someone manning a recruiting booth, or shove his way into a unit meeting and start hurting
people, and the same level of insurance would apply.

None.

[bflynn]

About 1 in 3 negative story I've heard about CAP involve CAP acting in some kind of crowd control or security monitoring role.

Regardless of whether it is allowed, my conclusion is that it's a bad idea.

[abdsp51]

This is one of those things that can be "what if" to death and beat around the bush.  Somewhere in the mix of things there is some aide.  Unless the alleged deranged person in Radioman's case is utterly homeless or has completely decided to live "off the grid"  there are assets that can be used. 

If a local unit wants to provide a level of support to a function in a certain capacity so be it.  I did a couple of Airshows as a cadet where we were in a "security" type role.  Ultimately an incident occurs on a piece of property it can come back on the property owner.

If Radioman is content to just kick back and do the bare minimum and only play on his terms let him, he can be an example of what not to do. 

[BrannG]

So please answer this question:

Assume that there's no AF/CAP mission number assigned, and is not a CAP mission, no IC structure just support agreed to by the local squadron commander.

A senior member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the adult member and he is hospitalized for 3 days, and will be out of work for 30 days.   The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills and cover the person's disability for lost wages

A cadet member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the cadet member and he is hospitalized for 5 days, and may be out of school for 30 days, and may have some permanent disability.  The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills, and address the permanent disability    

Okay, I'm going to ASSUME (since you have a habit of not doing your own homework) that the "non-mission" is something like an Airshow, and by some crazy case of "oh crap I forgot" the Squadron Commander, or Deputy Commander or Operations Officer somehow approved an activity that included the use of cadets without the approval of the Group or Wing Operations Officer or Commander depending on level of "activity".

Once again lets take a look at CAPR 900-5. (as this is the regulation you need to read and understand) In this case I'll just do the homework for you.. Section A-7 (page 3) is titled "AIRSHOWS"...

7. Air Shows.

a. Prohibited Activities.  No unit or member of CAP is authorized to sponsor or
cosponsor any air show. CAP members may not:

(1) Accept rides in an air show as a part of any official CAP activity.

(2) Be used as security guards, or damage control.

(3) Taxi non-CAP aircraft before, during, or after an air show.

(4) Direct parking of aircraft unless having received training on aircraft marshalling
and having a flight line authorization on CAPF 101 or CAPF 101T.

b. Permitted Activities.  CAP units and members may assist with an air show sponsored
and conducted wholly by agencies and organizations other than CAP. Prior permission to assist
or participate in any air show must be obtained from the General Counsel at National
Headquarters.  No such advance permission is required if the CAP assistance or participation in
an air show is limited to the following:

(1) CAP members may be used as guides or to provide directions or information.

(2) CAP units may setup a recruiting booth and/or a concession stand selling food
and drinks on the premises of an air show, providing that CAP is not in any way acting as a
sponsor.

(3) CAP members may be used around parked or static display aircraft for guidance,
information, or direction.

c. Air Force Assigned Mission (AFAM) status. CAP  members attending or
supporting an event on a military base,  are  not automatically provided AFAM status and
associated coverage.  Military commanders who desire CAP support must make the request in
writing to the CAP National Operations Center (NOC).  The CAP NOC will evaluate requests
and coordinate Air Force approval if appropriate.   If Air Force approval is received in

PLUS you have to look at that Section E I spoke about earlier, you know.. "SENIOR MEMBER AND CADET ACCIDENT, LIFE AND MEDICAL
BENEFITS—AUTOMATIC COVERAGE"

I'll quote something key from the first paragraph..

18. General.  As a benefit of membership, CAP provides a self-insured accident coverage for
both senior members and cadets, which  provides benefits in the event of reportable injury or
death that occur during CAP authorized activities.  This is a self-insured program paid out of
CAP's general fund and not a commercial insurance policy

So, for issues of liability, APPROVAL OF EVERY EVENT A FLIGHT, SQUADRON, GROUP, or WING does - it MUST require authorization prior to the use of CAP Personnel and Cadets. I would think this even more important in the way of cadets.

So, if proper "approval" has not be received and someone dropped the the massive large ball - than I can **GUESS** someone can in fact sue the Civil Air Patrol for performing an non-mission operation without approval of group/wing/national as required. And I am even more sure the squadron staff, to include their Safety Officer as he or she didn't remind the rest of the staff to get "liability" taken care of.. would be.. shall we say, replaced?

Once again, your solution is also in need of a problem, as we have a clear chain of command and as you should know, CAP hates wasting any money.. so I am sure they frown on being sued for medical expenses and damages from some random Major / CC not following procedure on a CAP Activity.

