"PRIVATE" security Rambo at Wallmart kills a shoplifter.

[K191145]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354034611' post='851353']
If the choke hold caused or contributed to the man's death then I'd say you would have to consider it "deadly force" but I'm not sure that even matters.

When one person's actions causes or contributes to the death of another then I think generally, someone is going to be charged with some sort of crime unless they can make a rational claim of self-defense.
[/quote]

It's possible the man could have been in very bad health and may have fought back but I talked to a Walmart employee last night about this and she said the guard and employees violated the stores policy on dealing with a shoplifter so they are somewhat responsible for the mans death. I hate a thief also but it isn't a capitol crime. I'm sure the guard and employee's didn't intend to kill him. Keeping criminals in jail is always the best way to prevent them from comitting crimes.

[E4 No More]

[quote name='K191145' timestamp='1354034551' post='851352']
I never said [b]ALL [/b]security officers were wannabe's or yahoo's but I do contend there's quite a few that are. Anyone can claim their the stores or businesses security guard without any training or qualifications, all they need to be is an employee. I've know a couple of yahoos who applied for work for a bail bondsmen to be bounty hunters, I don't know if they ever got the job, I hope they didn't because they wern't much different than the people they wanted to hunt. Yahoo's are out there working as so-called security guards and bounty hunters etc. I know you probably know that but it seems that some on here believe every person accused is quilty and all private security guards are hero angles.
[/quote]"I don't have very much respect for "private security" cop wannabe's, there's no real standards in training and I don't recognize any real authority they think they have."

This is certainly a generalized statement: however, it doesn't really matter. What many don't understand is that security guards fill a broad range of expectations. Most are nothing more than a warm body that lowers the client's insurance premiums while some are professional witnesses, and while still others are high quality with real expectations to act that way. Many see the warm bodies and associate them with all of the security officers just as many see corrupt police officers and associate all police officers as being the same.

If some security guard wrongly accused my wife of a crime and laid their hands on her I would be pissed too, but I would be pissed at the person; not the profession in general. But that's just me.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='SWJewellTN' timestamp='1354031265' post='851315']...What I am in perfect agreement with is that I'm not crying over a thief's death.[/quote]

There is a difference between "crying over a thief's death" and being somewhat appalled, as I am, that some here seem to think property is worth a person's life; most especially appalling when these employees/security guard who acted did so against their employer's policies, did so to protect property that is worth so very little as what this man attempted to steal and did so to protect property that didn't even belong to the people who acted. Maybe thinking the above makes me part of a minority here but if so it's a minority I'm proud to be a part of.

[E4 No More]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354034846' post='851356']
"One employee said he held the man in a choke hold and told him to tap when he couldn't breathe."

So if he doesn't "tap out" like you see on TV you just continue to choke him to death?
[/quote]
Because we know that integrity and accuracy in reporting is prevalent today? Not! I know an officer who shot and killed a man who pointed an empty AK at him, and a reporter who was rightfully directed to his Chief of Police for any comments told the officer that he either told her what happened or she'd just make it up.

[TMF]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354034846' post='851356']"One employee said he held the man in a choke hold and told him to tap when he couldn't breathe."

So if he doesn't "tap out" like you see on TV you just continue to choke him to death?[/quote]

I think that shows that his intent was absolutely NOT to kill him. Plus, even if he cut off his oxygen, that does not result in immediate death. Sounds like an accident to me. Regardless of Walmart's policy, he would have been justified in subduing the individual if he was assaulting him or someone else. If the guy attacked the manager, sounds to me like he was doing the right thing.

