Private security guards kill black male for tespassing.

Status
Not open for further replies.
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS THREAD AND ALL FUTURE THREADS OF THIS TYPE REGARDING INCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You may believe guns are the problem. Maybe they are. However, "taking them away" to the degree you guys are talking about ("nobody should have guns") would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. In other words, 2/3 of both the House of Representatives and the Senate would have to vote to propose it, and then 38 out of 50 states would have to approve it.

In other words, it's not happening.

And in this case it likely wouldn't matter, since the security guards are apparently (stupidly) considered law enforcement and would likely be allowed to carry guns anyway.

Jumping into every thread of this type and going "SEE GUNS SUCK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS STOP HAVING GUNS" is useless. Especially when it's a knee-jerk reaction to a situation in which that wouldn't solve the problem.
 
ssolitare said:
Seems like they can own guns, but you just can't give them "stand your ground" laws.
Click to expand...

I was watching Cops last night and saw two white yokels telling the officers: " this is Florida, we were standing our ground!" when they chased with a knife and a pipe, two other white yokels, off their property. And they still got charged with assault.

So some cops will arrest you if you chase someone with a knife, even when they're threatening you on your own property (perhaps because the other party was white) and other cops will let you stalk and kill someone, even if that someone is only defending them self (perhaps because that someone was black.)

Seems like that "stand your ground" laws are causing a lot of confusion and death.
 
Htown said:
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS THREAD AND ALL FUTURE THREADS OF THIS TYPE REGARDING INCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You may believe guns are the problem. Maybe they are. However, "taking them away" to the degree you guys are talking about ("nobody should have guns") would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. In other words, 2/3 of both the House of Representatives and the Senate would have to vote to propose it, and then 38 out of 50 states would have to approve it.

In other words, it's not happening.

And in this case it likely wouldn't matter, since the security guards are apparently (stupidly) considered law enforcement and would likely be allowed to carry guns anyway.

Jumping into every thread of this type and going "SEE GUNS SUCK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS STOP HAVING GUNS" is useless. Especially when it's a knee-jerk reaction to a situation in which that wouldn't solve the problem.
Click to expand...

I guess you want people to stop posting sanctimonious posts stating that they'll never own a gun and that we should all just trust the proper authorities with home security, too?
 
Ramblin said:
I was watching Cops last night and saw two white yokels telling the officers: " this is Florida, we were standing our ground!" when they chased with a knife and a pipe, two other white yokels, off their property. And they still got charged with assault.

So some cops will arrest you if you chase someone with a knife, even when they're threatening you on your own property (perhaps because the other party was white) and other cops will let you stalk and kill someone, even if that someone is only defending them self (perhaps because that someone was black.)

Seems like that "stand your ground" laws are causing a lot of confusion and death.
Click to expand...

I for one am shocked that two white yokels assaulting people with pipes aren't experts on the nuances of criminal law...
 
blind51de said:
Armed security guards are little more than mercenaries. They have no right to use deadly force.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I'm a university guard and these guys had no right to use deadly force. They are in deep shit.


And wow @ the shit they apparently said after they shot him... Nothing more than some irresponsible racist punks with guns if true.
 
jp_zer0 said:
when people tried to relate the increase in gun ownership with an increase in crime, they found no correlation.
Click to expand...

That's kind of irrelevant. There will always be crime regardless of guns, the difference is, the countries that banned gun ownership a long time ago will have dramatically less gun related crime or incidents. It's not about how frequent it is for some nutter to go around shooting up the place, it simply that the potential for that to happen is there.
 
Htown said:
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS THREAD AND ALL FUTURE THREADS OF THIS TYPE REGARDING INCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You may believe guns are the problem. Maybe they are. However, "taking them away" to the degree you guys are talking about ("nobody should have guns") would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. In other words, 2/3 of both the House of Representatives and the Senate would have to vote to propose it, and then 38 out of 50 states would have to approve it.

In other words, it's not happening.

And in this case it likely wouldn't matter, since the security guards are apparently (stupidly) considered law enforcement and would likely be allowed to carry guns anyway.

Jumping into every thread of this type and going "SEE GUNS SUCK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS STOP HAVING GUNS" is useless. Especially when it's a knee-jerk reaction to a situation in which that wouldn't solve the problem.
Click to expand...

I like you.
 
Htown said:
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS THREAD AND ALL FUTURE THREADS OF THIS TYPE REGARDING INCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You may believe guns are the problem. Maybe they are. However, "taking them away" to the degree you guys are talking about ("nobody should have guns") would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. In other words, 2/3 of both the House of Representatives and the Senate would have to vote to propose it, and then 38 out of 50 states would have to approve it.

In other words, it's not happening.

And in this case it likely wouldn't matter, since the security guards are apparently (stupidly) considered law enforcement and would likely be allowed to carry guns anyway.

Jumping into every thread of this type and going "SEE GUNS SUCK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS STOP HAVING GUNS" is useless. Especially when it's a knee-jerk reaction to a situation in which that wouldn't solve the problem.
Click to expand...

