Security guard just watch and call 911 as girl beaten

[hunter5]

http://www.katu.com/news/local/84092377 ... -container

PORTLAND, Ore. - In a Seattle bus tunnel a 15-year-old girl was viciously attacked while security guards did nothing but call 9-1-1. The incident, in addition to sparking outrage, has many asking whether security guards in Portland are allowed to step in.

Disbelief and disgust was the reaction by people who were shown surveillance footage of a girl being repeatedly kicked in the head by another girl while private security guards stood by at arm’s length and did nothing but call 9-1-1.

“I know the transit isn’t exactly the same over there (Seattle), but I know it’s still good and that’s, that’s horrible,” said one man after watching the video at a MAX station.

“Somebody’s getting hurt, I mean you don’t want them to get hurt, I don’t know, like, do something,” said another man at a MAX station.

TriMet and its private security contractor Wackenhut, said if one of their guard’s is near a fight, they won’t just stand back and dial 9-1-1.

Wackenhut project manager, Maj. Ellis Bremer, said there’s no question employees can and will get directly involved to stop fights.

“We will not stand by,” he said. “We are here to protect the employees and assist the employees of TriMet and in so far as the ridership goes, of course, protect the ridership and inform the ridership.”

The state only requires eight hours of classroom work to get a license to be a private security guard, but Wackenhut said it requires its people to go through an initial minimum of 80 hours and then a 16-hour refresher course every year.

Most riders said they believe security should mean more than just dialing 9-1-1.

Transit officers in Seattle say they are reconsidering the limits put on their private security guards

This is horrible. The link also goes to a video of the attack.

[Kamakazie Sith]

That is horrible. Those security guards could have done something and probably would have been just fine because the evidence would have shown then breaking up a vicious attack. However, I think it is more appropriate to blame the organization rather than the individual.

According to several sources those guards were only following policy. If you break policy and something goes wrong or you get sued or what have you then you're screwed. Security guards generally don't make enough money to play carelessly with their jobs.

[Big Phil]

They were following company policy, which is not to get involved in physical altercations, but instead to call 911

Reports have been coming out (and you can see on the video) that the victim had asked the security guards to help her and call 911, and they told her to get lost. There is a lot of contradicting information about what happened in the hour or so before this attack, but supposedly the victim had had a dispute of some sort with the gang that eventually attacked her. According to talk radio (I can't recall if this was her statement or a statement from the attackers), part of the reason this girl was attacked is that she thought she was better than the other people and acted "too white."

Probably the most aggravating thing about this attack, to me as a man of color, is that there are people defending the actions of the attackers, or at least excusing them. Let's face it, these little hoodlums are trash - if they were animals they'd be rightfully put to sleep so they could never harm someone again - but since they're black, instead we're asked to empathize with them and understand their perspective and we're told that they're "victims of society" who will be on the streets again in a few weeks or months.

What's even worse is that the Seattle Police Department (directed by the Mayor's office) have effectively surrendered the downtown Core and a number of Seattle neighborhoods to gangs, drug dealers, and other criminals. Gangs of kids (predominantly black) run wild, but because they're black, politically correct Seattle is scared to death of doing anything about them. The ironic thing is that Seattle's black population is tiny and relatively affluent (there isn't really a ghetto in Seattle and there aren't any "projects"), and Seattle is fairly egalitarian, so there really aren't any of the traditional excuses for this type of behavior (entrenched racism, abusive police, massive poverty, drugs, etc.).

[Vastatosaurus Rex]

According to talk radio (I can't recall if this was her statement or a statement from the attackers), part of the reason this girl was attacked is that she thought she was better than the other people and acted "too white."

Is talk radio really the best source for this kind of information? Knowing the right-wing bias of much talk radio, I wouldn't be surprised if some white racist was trying to inject racial themes into a situation where it wasn't present.

I remember once a situation where a bunch of black kids beat up a white kid on a school bus because of a dispute over seats, leading a lot of white people to claim that the attack was racially motivated when it really wasn't. That and other incidents has led me to think that racist white people like to project their own bigotry onto people of color. I think it is possible that something like that is happening here.