[E4 No More]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354035612' post='851366']
There is a difference between "crying over a thief's death" and being somewhat appalled, as I am, that some here seem to think property is worth a person's life; most especially appalling when these employees/security guard who acted did so against their employer's policies, did so to protect property that is worth so very little as what this man attempted to steal and did so to protect property that didn't even belong to the people who acted. Maybe thinking the above makes me part of a minority here but if so it's a minority I'm proud to be a part of.
[/quote]I'm not saying that you are wrong to be appalled, Robert. I'm saying that none of us know the whole story. Everyone rendering an opinion in this matter is speculating since we do not have ALL of the information. If the evidence shows that the security guard indeed acted out of policy and choked the guy to death then he gets what he deserves and I'm appalled at the guard's actions too. That doesn't mean that I'll feel bad that a thief died. I don't feel bad about someone intentionally jumping out of a perfectly good airplane and finding out that their chute didn't open either. Edited November 27, 2012 by SWJewellTN

[Guest rebeldrummer]

i work private security ... i have had to go through training ... qualifications....blah blah blah
there is a different set of standards for ARMED vs NON - ARMED security.
each state has its own set of qualifications for each. and on top of that, some companies require certain levels of training / qualifications to be employed with them. not every security guard is a mall cop (not bashing them either!)

like another post mentioned, i have also shot (at the range) against actual LEO and ex/current military guys and have out-shot them some of them!
(not tooting my own horn either, just stating a fact!)
just because they are actual gov employees does NOT mean they are MORE qualified at what they do.
i have been in some pretty sticky situations. my company was tasked with going in after katrina and securing about 25 ATMs that were loaded
with anywhere from 30K to 150K. with reports of looting and violence, we had to have a Coast Guard escort and were armed to the teeth.
pretty rough situation.

i am not a wanna be. i dont claim to be some tactical gun guru. i dont act like an elite operator. its just my job. its security. just because there are not bullets flying over our heads and monthly training does not make it less of a profession.

sure, that dudes death is unfortunate, but i am not saddened. like others said, if he had not been doing what he was doing it would have never happened.
i wasnt there. i dont know all the details so I cant judge the whole situation.

i just dont like the whole, "lets bash private security" mentality that I have read here.

[TMF]

Walmart policy and law are two different things. Whether or not he violated Walmart policy will have no bearing on prosecution for manslaughter. Based on what I read I doubt he will be tried for anything. He'll probably get sued by the dirtbag, oxygen thieving family.

[K191145]

[quote name='SWJewellTN' timestamp='1354035517' post='851364']
"I don't have very much respect for "private security" cop wannabe's, there's no real standards in training and I don't recognize any real authority they think they have."

This is certainly a generalized statement: however, it doesn't really matter. What many don't understand is that security guards fill a broad range of expectations. Most are nothing more than a warm body that lowers the client's insurance premiums while some are professional witnesses, and while still others are high quality with real expectations to act that way. Many see the warm bodies and associate them with all of the security officers just as many see corrupt police officers and associate all police officers as being the same.

If some security guard wrongly accused my wife of a crime and laid their hands on her I would be pissed too, but I would be pissed at the person; not the profession in general. But that's just me.
[/quote]

That was a generalized statement I admit but from my point of view I usually know if someone's a police officer and I will respect their badge and authority, however it's impossible to know who or how professional some private security guard is and how much if any training he/she has. The keyword is "private" and to me he/she has no more authority than any other private citizen. I know a private citizen can make an arrest but that should be limited to something that potentually endangers someones safety or life, lifting a few CD's isn't endangering someones life. By all means, take pictures of them with your phone, follow them out the door to their car and get their make and plate but don't touch them. Now if they get mad and come at you that's an entirly different situation.
Like I said before I don't steal or shoplift, I handle items in stores that I intend to pay for. If a police officers believes I stole something i'll cooperate and if I think it's unjustified i'll formally complain, but, I will not let a private security guard put his/her hands on me or search me, no more than I would allow my neighbor to.

[Guest RevScottie]

I'm sorry but if you aren't saddened by this persons senseless death, even if he did bring it partially on himself, you aren't much of a human being. To celebrate the fact saying he got what he deserved is just sick. A man DIED over a couple of hundred dollars worth of electronics. I think even a thief's life is worth far more than that. When society starts valuing its possessions more than another persons life it has lost its way.