I not only think people shouldn't be able to have them but I think all law enforcement except high-tier ones like SWAT shouldn't have guns either. I don't particularly go on about it though because like you said it would require massive resources and protest for congress to change it.

If that's the case and weapons will remain then I feel average citizens should be able to have the same weaponry police have (or in this case security guards). That way they can defend themselves against racist tyrants and there is a level playing field. However training should be mandatory and nobody be allowed to buy a gun/ammo without proof of such training.
 
Htown said:
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THIS THREAD AND ALL FUTURE THREADS OF THIS TYPE REGARDING INCIDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES

You may believe guns are the problem. Maybe they are. However, "taking them away" to the degree you guys are talking about ("nobody should have guns") would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. In other words, 2/3 of both the House of Representatives and the Senate would have to vote to propose it, and then 38 out of 50 states would have to approve it.

In other words, it's not happening.

And in this case it likely wouldn't matter, since the security guards are apparently (stupidly) considered law enforcement and would likely be allowed to carry guns anyway.

Jumping into every thread of this type and going "SEE GUNS SUCK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE GUNS STOP HAVING GUNS" is useless. Especially when it's a knee-jerk reaction to a situation in which that wouldn't solve the problem.
Click to expand...

Ahaha. Second April's fools to get me today. Good one.

EDIT: Oh, wait.

Hey, how's this for "YOU SHOULDN'T SAY THIS"? We know that if these were not armed guards, no one would have died that day. You can say all you will about the guards being stupid, but a human life was lost because of the wrong people having guns. I think that's bad. Same with Travyon Martin. But the number one reason to have a gun in the US is "so I can defend myself from everyone that has guns". But yeah, constitutional, bitches!
 
Angry Fork said:
I not only think people shouldn't be able to have them but I think all law enforcement except high-tier ones like SWAT shouldn't have guns either. I don't particularly go on about it though because like you said it would require massive resources and protest for congress to change it.

If that's the case and weapons will remain then I feel average citizens should be able to have the same weaponry police have (or in this case security guards). That way they can defend themselves against racist tyrants and there is a level playing field. However training should be mandatory and nobody be allowed to buy a gun/ammo without proof of such training.
Click to expand...

Maybe there should be some sort of psychological evaluation for gun ownership. It's kind of late to try and round up all the guns now, all the bad guys already have plenty of them.
 
lawblob said:
Why in the world do private security guards all pack guns nowadays? Such an obviously stupid thing. They should have low-grade non-lethal weapons at most.
Click to expand...

In my experience, most commercial people would rather hire unarmed because of price and liability issues.
 
shanshan310 said:
They did a huge buyback of guns in Australia in 1996. Since then gun homicide, general homicide, and burglary all decreased significantly. (Source). You can still own guns, but you need a damn good reason in order to get a gun licence (self defence is not considered a real reason for owning a gun there).

I'm not sure what the second part means. It sounds like you're implying that there IS a gun owner in every dark alley :p
Click to expand...

I was trying to say there wasn't a gun owner in every dark alley, waiting to commit a crime.

Looking at the graphs in your link, it seems that none of the crime data is related to gun ownership.

homihisty.gif


the rate of change for gun homicide was already going down before the buyback, and doesn't change after the buyback.

total homicide doesn't seem to change at all in response to the buyback measure.

The only data set that seems to change significantly for the better is Robbery, and the article agrees that it hard to prove that the gun buyback had any effect, or is related.
 
http://www.policeone.com/use-of-for...icted-on-murder-charges-after-shooting-death/

DAYTON, Ohio — State officials will order Ranger Security LLC to surrender the registration cards of two guards indicted Wednesday on murder counts.

"The company is ultimately responsible" for returning the cards, said Geoff Dutton, spokesman for the Ohio Department of Public Safety.

On Wednesday, a Montgomery County Grand jury indicted Justin Wissinger, 24, and Christopher Tarbert, 32, on charges of murder and abduction. The charges stem from the March 1 shooting death of Dante Price at the Summit Square apartments on Hoover Ave.

Ranger Security declined comment.

Both guards were certified by the state as security guards and allowed to carry firearms, according to state records.

Wissinger and Tarbert were arrested Wednesday. If they are released on bail, which had not been set Thursday afternoon, they will not be able to work as security guards while the case is pending because they will be surrendering their licenses and gun permits, Dutton said.

"Given their felony indictments, they're no longer allowed under the law to carry a firearm," Dutton said.

Montgomery County Prosecutor Mathias H. Heck Jr. said Wednesday that the guards had overstepped their authority in trying to detain Price and by using deadly force to try to make him comply with them.

On 911 tapes, the guards said they had no choice but to shoot Price because he tried to run them down with his car.

The guards were patrolling the parking lot when they saw Price, who was on a trespass list and had been ordered to stay off the property. They pulled their weapons and ordered him to exit his vehicle. Instead, Price attempted to drive away and the guards shot at him at least 17 times, striking him three times, Heck said.

Dutton said that the state did not yet plan to take any action against Ranger Security related to Price's slaying. But the state is watching an unrelated misdemeanor criminal case in Franklin County Municipal Court, he said.

