Brooklyn Congressman Hires Bodyguard

The New York Post, carrying a story by Natalie O’Neill, is reporting that the first politician to openly admit to hiring a bodyguard for protection in the wake of the Arizona killings is Congressman Micheal Grimm (R- Bay Ridge), from Brooklyn.

In an ironic twist of fate, all of Congressman Grimm’s Democratic collegaues in Brooklyn are stating that they have no intention of hiring security to ensure their safety. Grimm, a former Marine, is not only concerned for his own safety, but the safety of his staffers who accompany him.

It would appear that the decision for many politicians not to hire professional security is down to two reasons. Firstly, they would have to pay for it themselves and secondly, they are afraid of creating barriers between them and their consituents.

Regarding the first concern, it should not be too difficult or controversial to introduce a stipend to assist elected officals hire professional security personnel when they feel a need and can demonstrate that a potential threat may exist.
Afterall, the government already outsources these types of duties to private security firms for coverage in the U.S. and abroad.

Regarding the public being denied access to elected officals, this does not necessarily have to be the case. Whenever talk comes around to security, it is often linked to phrases like; “big, burly security guards”. The public and media alike should realize that Personal Protection, when conducted in a professional manner, is not as obtrusive as one might think.

Personal Protection or Close Protection, involves protecting a person in a very covert manner. Highly trained professionals remain in close enough contact with the person being protected in order to allow them to take action if necessary, whilst at the same time keeping their distance and allowing the person (in this case politician)to engage with the public.

Much planning goes on behind the scenes to allow for this “free flowing” movement. Professionals have an array of tools and devices to aid them. The days of the “big, burly security guard” blocking people’s path are over (for the more enlightened clients anyway). A professional bodyguard could easily pass as a politician’s aide and nobody would be any the wiser.

For more information on Executive Protection Services and to learn how to become an Executive Protection Agent, please visit the E.P. and Training pages of our website;

Four dead, five injured in Washington D.C. killing spree

In what has been described as the worst killing spree for the past 16 years, four are dead and five injured after a shooting on Tuesday.

The killings are believed to have started from the theft of a bracelet. The killers, who were later apprehended by Metro Police, had a number of weapons in the vehicle at the time of their arrest. Just prior to getting stopped, they thre an AK 47 out opf the window. The assault rifle is believed to have been used in at least one of the murders.

Surprisingly, a 14 year old boy was the driver of the “hit van”. Washington D.C. is one of the most difficult cities in the U.S. to try and carry a firearm legally, yet the criminals are totally unhindered by the Draconian laws.

The current relaxing of the law regarding gun ownership will not do much to address the matter of citizens being able to carry a weapon for either self-protection, or as in the case of Executive Protection; to protect one’s client, since weapons are only going to be allowed to be kept in the home, not to be carried in a concealed manner.

Does anyone else see something wrong with outlawing firearms which could be carried by trained, qualified and law-abiding citizens, when teenagers are running around killing people with AK 47 assault rifles?

If politicans were getting shot and killed, the laws might get ammended, but as long as the killings stay in the ghettos, the status quo will most likely remain undisturbed.

Straight Talking Warren Buffett

For those who did not hear Warren Buffett being interviewed last Friday morning on CNBC, he did not beat about the bush when talking about the former Presidential hopeful, John Edwards.

Mr. Buffett came straight out and accused Mr. Edwards of soliciting and taking money by deceitful means during his unsuccessful Presidential bid earlier this year. According to Mr. Buffett, John Edwards knew back then that it was only a matter of time before the media uncovered the story of his mistress and alleged love-child.

Unfortunately, this did not stop him from asking suporters to fund his campaign. Had people knew about the extra-marital affair, they most likely would not have sent in their hard earned dollars as there was no chance that he could continue in the race once the damning news broke. Mr. Buffett suggested that Edwards should cut back on a few of those expensive haircuts and return those fifty and one hundred dollar donations that came in from ordinary hard working followers.

This sentiment rings true for my industry. At our training courses, we focus on Ethics at the beginning of the course and it runs throughout the training. Nobody is saying that we are not human and we do not make mistakes – we all do, but covering up the truth to further your own selfish goals is a practice that would probably even disgust the animal Kingdom – except the reptiles possibly.

Thank you Mr. Buffett for being so frank and forthright in this era of sterile political correctness. This is why I enjoy working with successful business people and despise the empty promises and double-talking of policticians, to whatever party they belong. To those of you in the security world, again I implore you to never forget that your word is your bond and at the end of the day, your reputation will live on after you are long gone.