[Guest rebeldrummer]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354040614' post='851425']
I'm sorry but if you aren't saddened by this persons senseless death, even if he did bring it partially on himself, you aren't much of a human being. To celebrate the fact saying he got what he deserved is just sick. A man DIED over a couple of hundred dollars worth of electronics. I think even a thief's life is worth far more than that. When society starts valuing its possessions more than another persons life it has lost its way.
[/quote]

im not sad. nor do i value electronics over his life. what IS sad is that society is breeding a whole generation of people who are worthless, non-contributing members who would rather steal than work hard and save up. i am not cold and callus but to me this whole situation is just natural selection running its course.....play stupid win big (over-used saying but it fits!)

[Guest RevScottie]

[quote name='SWJewellTN' timestamp='1354032514' post='851331']
Well, a choke hold, yes, but a neck restraint that people typically refer to as a choke hold wasn't back in the day. My martial arts instructor was the one who showed it to Sgt. Lindell of the KCPD, who later taught it widely as his technique, (the bastage!). [color=#FF0000]When properly applied it doesn't choke the suspect[/color] but rather cuts-off the blood supply to the brain to cause the subject to pass-out long enough to be secured with handcuffs.
[/quote]

And that is why I think these employees way over responded, especially if they weren't trained to physically restrain a suspect using this method. There is real danger in applying this type of hold improperly and many PD's have banned its use due to the risk of "air choking" the victim if he struggles and manages to turn his head.

[Guest RevScottie]

[quote name='rebeldrummer' timestamp='1354041044' post='851429']
im not sad. nor do i value electronics over his life. what IS sad is that society is breeding a whole generation of people who are worthless, non-contributing members who would rather steal than work hard and save up. i am not cold and callus but to me this whole situation is just natural selection running its course.....play stupid win big (over-used saying but it fits!)
[/quote]

So what your saying is if someone steals something its no big deal if they get killed in the process? Funny the law doesnt see it that way.

[Guest rebeldrummer]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354041262' post='851432']
So what your saying is if someone steals something its no big deal if they get killed in the process? Funny the law doesnt see it that way.
[/quote]

your taking this out of context.....we dont know what all transpired after he was confronted. i am all for obeying the law. i would not shoot and or kill someone for stealing from me. my statement referred to the emotion of sadness and I (and alot of others on here) do not feel it for this criminal. period.
i am sorry if my comments conveyed anything else...or if you took it any other way.

[E4 No More]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354040614' post='851425']
I'm sorry but if you aren't saddened by this persons senseless death, even if he did bring it partially on himself, you aren't much of a human being. To celebrate the fact saying he got what he deserved is just sick. A man DIED over a couple of hundred dollars worth of electronics. I think even a thief's life is worth far more than that. When society starts valuing its possessions more than another persons life it has lost its way.
[/quote]Am I right to assume that "RevScottie" means Reverend Scottie?

[TMF]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354041262' post='851432']

So what your saying is if someone steals something its no big deal if they get killed in the process? Funny the law doesnt see it that way.[/quote]

Actually, it does. I have the right to confront someone stealing from me. If they respond with violence I can respond in kind. So, while can't shoot someone breaking into my car, I can stop them with force. If they up the ante I can increase the level of force to match theirs. That is what it appears happened here. If so, the perp is 100% responsible for the outcome. You're having a hard time discerning between the value of the items he stole with his actions after he stole them. If anyone has devalued his life to the cost of the items he attempted to steal, it was the perp himself. He chose to keep escalating the situation to the point he was restrained in a choke hold. It had nothing to do with the value of the items. His death was his own fault. The loss prevention employee has no legal liability here.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='TMF' timestamp='1354042436' post='851454']

Actually, it does. I have the right to confront someone stealing from me. If they respond with violence I can respond in kind. So, while can't shoot someone breaking into my car, I can stop them with force. If they up the ante I can increase the level of force to match theirs. That is what it appears happened here. If so, the perp is 100% responsible for the outcome. You're having a hard time discerning between the value of the items he stole with his actions after he stole them. If anyone has devalued his life to the cost of the items he attempted to steal, it was the perp himself. He chose to keep escalating the situation to the point he was restrained in a choke hold. It had nothing to do with the value of the items. His death was his own fault. The loss prevention employee has no legal liability here.[/quote]

Really? You know all that for a fact?

