Man leaves store and sets off alarm, pays no attention to alarm. Security guard chokes him out. Oh yeah, the guy didn't here the alarm because he is deaf. Frantic deaf friend tries to show receipt. [VID]
Posted Aug 11, 2010, 10:31 PM UTC
2.5K2.3K
A guy in Chicago just fucking died in the same situation, a fucking choke hold. What the fuck else are you suppose to do? Just lie there and take it? Fuck that.
I hope these guys fucking own whatever shit clothing store that is after they're done suing the fuck out of them.
And if anyone starts their bullshit about frivolous lawsuits, fuck you too, this is FUCKING EXACTLY what lawsuits are for.
620
Seriously. I would fight like my life is in danger (Because it would be!) if anyone ever landed me in a hold like that.
Nope, sorry, its never ok.
119
I'm a former cop and current reserve deputy for the local sheriff. If I were ever tackled for no reason by someone without a badge, the service weapon is coming out. It's only a matter of time before untrained security tries that on an off-duty cop. It's a very dangerous situation when that happens, because if you're carrying, you have no other recourse but the escalate the situation (especially if you have a badge on you). These podunk 'loss prevention' officers need to prosecuted for false imprisonment. If you don't have a badge, you have no business detaining someone.
36
I'm not a former cop, but I do teach Permit to carry. I don't give a crap if you are on off duty cop or a normal civi. If someone tries to choke you out, you are well within your rights shoot them. This isn't escalating the situation, this is responding because you are in fear of your life. A security guard who doesn't know enough to not choke patrons, probably doesn't know enough to stop choking you when you pass out.
11
I'm going to citizens' arrest your ass! I'm not afraid of your gun, I went to the company orientation and they taught us how to detain punks like you!
3
What bothers me most is the fact that bystanders are gawking and not helping the guy.
3
but don't private security officers have a right to detain until police arrive? i thought that's how it worked.
1
They have deaf cops?
1
[deleted]
29
break one of his fingers, he'll let go
13
yes, even the strongest grip is defeated through the pinky finger. However, if someone knows how to do the choke properly, you can pass out in a few seconds. The security guy in this film does not and that is even more dangerous. choke holds are not a joke. The security officer should go to jail.
20
Or bite off a mouth full of the attackers arm/face...
inserting his eye into his eye socket with your fingers works just as well.
Repeat when thrown in jail...
3
Just go for the eyes and the balls. Game over, man. Game over.
6
If you go for the balls, grab them hard and squeeze. Don't let go until he's crying blood.
4
Then nuke him from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
2
This is some really pretty shit we are in now.
1
As a side note, if that were a real choke hold that dude would have been unconscious in about 3-5 seconds. Clearly there was not much pressure being applied which makes it both a shitty choke and also a pretty lousy submission hold.
That was just a headlock which is really a horrible (as in ineffective) way to try to restrain someone.
2
Well, he succeeded at restraining the deaf guy, so that counts as reasonably effective in my book.
1
I had a person put me in a choke hold in college while I was playing Nintendo 64 with some friends.
All I did was grab his thumb and bend it as far back as I could. Then once he let go I stood up turned around and started punching him in the head 4-5 times.
I think he figured out I really don't like being in a choke hold as it is one of my Big phobias. The friends I was playing N64 with were like WTF as they didn't see him put me in the choke hold so it just looked like I got up and punch this guy in the head for no reason.
Once I explained it they understood and Mr. Antisocial dropped out a couple weeks later.
2
Always try to Wedge something of leverage in there to create breathing room.
I believe you'll find there are two kinds of chokeholds, but I am NOT an expert:
-
blood chokeouts - constricting blood vessels on the side of your neck that fuel your brain
-
airway chokeouts - preventing you from breathing
I googled this after I wrote it: http://www.mma-training.com/choke-holds/ It confirms two means of effecting a chokehold.
The best defense in these situations is preparation and a clear head: think about what the guy is trying to do and try to stop it. Go google shit, there is tons of information on personal defense.
1
I carry a knife, and this would have been one of the few situations where it would be a weapon, not a tool. There would have been serious consequences.
1
They'd never be the sa... eh, fuck it.
1
Spread fingers, throw them behind your head, repeat quickly and attempt to jab at the eyes- obviously this takes practice but even if you do it wrong, you might get lucky and graze the eyes or near it, perhaps enough to surprise the person and get away.