Also, I should say that your new question is about INSURANCE not the topic you started and thus I can honestly say - "WE ARE NOW OFF TOPIC!" Have a wonderful day!

[lordmonar]

Eh should just ignore him unless he presents something more than conspiracy theories and something constructive about the organization.

The problem, though, is that unchallenged, this stuff becomes part of the searchable information on the board and the interwebs.

Someone doing a superficial search on the topic may well believe the idea(s) have merit, and the next thing you know it's "I read it on CAPTalk."
Bad on people who go that route, but it is, what it is. 

Bad ideas, unchallenged, are the basis for a lot of wive's tales in CAP and elsewhere.

So please answer this question:

Assume that there's no AF/CAP mission number assigned, and is not a CAP mission, no IC structure just support agreed to by the local squadron commander.

A senior member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the adult member and he is hospitalized for 3 days, and will be out of work for 30 days.   The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills and cover the person's disability for lost wages

A cadet member is assisting at another non profit organization's event in a so called passive "security" role and a deranged person attacks the cadet member and he is hospitalized for 5 days, and may be out of school for 30 days, and may have some permanent disability.  The person who attacked him has no assets, who is going to pay the medical bills, and address the permanent disability    

So is it going to be
A.  Tough luck CAP member, let your insurance handle it, no personal disability insurance, oh well.
B.  The Non Profit Organization CAP is supporting that day, insurance carrier contacts the member/member's guardian to come to an agreement start payments.
C.  Civil Air Patrol pays.
D. Combination of Above

What I'm saying is don't we need to know formally when we are supporting another organization on a ANY community type support (but in particular support called "security"), who's is going to pay for what if something goes astray

Now I personally think a good lawyer will get both CAP Inc and the non profit we were supporting that day to pay those bills.  Wouldn't be surprised if the project officer and even the direct unit leadership got pulled into as part of the lawsuit.  (of course unless some hold harmless waivers were passed around and the member or if a cadet parents were stupid enough to sign it).     

Surely I hope this NEVER happens, likely it won't BUT that's why we have insurance, right

RM     

The same people who pay for when that same deranged man comes through your squadron door on monday nights.
And you can never control who gets pulled into a law suit.....so if you are worried about it....buy personal liablity insurance or don't participate.

Realy RM....it is that simple.   No one is making YOU particapte.  If you don't feel comfortable with your level of risk....go away.  CAP has been doing security and safety patrols at air shows ...with and with out mission numbers for decades!   

If CAP INC has a problem with it.....they have been awfully silent about it....I meant....let's see....CAWG gets at least one mission number a year to support he MARCH AFB airshow.  NVWG gets one for Aviation Nation each year, and one for the RENO Air Races.  Oh.....and there is this thing called Airventer each year in Oshkosh.   I seem to remember CAP being involved with that in a little way.

Dude.......just go away and talk about the radio net.  It is one of the things you actually know about. 

[RockRat]

When I was a cadet in the early 90s I was working the March AFB Airshow.  I was at our booth that we had set up when an F-14 pilot walked over to our booth and asked if the squadron could spare two cadets to watch his jet while he stood at his booth and talked to people.  Seems he caught people shoving trash in vents, and found a guy with a screw driver actually trying to access a panel (If youve ever spent any time in Moreno Valley, CA youd understand!) 

I ended up doing it, and so did two other cadets.  We just stood around the jet and made sure people werent being stupid.  At the end of the day, we got patches, t-shirts and got to sit in the jet.  After hours, after the airshow was over.  Then when we were done, the B-1 bomber crew who was parked started getting into some friendly inter-service "banter" with the Navy pilots.  As a result of that, we were invited into the cockpit of the B1 so the Air Force guys could show us "what a real aircraft looked like"  They gave us patches, and a t-shirt with the Sq name with a picture of a mushroom cloud that said "No sense running you will only die tired" (My mom never let me wear it to school  )

So as a young CAP "Security Guard" I fared quite well.  My past Sq also provides "Security" at the local warbird airshow at Madera Airport also.  Just crowd control, walking around making sure people arent places they shouldnt be, or climbing on some guys multi-million dollar Hawker Hurricane while hes in the Porta-Potty.

Never been any issues.  CAP members are told not to "confront" people.  However, asking someone to follow the rules isnt "confronting".

May I ask what squadron? I also worked the airshow over the summer 

[Flying Pig]

Sq 45.  I was a cadet there from about 87-92.  Then came back in 98 after I got out of the Marines as the Deputy Commander for Cadets until about 2003ish.  The Madera airshow was with Sq112

[whatevah]

May I ask what squadron? I also worked the airshow over the summer 

Welcome to the forum, but this should have been a private message, not a bump to a 7 month old thread.