an other perspective (or two) but having a record of who entered the facility is a tool for potential, subsequent capture. I am not advocating capture by our members, but after the fact the police do ask, did you see the perpetrator. If the answer is yes, then it might be time to go to the tapes (or Digital Video now days). Also, the question can be, was anyone hanging around, looking suspicious? Again, go to the tape to get a better description, and hey, maybe even enough detail to submit for facial recognition with some Law Enforcement departments.

But aside from the after the fact benefits of video surveillance, the fact that we did do verification of Government issued ID was a deterrent. However, the usefullness of that ID verification can be weakened if we don't enforce a name badge waering requirement. And we can greatly enhance both of those actions by enforcing a daily wristband requirement. (While I know that that was contemplated for the last Convention, the fact that it did not happen, may or may not have prevented the theft, but what it can do is yield a rather definative list of potential suspects to law enforcement.

While the current utilization of security officer(s) is very reasonable and non-confrontational for entry monitoring, I don't think it would be unreasonable for a small number of members to be asked (volunteer) to politely challenge non-badge wearers to do so. This does get into an area consistent with having a Sergeant at Arms role (during the Convention) which I seem to recall seeing this position identified in at least one Convention prior to my membership.

Anyway, just some random thoughts on the challenge to make suggestions, and that is all these are, just suggestions.

Jim