That said, whether or not there was racism present here, this attack was inexcusable and anyone defending it is at best seriously misguided.

[Mayabird]

It's Seattle, dude. There's also liberal/progressive talk radio (which can be just as stupid as the usual, but I digress).
[line 2]

[Vastatosaurus Rex]

It's Seattle, dude. There's also liberal/progressive talk radio (which can be just as stupid as the usual, but I digress).
[line 2]

If this was a liberal station, I suppose I have no good reason to doubt it.

[ArmorPierce]

I live in NY area and have not heard any liberal/progressive talk radio. Do you know for a fact that there is liberal talk radio on the radio?

[hunter5]

I live in NY area and have not heard any liberal/progressive talk radio. Do you know for a fact that there is liberal talk radio on the radio?

The only large group that comes to mind is Air America but I think that may be off the air by now. I am sure there are a few local hosts that are liberal/progressive.

[Mayabird]

There is stuff in Seattle. I know because I lived there and one of my obnoxious coworkers at one of my jobs subjected us all to it, the stupid crazy conspiracy theory left-wing version of talk radio. I just wanted to listen to Bird Note on NPR; was that really too much to ask? And he stank of patchouli. Damnit, why am I hijacking all these threads?

Anyway, yeah, there are a lot of company policies these days which consist mostly of protecting the asses of the higher-ups from litigation and making the underlings have to decide between still being able to eat and pay the bills and maybe trying to do the right thing. Although if the security guards had been dicks to her beforehand, it would be different.

[AMT]

Why should you trust liberal talk radio?

Talk Radio has no need to be truthful, honest, or unbiased. You'd do better to watch the news or read a newspaper then to get the facts from talk radio, no matter what side of the aisle it is.

[Molyneux]

That is horrible. Those security guards could have done something and probably would have been just fine because the evidence would have shown then breaking up a vicious attack. However, I think it is more appropriate to blame the organization rather than the individual.

According to several sources those guards were only following policy. If you break policy and something goes wrong or you get sued or what have you then you're screwed. Security guards generally don't make enough money to play carelessly with their jobs.

I got my ass handed to me in a previous thread about advocating something similar, but I'm going to go ahead and say that here it's explicitly justified:

The hell with policy.
Past a certain point, he had an ethical duty to act to protect the well-being of the girl. The risk of death or permanent damage to her should have outweighed his need to keep his job, no question.

[wolveraptor]

Let's face it, these little hoodlums are trash - if they were animals they'd be rightfully put to sleep so they could never harm someone again - but since they're black, instead we're asked to empathize with them and understand their perspective and we're told that they're "victims of society" who will be on the streets again in a few weeks or months.

I wasn't aware that we generally support the death penalty for second degree assault.

What's even worse is that the Seattle Police Department (directed by the Mayor's office) have effectively surrendered the downtown Core and a number of Seattle neighborhoods to gangs, drug dealers, and other criminals. Gangs of kids (predominantly black) run wild, but because they're black, politically correct Seattle is scared to death of doing anything about them.

Are you saying that black criminals actually recieve reduced sentences in Seattle? Sounds like some nightmarish conservative caricature come-to-life.

The ironic thing is that Seattle's black population is tiny and relatively affluent (there isn't really a ghetto in Seattle and there aren't any "projects"), and Seattle is fairly egalitarian, so there really aren't any of the traditional excuses for this type of behavior (entrenched racism, abusive police, massive poverty, drugs, etc.).

Didn't you just say that certain neighborhoods had been surrendered to drug-dealers? But there aren't a lot of drugs in the city so those damned niggers don't have an excuse? lolwat

[ArmorPierce]

I got my ass handed to me in a previous thread about advocating something similar, but I'm going to go ahead and say that here it's explicitly justified:

The hell with policy.
Past a certain point, he had an ethical duty to act to protect the well-being of the girl. The risk of death or permanent damage to her should have outweighed his need to keep his job, no question.

