Why were security guards eliminated as a supplemental security measure?

Why were security guards eliminated as a supplemental security measure?

• A. IDS is more cost-effective.
• B. Guards are unreliable.
• C. Guard use is prohibited by regulation.
• D. IDS is required for all facilities.

Answer: (A)

Cost-effectiveness drives why guards were eliminated as a supplemental security measure. An intrusion-detection system provides continuous, automated monitoring and rapid alerting at a fraction of the ongoing cost of hiring, training, scheduling, and paying benefits to security personnel. This makes IDS a more economical way to add defense in depth, so relying on it reduces the need for human guards in a supplemental role. Guards can offer deterrence and judgment, but their higher, recurring costs often outweigh the benefits when an automated system can cover the same risks more efficiently. Regulations don’t universally prohibit guards, and there isn’t a blanket requirement that IDS be used at every facility.

Cost-effectiveness drives why guards were eliminated as a supplemental security measure. An intrusion-detection system provides continuous, automated monitoring and rapid alerting at a fraction of the ongoing cost of hiring, training, scheduling, and paying benefits to security personnel. This makes IDS a more economical way to add defense in depth, so relying on it reduces the need for human guards in a supplemental role. Guards can offer deterrence and judgment, but their higher, recurring costs often outweigh the benefits when an automated system can cover the same risks more efficiently. Regulations don’t universally prohibit guards, and there isn’t a blanket requirement that IDS be used at every facility.