The counter to a rear-choke attempt is that before the guy can fully put you in one to immediately tuck the chin in- can't choke you if the windpipe is protected, then a couple of rear elbow strikes will work nicely.
Yes- I have taken years of self defense training, rusty now but still remember the basics.
1
Take your first and second finger. Jab them into his side, feel for a ribs. Push your 2 fingers in as hard as you can between them. If you haven't passed out from the choke he will let go pretty quickly.
1
You just reach around for a pressure point and apply it as hard as you can. His arms were free.
-1
You should listen to this advice.
Pressure points include, but are not limited to :
- neck (either grab his throat and hold it then pull or just slap his throat)
- nose (push it from below)
- that little soft hole on your chest just below your neck (push towards the bottom)
- fingers (like trying to break it)
- ears (be careful they can tear off)
- cheeks (you have to put your thumb inside his mouth and pinch the cheek, then pull reall hard)
- eyes (you can either put your finger in the top of the socket or straight in it, but you might destroy his eye)
There might be more of them I don't remember which ones.
2
the thing about a choke hold is that just a little pressure prevents your victim from doing anything at all. Even tough the arms and legs are free, not being able to breath turns the brain in a kind of emergency mode, where all you'll want to do is not piss off the guy choking you .
Of course, if you're experienced with being in a choke hold it's a different thing.
2
Oh quit it. If the choke hold is for real, pressure points aren't going to do shit.
You've got 30 seconds to a minute to get out before you nod out. If the guy is skilled enough to put a proper choke on you, I'd bet good money he can take pressure point pain long enough for you to go to sleep.
He's got the incentive for you to stop, too. You go poking around, he squeezes. You stop, one way or another, voluntarily or by passing out.
There are ways to get out, but telling people to poke on the bad guy isn't one.
1
Which pressure point?
Sorry, doesn't work that way.
1
Yep. I carry a pretty easy to open pocket knife and you can bet that this guy would have been gutted. That is clearly a case of self defense.
As it stands, I would have liked seeing the man doing the assault walking out of the store in handcuffs.
16
Bullshit.
28
[deleted]
14
It's more practical to carry a small blade- razor or exacto knife, maybe- hidden in your wallet or somewhere inconspicuous. Surprise claws can come in handy in choke-hold situations.
2
You'd be surprised how quickly "self-defense" turns into a fight. Read http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/jailfordefending.htm . The writing style is, to be kind, annoying, but the content is probably accurate.
2
[deleted]
2
That is clearly a case of self defense.
You would be sued for all your worth.
2
I'm actually surprisingly worthless.
2
No you wouldn't.
1
Why do you think he wouldn't have liked seeing him walking out of the store in handcuffs?
9
[deleted]
1
That was also my immediate though. Had I seen this, I would have probably just pulled my XDm.
1
What good is a login screen going to do in a situation like this?
1
It's even illegal in wrestling (real wrasslin'), you need an arm in there between the neck and agressor.
15
All that I can say is that this is why I have personal defense training. I mean a choke hold? A choke hold is never necessary to restrain someone. I mean pin the guy if you have to, but using a technique that can cause severe injury, or even death in the user is incompetent, as this rent-a-cop seems to be, is just crazy. Yes guards have the ability of a citizens arrest, but that is not a citizens arrest, that is assault, and even if the "arrest" is justified, it is still a use of excessive force. God, it never ceases to amaze me how stupid people can be when their job requires them to be on a power trip. And if you have bothered to read this far, thank you, I'm sorry about any grammar or spelling issues that you might want to point out. In summery, sue those bastards and their employer for as much as you can get, and if you lose, I will have lost all faith in the justice of the world.
3
You mean "summary".
3
What about in wintery?
2
At one point you actually see the guy go for the man who's choking him's eyes/mouth/nose to gtfo of the situation, but then you see the hesitation where he realizes he'd be fucked if he did so. He could've gotten out, but didn't because he had no clue wtf was going on. He could have died and furthermore he could have saved himself, but he knew that in doing so, he'd probably have to pay some sort of fine/be in trouble himself as well. It sucks.
2
The guy in the video was even trying desperately to appear non-threatening! After he got out he put his hands up! He didn't hit back or anything he spent the entire time trying to submit. If that doesn't sound like compliance I don't know what does. This meathead mall cop simply wanted to tell a good story about putting a guy in a choke-hold, because there is no good reason for him to do it otherwise.
