NATIONAL NEWS - Private security guards could soon be forced to respond to clients in distress or social upheaval armed with little more than their bare hands and good intentions.

If approved, proposed industry regulation amendments by Psira, the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority, may soon all but prohibit security guards from using firearms, tasers, tear gas, rubber bullets or even hand cuffs.

While semi-automatic assault rifles may still be used to safeguard valuable items such as cash-in-transit (CIT) vehicles, key infrastructure or for anti-poaching (just not at public places like shopping malls, taxi ranks, churches, restaurants and schools), special operations teams (SOT) who regularly come up against suspects armed with rifles, would no longer have rifles.

"Under the proposed regulations, assets are worth more than a security officer's life," a well-placed private security insider who cannot be named said in response to the prospect of sending his SOT's out without rifles.

Police minister, Senzu Mchunu published the proposed amendments in the Government Gazette on 28 March. These have since elicited severe backlash from industry stakeholders.

While the apparent intention is to tighten up the issuing of fire arms and clamping down on rogue elements within the industry (a principle many service providers George Herald spoke to agree with), the bill's blanket prohibitions, if passed, would basically disarm security guards. 

It will also make it impossible to provide armed response at public places, such as shopping malls, taxi ranks and restaurants that are often targeted by armed suspects.

Fidelity Services Group CEO, Wahl Bartmann says the changes that will have far-reaching negative consequences for both industry operations and public safety.

Advocating for constructive alternatives such as differentiated regulatory mechanisms, compliance monitoring and sanctions without penalising the broader industry, Bartmann highlighted key areas of concern:

1. Operational restrictions based on investigations
He said the amendments propose that armed guards be prohibited from performing their duties if their employing company is under investigation - regardless of any proven wrongdoing. "This could significantly disrupt security operations and potentially leave vulnerable areas unprotected," he warned.

2. The limitation on firearm use and ammunition
Proposed restrictions on firearms in public spaces and vaguely defined ammunition limits could hinder the ability of security personnel to respond to threats.
"The lack of precision in defining a 'reasonable quantity' of ammunition creates room for subjective interpretation and inconsistent enforcement," said Bartman, advocating for clearly defined limits that are adaptable to operational contexts.

3. Mandatory psychologically evaluations
Some industry insiders have questioned why private security would have to undergo a higher standard of screening than police and lamented the economic impact the cost of compliance would have on security companies. Baartman added the proposed annual employer-funded assessments for all armed personnel lacked clear guidelines on the criteria for these evaluations and could lead to confusion and inconsistent applications.

4. Prohibition of non-lethal equipment (tasers, tear gas, water canons, etc.)
"From experience we have seen how these non-lethal tools are instrumental in de-escalating potentially violent situations while avoiding deadly force. We strongly recommend their regulated use should be maintained," said Bartmann.

5. Restricting armed officers in public spaces
Stressing the broader impact on public safety, Bartmann said restricting armed officers in critical public spaces, often targeted for crime, such as shopping malls, schools, hospitals and taxi ranks would compromise frontline security. This as armed personnel act as both a deterrent and rapid response mechanism.

6. Tracking devices
He further warned the proposed imposition of tracking devices on all firearms would place significant operational and financial strain on private security companies. In addition, said another role-player, where the of then live tracking information goes is critical as this would allow security officers, anti-poaching teams, CIT teams and those transporting goods to a location that needs to be kept secret for security reasons, to be tracked.

Public participation snag - WRONG EMAIL

While comments have to reach the PSiRA office in Pretoria by 25 April, either by post or email, many opposition comments will likely not be received. The SA postal service is in disarray and the 

In a statement, MP Ian Cameron, the DA’s spokesperson on police, provided the correct email address for comment: Regulations@psira.co.za

George Herald can reliably reveal that it is no wonder that the provided erroneous email, regulations@info.co.za, does not work, as the security certificate for the private domain, info.co.za has expired and the domain www.info.co.za is currently for sale.

‘We bring you the latest Garden Route, Hessequa, Karoo news’