Yeah? Fuck that. Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

[stormthebeaches]

Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

Physical well being? Its a 15 year old girl. Are you trying to tell me that three security guards can't handle one 15 year old girl? And yes, it is kind of immoral to just stand by whilst someone is getting brutally beaten right in front of you. What if the girl was being raped or strangled to death? Would they just stand by then?

[ArmorPierce]

Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

Physical well being? Its a 15 year old girl. Are you trying to tell me that three security guards can't handle one 15 year old girl? And yes, it is kind of immoral to just stand by whilst someone is getting brutally beaten right in front of you. What if the girl was being raped or strangled to death? Would they just stand by then?

Aww yes, they can seriously get hurt including getting bitten, eye gouged out, scratched, falling over. My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma. Why should he risk his well being and the well being of my family when we are struggling to just live everyday as it is? He falls over, gets a bad injury, have to medical insurance to cover that and on top of that he lost his job. Fuck putting himself at risk.

THEY DID NOT JUST STAND THERE, they called the police.

It is beyond retarded to expect someone to risk so much when they make so little and there's a good chance they don't even have medical insurance.

Expect them to do more? Give them a gun, give them a baton, and give them a large raise.

[Jim Raynor]

Yeah? Fuck that. Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

Three grown men are risking their physical well being by forcing an unarmed teenage girl to back the fuck off? And the possibility that he might have to answer to his boss (about something as easily defensible as jumping in to save a girl) is outweighed by the much greater risk that the girl who was getting kicked and stomped in the head could suffer permanent injuries or death.

And what is this shit about company policy against physical intervention? The article and video both explicitly say that their guards aren't supposed to just stand back and dial a fucking phone.

[Ryan Thunder]

My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma.

That begs the question of why he was a security guard...

[Jim Raynor]

Aww yes, they can seriously get hurt including getting bitten, eye gouged out, scratched, falling over.

I saw two, and later three guards in that video. Grab the bitch by the armsand restrain her, Jesus Christ.

My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma. Why should he risk his well being and the well being of my family when we are struggling to just live everyday as it is?

Sounds like your father was ridiculously unqualified for the job, if he had an actual medical condition like that. Do you believe these three guards had anything remotely similar to that condition?

THEY DID NOT JUST STAND THERE, they called the police.

Yeah, call 911 so that the cops MIGHT show up in several minutes at which point the victim could've already had her head stomped in.

It is beyond retarded to expect someone to risk so much when they make so little and there's a good chance they don't even have medical insurance.

It is beyond retarded to pay for a security guard to just stand there and do jack shit.

[ArmorPierce]

Yeah? Fuck that. Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

Three grown men are risking their physical well being by forcing an unarmed teenage girl to back the fuck off? And the possibility that he might have to answer to his boss (about something as easily defensible as jumping in to save a girl) is outweighed by the much greater risk that the girl who was getting kicked and stomped in the head could suffer permanent injuries or death.

It's so easy for someone to say that someone else should risk their well being and not give a shit about his or her or their family's well being.

And what is this shit about company policy against physical intervention? The article and video both explicitly say that their guards aren't supposed to just stand back and dial a fucking phone.

Show me where the article stated that? To my understanding, the security guards interviewed were from ANOTHER CITY. It even states at the end of the video that they are reconsidering policy.

[ArmorPierce]

My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma.

That begs the question of why he was a security guard...

Because his stated duty as a security guard was to 'observe, deter, and report' Not to get involved physically, and that was specifically stated to them.

Aww yes, they can seriously get hurt including getting bitten, eye gouged out, scratched, falling over.

I saw two, and later three guards in that video. Grab the bitch by the armsand restrain her, Jesus Christ.

As stated against company policy. And it was not only them getting injured, what if one of them were injured as result, they would be liable especially considering that their company specifically states that they are not allowed to do it.

My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma. Why should he risk his well being and the well being of my family when we are struggling to just live everyday as it is?