In that case, Ranger is accused of providing an unlicensed security guard in 2010 to a Columbus nightspot — a place that police there said was a suspected hangout for gang members. If convicted, Dutton said, the agency would again move to revoke Ranger's license.

Ranger Security was on the brink of losing its state license, nine months before Price's death, for a pattern of behavior one regulator called "a potential to cause serious harm to public safety". Without a license, Ranger Security would have been out of business.

Because of state regulators' faulty policies and procedures, however, the security company's ability to maintain its license is now in the hands of a Franklin County judge.

According to the more than 400 pages of records obtained by the Dayton Daily News, Ranger Security Inc. racked up more than 5,200 violations in four investigations during three years — that's nearly five violations a day — from the state agency charged with regulating security guards. Yet the same agency granted a new license to the company when it changed its name to Ranger Security LLC in 2011 despite the violations.

State public safety officials have said the agency has since changed policies and procedures to ensure the scenario is never repeated.

Dutton said the agency also has started a program that runs daily computerized checks on licensed security guards for felony convictions or indictments. Since then, 10 guards have had their registrations pulled, he said. Dutton also said that none of the others was involved in a death, and he could not remember a similar case.
Click to expand...

The security guards have been charged with murder and abduction.
 
Still can't believe they shot and killed a guy. Who the fuck do they think they are? Private citizens do not have the right to detain other private citizens. They most certainly do not have the right to use force to make others comply with their arbitrary "orders".
 
Zefah said:
Still can't believe they shot and killed a guy. Who the fuck do they think they are? Private citizens do not have the right to detain other private citizens. They most certainly do not have the right to use force to make others comply with their arbitrary "orders".
Click to expand...

Citizens arrest

However... If he was trespassing I don't think you're allowed to use citizens arrest for it. Has to be a felony in the US and trespassing is a misdemeanor in Ohio

so the only thing they can do is stop him for questioning and escort him from the property, really.
 
I'm sure it varies by state in the US, but don't you have to be witness to a pretty severe crime to justifiably perform "citizen's arrest"? I'm pretty certain a guy trying to leave in his vehicle does not constitute "a severe crime" regardless if he was trespassing or not.
 
Slayer-33 said:
Exactly.

I'm a university guard and these guys had no right to use deadly force. They are in deep shit.


And wow @ the shit they apparently said after they shot him... Nothing more than some irresponsible racist punks with guns if true.
Click to expand...

Called it, lol not surprising.
 
Zefah said:
I'm sure it varies by state in the US, but don't you have to be witness to a pretty severe crime to justifiably perform "citizen's arrest"? I'm pretty certain a guy trying to leave in his vehicle does not constitute "a severe crime" regardless if he was trespassing or not.
Click to expand...

That's what I said. It has to be a felony, not a misdemeanor.
 
Still amazing that you can shoot and kill someone and then walk free with your gun permit for 4 months. Gun laws are seriously fucked up. An admitted killing needs to be an immediate arrest, you can argue your self-defense claim at the trial.
 
Kettch said:
Still amazing that you can shoot and kill someone and then walk free with your gun permit for 4 months. Gun laws are seriously fucked up. An admitted killing needs to be an immediate arrest, you can argue your self-defense claim at the trial.
Click to expand...

Yea. Theres something really wrong with that. But its the process. Glad these idiots are going to get time for this. No one deserves to die at the hand of some asshole who thinks a gun gives him power.

LQX said:
Pieces of shit and I bet these fuckers will still have defenders.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't take that bet, at all.
 
Armed guards at an apartment is odd, usually only big corporate places have them since armed guards cost a lot more due to the rick and insurance issues. Why they needed armed guards for an apartment is crazy. Course most armed security guards have it drilled into them to not use their guns for anything other than the most dire circumstances due to liability issues for the company. The guns are supposed to just be a deterrent but the companies don't want their security guards actually pulling the weapons. I wouldn't be surprised if the security company gets sued after this too.

Kettch said:
Still amazing that you can shoot and kill someone and then walk free with your gun permit for 4 months. Gun laws are seriously fucked up. An admitted killing needs to be an immediate arrest, you can argue your self-defense claim at the trial.
Click to expand...

If it was justified self defense shooting that you were cleared of, why not? In this case for example they are taking away their right to carry guns and if your convicted of a crime most states won't let you carry either.

Also self defense shootings are determined by grand jury panel, not by a trial. Grand Jury has to determine if their is plausible cause for the case to go to trial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Mystery Social Security Check?
12
465
ReBurn replied
Windows 11 24H2 Security Update Causes SSD/HDD Failures and Potential Data Corruption
2
83
1K
Celcius replied
Black Phone 2 | Official Trailer | Black Phone Meets A Nightmare on Elm Street?
29
783
spookyfish replied
American Gaf.. are the Appalachian Mountains going to kill me?
2
51
849
Nocty replied
Real Life Black Mirror Episode | Tragedy Of Jean Pormanove
8
177
DeafTourette replied
Top Bottom