2
<EDIT - my bad accidental reply>
I'd be wrestling that guy right back, but even if I were deaf I would be yelling "stop I'm deaf" or "bleaarhh" - however it might come out.
1
Look at the position the guy is in. He has at the complete mercy of the security guard. There would be nothing you can do.
1
All I can say is, seconded.
107
Ditto.
1
Aye. I also blame these kinds of events on the bystanders who don't give a fuck as long as they're not in that position themselves. I hate how people are so damn selfish that they only care about taking care of themselves, and not a deaf guy who's being harassed against the law.
People always forget the fact that these kinds of things happen because there aren't enough deterrents to them.
0
I seriously hope that the security guard left in handcuffs.
1
I seriously hope that the security guard left in handcuffs.
1
All I can say is upvoted
-3
I hate to be that guy, but there's a button for that.
3
[deleted]
-6
All I can say is, voted down.
4
[deleted]
0
Very well put. Being from Chicago, I can only assume that after the guy got choked out, the police arrived and further abused him before arresting him.
44
I would assume the choke hold lasted slightly too long, and the person died as a consequence.
3
It takes less than 20 lbs of pressure to break the average human neck. You can exert a shitload more than 20 lbs of pressure on your own neck trying to get a breath of air when the reflex kicks in. This could be mere seconds after the hold is applied and why it should be reserved for life or death situations - it creates one.
4
Well I was trained to do it, and when someone is going nuts and wont stop fighting, I would still use it today. Im not doing that job any more, though.
Heres the rules for professional security as I was taught and used...and have modified through experience.
Assess the situation. Find the 'guilty' party (generally the more agressive person in a fight). Talk them down. - Explain that they are in a situation where they are not thinking. - Explain there are consequences to their actions. (police, get hurt - fall down, etc) - Listen to their grievance - Befriend them (not too much, but to get them feeling they are right - have won - are tough) so that they will leave. - All else fails pretend to call Police (Even the most tough guy is afraid of handcuffs) - All else fails get more crazy (fake) than they are currently pretending to be to scare them. (witnesses /= good)
During all of this wonderful plan if the person physically harms someone including yourself intervene in the safest possible route for yourself (first), and others (second). You are of NO use to anybody else or their safety if you end up knocked out or damaged.
An arm bar, or a well placed push can do the job. A choke is good if they are attacking others, are faced away from you, and you know they are on drugs or drunk or so insanely high on adrenaline that there is no other route.
I have done ~20 chokes and have never harmed anybody. It scares me to use a choke, but sometimes the situation (person) is so out of control its the only possible option.
They wake up 10 seconds later, and have forgotten their plight. They usually calmly ask what happened. I usually told them they fell. Then they always go home... or somewhere other then here.
I understand high horses, and used to be on one before I had to deal with these problems myself.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HAPPENED IN THE VIDEO.
They were out of line, and skipped the whole think and talk thing.
5
...and then the Chicago police abused him.
2
they would've slapped the deaf guy around for not answering them clearly and then throw him in jail for disorderly conduct
1
IMHO a choke hold should only be used in a life-or-death situation. There are plenty of other moves you can pull on someone to restrain them if you know your wrestling moves. You don't need to choke someone out. If you don't know what you're doing you can cause serious damage.
That guard was way out of line. I hope they press every charge they can against him.
22
Once he had top control he should have restrained the arms and sat on him from the back side, huh?
1
[deleted]
8
My kneejerk reaction to the caption on the vid "I smell a lawsuit" was "here we go again, bloody America and their overly-litigious society". Two seconds later I though "fuck no, these bastards should be sued into oblivion". You're exactly right, lawsuits are for restitution, and these guys were clearly wronged in a horrific way.
4
I sincerely hope they actually do end up owning the store. They seemed like nice harmless guys that would never do that type of thing to someone else.
2
Well, let's not get to that issue "They seemed like..." Give me a break... Anyone can look as if they're the nicest person possible and still steal. The fact is that they're deaf, have proof and receipt, and the stupid guards are incompetent and the whole store should get screwed to a craphole.
1
Generally security is trained to do choke holds till a lack of oxigen to the brain causes a temporary blackout. You must stop when the suspect goes limp or starts snoring, because there is a difference of 5 seconds between unconsious or dead.
Security are generally also trained to do arm bars, which I saw tried on numerous occasions. The suspect was able to resist because they were not done fast enough. If the suspect knows what you're doing and is as strong as you, then you're not going to succed.