You may have a right to "confront" someone but I doubt any DA in Tennessee is going to give you much latitude if he is trying to run away and you end up killing him while trying to restrain him.

[Guest RevScottie]

[quote name='TMF' timestamp='1354042436' post='851454']
Actually, it does. I have the right to confront someone stealing from me. If they respond with violence I can respond in kind. So, while can't shoot someone breaking into my car, I can stop them with force. If they up the ante I can increase the level of force to match theirs. That is what it appears happened here. If so, the perp is 100% responsible for the outcome. You're having a hard time discerning between the value of the items he stole with his actions after he stole them. If anyone has devalued his life to the cost of the items he attempted to steal, it was the perp himself. He chose to keep escalating the situation to the point he was restrained in a choke hold. It had nothing to do with the value of the items. His death was his own fault. The loss prevention employee has no legal liability here.
[/quote]

My question is did the manager have the right to pursue him and drag him to the ground? If I had a verbal confrontation with someone i felt had stolen something from my storage building and they turned to run away and I physically asault them it has always been my understanding that I would be the one guilty of escalating the situation. If I escalate the situation I have no claim to self defense...

[TMF]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354045179' post='851472']

Really? You know all that for a fact?

You may have a right to "confront" someone but I doubt any DA in Tennessee is going to give you much latitude if he is trying to run away and you end up killing him while trying to restrain him.[/quote]

I don't know that for a fact. It appears to be what happened. The loss prevention guy didn't drag him back into the store. It appears he reacted to the actions of the perp fighting the manager. If I were a security guard and saw the GM getting beat up by a shop lifter, I'd step in and restrain him too. All sounds reasonable to me. No need for you to get stirred up about it and get huffy with me.

[TMF]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354045712' post='851477']

My question is did the manager have the right to pursue him and drag him to the ground? If I had a verbal confrontation with someone i felt had stolen something from my storage building and they turned to run away and I physically asault them it has always been my understanding that I would be the one guilty of escalating the situation. If I escalate the situation I have no claim to self defense...[/quote]

The manager isn't the one who restrained him in the choke hold. As for the legality if the manager dragging him back into the store? I dunno. I'm pretty sure he law says you can use force to take back wht is yours. If someone walks out your front door with a TV you can stop them. If they drop it and run then you can't use force to hold them, although it happens all the time and I doubt ciminal charges come from it, at least not where I live.

The issue here is not that he died. There is no intent, and so long as the guy had their property they had a right to get it back. He died as an accident, unless you think a gainfully employed security guard decided that he was going to murder someone for chits and grins.

[LagerHead]

I would like to remind some folks on here that the reason that the general public thinks gun owners are a bunch of vigilante a-holes is because some of us act like a bunch of vigilante a-holes, and are doing so in response to this story. I understand that the thief escalated the situation (supposedly) and that is very likely why he is dead, but reveling in his death over petty theft is pretty asinine in my opinion. I would wager that every single person on this board has at some time in their life broken a law. I would also wager that none (or at least very few ) of you deserve to be dead.

Edited November 27, 2012 by LagerHead

[Guest RevScottie]

[quote name='TMF' timestamp='1354046099' post='851481']
I don't know that for a fact. It appears to be what happened. The loss prevention guy didn't drag him back into the store. It appears he [color=#FF0000]reacted to the actions of the perp fighting the manager[/color]. If I were a security guard and saw the GM getting beat up by a shop lifter, I'd step in and restrain him too. All sounds reasonable to me. No need for you to get stirred up about it and get huffy with me.
[/quote]

This is the main part of the story that everyones actions hinge on. If the manager was in the wrong for pursuing the thief and dragging him to the ground in the first place then anyone helping him in the resulting fight is also in the wrong.

