I'm not blaming security directors, although they should have the strength to make their company provide effective security. The problem is, when the company appears not to care, or even to be unaware of what's going on, then there's a spill down to the security people, who then tend to make some sloppy decisions concerning the application of their security tasks. If nothing happens, nobody notices. But all it takes is one incident to get everybody scrambling to find a good excuse for what happened. It's a heck of a lot easier to practice good, reasonable security than try to fix the problem.
Security is there to protect the organization from needless loss.
I remember when the Barr-Martinez bill first was announced in 1992. For those of you not familiar with the proposed legislation, it is titled the Private Security Officers Quality Assurance Act. The private security industry has been self warned time and time again that if it doesn't take the issue of quality assurance into its own hands, then legislation is sure to follow. Even though the bill has still not been enacted, it does make a very strong statement about what the industry should have done many years ago. The Private Security Task Force which concluded its work in 1976 provided a way for the Security Industry in every State to look at the recommendations it made concerning hiring, training, and the like, and to decide whether those recommendations should be voluntary or mandatory.