This is a horrible attempt at restraining someone and I would imagine for a shopping center security job, pretty standarly poor.
Real qualified security will do ANYTHING to avoid a fight, although tempers may boil over on occasion.
tldr: Very sloppy poorly trained security. Possibly average for the shit job that it must be.
2
I'll tell you what I would have done: grab my keys in my fist and hit the asshole in the head, possibly in the eyes if I could. (His arms were not restrained)
2
If someone has you in a choke hold like that you pull a weapon and you use it. Its pretty much checkmate otherwise.
2
Wonder if XXI will sue the rent-a-clowns for loss of reputation or somesuch. That'd be fun to watch.
2
Self Defense Tips for a Choke Hold from Behind
If an attacker comes up from behind and puts an arm around the front of you neck, turn your body towards the attacker like you're trying to turn around to face him. As you're turning, bend over so that the attacker's arm loosens around your neck and you can just slide out of his grip.
Remember to turn as if you're going to face him. Don't turn towards his outer elbow or else he will end up with a tighter grip around your neck.
Choke Hold on the Ground
If you're being choked while the attacker is sitting on top of you, buck your hips and buttocks off the floor. This will cause him to fall forward. As he's falling forward, bring your arms down so they don't get caught by the attacker.
Once he falls forward, roll over and you will end up on top of him. At this point, start attacking the vital areas like gouging his eyes, applying palm strikes to his nose and chin and kneeing him in the groin area. Then, get up and run away.
Go to Ground Self Defense Techniques for more on defending yourself while an attacker is on top of you.
Take a Judo class at your local college, that teaches you a lot about leverage and gives you a chance to wrestle around and understand what all this means.
2
From the info on Youtube
Forever 21 6801 Hollywood Blvd #1C-134 Los Angeles, CA 90028 Neighborhood: Hollywood
1
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
1
No way this would be a frivolous lawsuit!
1
Do you have a source?
1
Forever 21 is the store. On hollywood/vine.
1
a fucking choke hold. What the fuck else are you suppose to do? Just lie there and take it?
At that point, yes. He's already in an air choke when the video starts so it's not certain how he ended up in that position, but the black guy released the hold when the guy started tapping and just constrained him to the floor. Literally every single time the guy got in a choke hold after that was because he rolled himself into it. Not only did he roll himself into the position, while he was there he started leaning into it.
0
i know im gonna get downvoted to hell for stepping in front of the blind rage himvemind but id say you clearly dont understand the situation nor how lawsuits works...
0
Care to explain? Rather than posting half of a comment?
3
fucking ... fucking ... fuck ... fuck ... fucking ... fuck ... fuck ... FUCKING.
Tell us how you really feel.
0
[deleted]
0
He was trying to tap out, poor guy.
506
That's the part that was killing me the most. We've determined that as the international sign for "Holy shit, going to black out, I don't want to die. Seriously, get off me, You are going to kill me."
437
[deleted]
256
The police officers should have had him in cuffs the second they found out a deaf man was tackled because he ignored a verbal noise that even a hearing personally legally can ignore.
130
You have an excellent point. But even if he wasn't deaf, guard should have been arrested.
There is no legal duty to listen to the commands of a fucking rent-a-cop.
EDIT because I'm stupid.
91
The cops would probably been to stupid and SCREAM RESISTING ARREST and then taze the deaf guy too
1
[deleted]
1
That's not true for all states.
One of these alarm being activated is classed as probable cause and they're allowed to detain you whilst they verify your purchase in states which have citizen's arrest laws.
For example: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+8.01-226.9
1
If you didn't steal anything you too can ignore any noise a store makes at your or any command to stop by some random stranger.
1
I'm guessing a slap on the wrist, and the store will payout ~50k when threatened with a lawsuit.
49
Fuck that. I hope they pay millions for hiring these untrained dumbasses and they both get a year of jail time.
90
I'm pretty sure the store will say fuck both of them. If I was him, I'd sue the security guards, not the store. No store is willing to take tens of thousands of damages for (at most) $10-50 bucks. And why make some random people pay for shit, when it was a very significant few individuals who were responsible?
Fuck these guys, and destroy them with lawsuits. Just because your working security for some store, doesn't mean your special forces.
1
I like to compare it to the one (different state, store, etc) where the security officers just stood by and did nothing when crooks outside the store loitered to snap the bike locks of paying customers.
It all depends on what's being stolen...