Does the law allow a private citizen to use physical force to detain a thief? From what has been reported the thief became violent AFTER being brought to the ground by the Walmart employee. Unless there is some exemption in the law for pursuing a petty thief that allows the use of force then the manager escalated the situation and will likely suffer the consequences.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='TMF' timestamp='1354046099' post='851481']

I don't know that for a fact. It appears to be what happened. The loss prevention guy didn't drag him back into the store. It appears he reacted to the actions of the perp fighting the manager. If I were a security guard and saw the GM getting beat up by a shop lifter, I'd step in and restrain him too. All sounds reasonable to me. No need for you to get stirred up about it and get huffy with me.[/quote]

I didn't realize asking a question was "getting huffy". Maybe I misunderstood but it seemed as if you were presenting your version as if it was what happened when the truth is we don't know anything that precisely.

That said, whether we have "right to confront" or not, if the alleged thief dies during the confrontation the confronter is probably going to be charged with some sort of homicide charge and deservedly so IMHO.

I think "confronting" anyone simply because he may be steeling something is a questionable choice for one to make; "stuff" isn't worth anybody dying whether the anybody is the alleged thief, the alleged victim or just an innocent bystander...some seem to be pretty content and okay with the fact that it was only the "thief" who died but had the thief in this story been armed and decided to start shooting rather than just try to get away, who knows how many innocent people in that parking lot could have been killed or seriously injured...can anybody here really tell me with a straight face that this couple hundred dollars of someone's property is worth that? If anyone can then I truly believe that person needs to reexamine their priorities because if stuff is that important to someone they have a problem.

[TMF]

[quote name='RevScottie' timestamp='1354046929' post='851497']

This is the main part of the story that everyones actions hinge on. If the manager was in the wrong for pursuing the thief and dragging him to the ground in the first place then anyone helping him in the resulting fight is also in the wrong.

Does the law allow a private citizen to use physical force to detain a thief? From what has been reported the thief became violent AFTER being brought to the ground by the Walmart employee. Unless there is some exemption in the law for pursuing a petty thief that allows the use of force then the manager escalated the situation and will likely suffer the consequences.[/quote]

There is a good chance that is the case, however, if the security guard wasn't involved in reeling the guy back into the store, his actions were probably reasonable for how he interpreted the situation.

Point I'm making, the security guard seems to be the focus of wrongdoing, when in fact, it appears that everything he did can be reasonably explained. I can't say the same about the shoplifter, unless he wasn't actually shoplifting and was jut some random guy the manager decided to hassle.

[TMF]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354047106' post='851499']

I didn't realize asking a question was "getting huffy". Maybe I misunderstood but it seemed as if you were presenting your version as if it was what happened when the truth is we don't know anything that precisely.

That said, whether we have "right to confront" or not, if the alleged thief dies during the confrontation the confronter is probably going to be charged with some sort of homicide charge and deservedly so IMHO.

I think "confronting" anyone simply because he may be steeling something is a questionable choice for one to make; "stuff" isn't worth anybody dying whether the anybody is the alleged thief, the alleged victim or just an innocent bystander...some seem to be pretty content and okay with the fact that it was only the "thief" who died but had the thief in this story been armed and decided to start shooting rather than just try to get away, who knows how many innocent people in that parking lot could have been killed or seriously injured...can anybody here really tell me with a straight face that this couple hundred dollars of someone's property is worth that? If anyone can then I truly believe that person needs to reexamine their priorities because if stuff is that important to someone they have a problem.[/quote]

It is the way you say it Robert. You ride the edge of provocative with your responses, then get indignant when someone calls you on it.

As for the rest, you are free to allow people to steal your property and wait for the police. People protect their property everyday without being charged with a crime. An individual has to take it pretty far to find themselves in a courtroom in this state. I choose not to allow someone to take my stuff. That is my right. If someone decides to take my things I will stop them with force from taking it. It is up to the criminal how much force I will use. That is how it works. The law supports that. It isn't about how valuable the stuff is. It is about something completely different. Being a victim is a choice, and I choose not to be.