Sounds like your father was ridiculously unqualified for the job, if he had an actual medical condition like that. Do you believe these three guards had anything remotely similar to that condition?[/quote]

I don't know but as I stated, he was completely qualified for the job. His job specifially stated that they are not allowed to get physically involved. Their duty was to 'observe, deter, and report' not to get involved physically

THEY DID NOT JUST STAND THERE, they called the police.

Yeah, call 911 so that the cops MIGHT show up in several minutes at which point the victim could've already had her head stomped in. [/quote]

There were other people walking around, why did anyone else not get involved? They had as much duty getting involved as anyone else, in fact, considering that their job tells them not to, they had more duty getting involved.

It is beyond retarded to expect someone to risk so much when they make so little and there's a good chance they don't even have medical insurance.

It is beyond retarded to pay for a security guard to just stand there and do jack shit.[/quote]

That is their job description. They are NOT allowed to get involved. Want better security guards, pay them more, give them a gun and a baton, hand cuffs, give them good benefits, remove resctriction of physically getting involved, etc. You can't expect to pay them jack shit and expect them to risk their own well being. In some other countries, security is a respected position with plenty of former military guys and police guys doing it. They are well armed and well paid.

[Jim Raynor]

I've searched some more on this. That article and video are misleading. The security company that was interviewed isn't even the same as the one that employed those three guards. Also, the attacker had a gang with her, which was completely left out of the article and video that were linked to in this thread. That makes it more understandable.

The company is actually Olympic Security Inc., and here is there statement about what happened. According to the company itself, its guards aren't allowed to "take physical action." But later in the statement, they DO say that they have been effective by using "verbal intercession or acting as a physical buffer" to prevent fights. They claim that when the situation escalates, this passive approach isn't effective. I wasn't there, but of course this is just a company statement.

Well, look at the video there, the guards clearly allowed the attacker to get past them alone and get right on the victim. Couldn't they have made a better "buffer" and tried harder than that to keep the attacker from going in? Then escort the girl to a safer area? These are some questions that should be answered.

Also, King County is at fault for contracting out such weak and limited security.

[Ryan Thunder]

My father did a stint as security guard and he has a condition that gives him brittle bones meaning him falling over can cause him massive trauma.

That begs the question of why he was a security guard...

Because his stated duty as a security guard was to 'observe, deter, and report' Not to get involved physically, and that was specifically stated to them.

Ah. No offense intended, btw, I was just wondering.

[Shroom Man 777]

In the Philippines, security guards can come armed with M4 carbines and USAS-12 automatic shotguns. I've also seen, with my own eyes, our local security guards shoot and kill people.

Question, what do American security guards do when bad people with guns come to rob the place? Are the American security guards armed, and authorized to use weapons in self-defense?

[Molyneux]

I got my ass handed to me in a previous thread about advocating something similar, but I'm going to go ahead and say that here it's explicitly justified:

The hell with policy.
Past a certain point, he had an ethical duty to act to protect the well-being of the girl. The risk of death or permanent damage to her should have outweighed his need to keep his job, no question.

Yeah? Fuck that. Why should a guy who is making $10 an hour risk is financial and physical well being by going against company policy and getting involved?

Because he's risking $10 an hour. If he doesn't intervene, an innocent person just might die.
I'm not saying that it's his job - it's a fucking ethical imperative to the security guards and any other bystanders to get involved.

If the attacker did have friends with her who didn't appear in the video, then it may be a different situation - but just going by the video, the guards failed as human beings.

[Raxmei]

In the Philippines, security guards can come armed with M4 carbines and USAS-12 automatic shotguns. I've also seen, with my own eyes, our local security guards shoot and kill people.

Question, what do American security guards do when bad people with guns come to rob the place? Are the American security guards armed, and authorized to use weapons in self-defense?

Witness the act taking place, call the cops, give them a good description. Some guards are armed but in most states that requires special certification. You're always authorized to act in self defense if assaulted and the law allows you the same powers of arrest that everyone else has. Some companies have more restrictive policies. For example some companies don't like their guards to perform arrests even when it's legal and makes a whole lot of sense to do so.