1
[deleted]
1
I was hoping the entire time that someone would rush in and land a swift kick to his fat head while he was choking the guy. Ah well, I can still fantasize...
60
no kidding ...
it just blew me away that nobody tried to step in. I'd hate to think I'd be so passive that I wouldn't try to help. It's one thing if the victim was acting violent or had a weapon, but it's pretty damn obvious he wasn't a threat.
6
Sounds awesome...in your head. In the real world you have no clue what is going on. Maybe the person DID flash a weapon. Maybe after your kung fu kick to the security guard's head the suspect would whip out a glock and kill 5 people. Then you would not be feeling so righteous.
Situations like this are rarely so clear cut that you should do anything more than call police.
1
It's unfortunate because the public was trying to tell the security guard that the man he was choking was turning purple. I suppose what happened was fear of being choked themselves. Cops don't even have the right to fucking choke someone for suspecting them of a crime. The only time they are supposed to use force is when they are resisting arrest.
I'd be lying though, if I said that I didn't fantasize about getting creative on his face with my steel toe boots.
1
upvoted for being a mind reader
4
I was fantasizing about the very same thing! Then I actually watched the video, and fantasized about moving the circle of onlookers inward, dragging the victims to safety, then encircling the rent-a-cops while having them assume submissive postures and admit their worthlessness.
2
Were my thoughts exactly. The situation this poor guy found himself in was appalling.
2
In any other country, yes, but not Amerikuh.
2
[deleted]
1
"wo....rth.....it...."
2
Also, "I give. No more threat from me."
Seems like psycho mall cop probably watches spike tv and has been waiting for any reason to try out some armchair jiu-jitsu. I'm not surprised he couldn't get the guillotine choke to work, it's not just a headlock, but after the deaf kid rolls out, the rent a cop gets kind of a reverse hammerlock, which (if the deaf kid didn't keep rolling) could easily have broken the arm, especially since the rentacop had like 50 lbs. on the deaf kid.
Serious respect to the deaf kid for at least two escapes, and continuing to roll with a hell bent pyscho on him who doesn't care if he taps.
1
That's what killed me too. At that point the thug was just drooling from exerting power over a handicapped person. He belongs behind bars.
1
Both customers were clearly trying to say something - I'm not sure if they were both deaf or not, but they were pointing to their ears. Someone doing something strange like that just begs of "he's trying to tell us something." I'm not sure how the standing defender/guard didn't turn around and say 'hey Bill, somethings not right here, dude's pointing to his ears!'
The other guy tapping out wasn't even resisting really, he's tapping and tapping and trying to get him to let go, if only just to try to figure shit out - he could have easily started scratching and clawing and all, instead is tapping on guards face, arm, and wherever else he can try to get his submission on.
1
it's a nightmare in reality. Imagine being so helpless, unable to express yourself verbally and doing the only thing you can to communicate and to survive, only to see it being pointless.
1
:(
1
[deleted]
1
The fact that no one bothers to help is what bothers me the most.
0
my thoughts exactly. calling herb dean... big john... anyone... i'm done! just save me from death by mall cop.
24
The fact that that guy just keeps choking him when the poor guy is tapping him on the arm (which is just like saying "I surrender" even to people who do not know that convention from martial arts) is totally over the line.
As a European Redditor I usually don't get the American style "sue them" sentiments but in this case they REALLY need to sue their brains out.
Hope it works out for them!
1
That guard is lucky. If he choked out someone like myself, who has a pocketknife, there would have been bloodshed.
1
[deleted]
1
This is very upsetting to watch. I'm calling the store to complain about those guards.
Store Information.
XXI
6801 Hollywood Blvd
1C-134
Los Angeles, CA 90028
(323) 462-8500
444
I spoke to Rachel at the above number and told her that what I saw was really shameful.
She said she couldn't comment on it, but I should call the Law Dept for their company at (213) 741-8906 during business hours.
183
Forever 21 is going to be devastated by the loss of their male Reddit demographic. What are you guys going to stop buying, their dresses or their intimates?
167
As hilarious as your post was, if I were a decently sized company like Forever 21 I would be more fearful of crazed internet folk coming after me than x amount of 16 y/o girls and their parents asking for an apology and vowing never to shop there again until they get it.
Aside from everything else the internet can accomplish if you piss them off, can you imagine working there for minimum wage and having to answer to BattleToads inquiries every couple of minutes? Savages!
