When one considers the historical nature of security applications and programs of any type, i.e., CCTV, intrusion detection and alarm systems, corporate policies and programs and countermeasures of any type, the phenomenon of the Denial Syndrome, Complacency and Failure to properly allocate a Security Budget can not be over emphasized. If we, as individuals, as a country and as a government, have not learned anything from the lessons of 911, it is the benefit of being pro-active and utilizing the concept of foreseeability.
No mater how, when or where, the denial syndrome is the one human response mechanism which can be most fatal in any security response program or effort. On too many occasions, individuals, whether VIP’s, corporate executives or the neighbor down the street will simply place their hand in the sand and resolve themselves stating to themselves “it won’t happen to me”.
Too many clients respond to their threats whether due to a: stalker and/or threat from a disgruntled employee or corporate enemy, a Workplace Violence issue, internal thefts – both Estate and Corporate, security issues due to high profile or net worth, corporate espionage, marital disputes, etc., with the denial syndrome. Too many individuals simply feel that they can “safely play the percentages” and ignore the threat or the possible repercussions. The results of this type of complacency is too may times very costly and potentially, deadly.
Then of course, there is the individual or corporate executive who inevitably will analytically determine the ROI does not exist in relation to the threat level. However, the individual almost unilaterally comes to this conclusion, completely ignoring and discounting the recommendations set forth as a result of a properly conducted Vulnerability and Threat Assessment. This response is typical and a perfect example of the “penny wise and pound foolish” attitude.
Anothern aspect of life today, which has become such a serious issue and “threat” to us as individuals, families, and as a country and nation, is “Child Abductions”. We too many times, turn on the evening news to hear of yet, another child being abducted. These child predators have no conscience and seek out victims, statistically between the ages of 10-12 but not limited to those ages, more times than not, a young girl and brutally sexually abuse and then murder them. The predator would more than likely prefer to abduct the older person, perhaps a 19 or 20 year old female. However, probably due to the greater degree of resistance and increased difficulty in being successful, the predators choose the younger victims.
It is in these instances that we sharply notice the denial syndrome, complacency and failure to properly budget security in operating in our lives. We plainly need to realize that we no longer live in a society that was as safe as when we grew up.
Today, due to many circumstances, one being the overcrowded criminal detention system and the pressures it places on the criminal justice system to plea bargain down felony crimes and another one being the past decades of budget cuts in state and municipal funding of Psychiatric Institutions has placed too many “psych” patients and “predatory criminals” out on the streets and living in our neighborhoods among us.
We, as parents and as a society in general, have to come to grips with the fact that we must be as pro-active. Simple mistakes such as allowing our children to ride their bikes alone, travel (walk) to a friend’s house or to school, unescorted can be fatal. We simply can’t allow small children to play unsupervised, in any environment, whether it be the driveway, backyard, park or school playground. Predators exist. They are out there, looking for the mistake.
Being pro-active is critical. There are other steps parents can take, such as the use of a GPS watch or cellular phone. Obviously, the wealthier can utilize the services of an armed bodyguard, protection agent to escort their child, such as in the movie “Man On Fire”.
Given the nature of today’s occurrences, whatever the countermeasure taken, we can be assured, it probably rests within the parameters of sensibility.