39
RELEASE THE ANON! - no seriously, the store deserves a shit storm to set example to other businesses, that in today's age of mobile camera phone movie recording technology...
If you or your employers do something that is clearly "out of order", then it WILL make it onto youtube and the internet.
A nice shit storm would help highlight this "people journalist" effect.
22
Upper management are still in the web 1.0 age... Just send them a link to the recent Stockton College kid that got harassed TWO years ago and what might happen to the bullies. It's just the tip of the iceberg.
6
a serious question: what has the internet ever accomplished apart form "defacing" some html webpages? or massively and randomnly harrasing the wrong guys?
i remember how we all swore rage at SEARS... and how everybody was swearing they would be scared shitless because we'd all boycott them... what happened?`yes... didnt happen shit.
and those games we wanted to boycott because LAN features were going to be removed? what happened? oh yes... didnt happen shit.
keyboard warriors are the best for a quick laugh... but tomorror their gonna forgot about this as soon as a lolcat turns up at the front page.
-2
I wonder what kind of dresses and intimates two deaf guys would buy?
11
Forever 21 has a section called "21 Men". That is where they sell their male clothing.
4
I think a campaign of "for rectal use only" on all their merchandise is a possibility.
4
Well my wife isn't going to shop there anymore. She is a petite Asian of age 31 with the body of an 18 year old and would probably have been a life long customer.
3
Or show this to our better halves, who will more than likely feel the same as we do.
1
Well apparently dudes shop there, as seen in the video. Idiot.
1
You know that Forever 21 actually has some decent cheap male clothes, right? A T-shirt it a T-shirt.
1
Oh, you mean like the two oddly male-looking ladies who shopped there in the video?
1
Hahaha!
Happy Reddit birthday!
1
Hey thanks man. Just realized it's only three days off from my actual birthday.
1
One might ask what two deaf guys were doing in Forever 21, a pre-teen fashion store.
1
Is XXI the same as Forever 21? (Yes, I understand Roman numerals, but I don't know why the branding would be different for the same store.)
1
Forever 21 sells dude stuffs. It's all girls stuff in some of the smaller locations, but in the larger stores they do carry mens lines.
1
Thanks
3
that sounds like a pretty canned response for a shopkeeper, you must not be the first person to call
1
I just called them. They said they're not allowed to comment.
They told me to call this number:
+1-213-741-8906
... doing so now.
131
Guess what... it goes RIGHT to voicemail.... are you shitting me.
I shopped (past tense) at Forever 21 sometimes with my GF... NEVER again.
67
And now the main store isn't answering their phone.
Classy... They might be DoSd by all the activity though.
43
forever 21 probably doesn't endorse this kind of behavior. i don't think an order came from the top that said "choke this guy out, he might be stealing." just a dumb-ass security guard
12
As unfortunate as that is, they are responsible for the selection of security guards in their stores. If they choose untrained, violently abusive staff then the consequences should rain upon them. Lack of training and standards doesn't excuse them.
19
Whatever, it's THEIR security guard and therefore the store's responsibility.
10
So? Until "an order from the top" comes down firing these fucks and very aggressively discouraging this type of behavior from their staff in the future, I think boycott is perfectly reasonable.
7
I left them a message.
10
I shopped (past tense) at Forever 21 sometimes with my GF... NEVER again.
People have incredible power when they vote with their wallets.
7
You mean they are getting a lot of phone calls and the line is possibly busy so it goes to voicemail?!
WHY I NEVER.
3
[deleted]
2
Yea, this is the exact same reason why I'm always on guard around Germans. Y'know, just in case they go Nazi'ing it up all of the sudden.
-3
wtf??
2
Called and left a message. I hope more people are doing this.
53
Done and done.
P.S. Karen Hampton will probably be away from her desk for quite some time because that shit is going to be blowing up.
41
Likewise, I did too. Hopefully more will hear about this. Does anyone want to start a petition of some sort? Have the company/store change their policy?
6
I am.
3
Me too! I called and left 12 of them!
4
[deleted]
1
I did too. The fellow was very nice. Horrific video.
1
[deleted]
0
What kills me is that Forever 21 is a store known for their dirt-cheap knockoffs. So a guy gets nearly choked to death for potentially stealing a $10 Armani knockoff? Ridiculous.
89
A genuine Armani on the other hand? Choke that fucker out.
35
This is an excellent point.
5
That's what i thought!
3
Yeah. Not only that, but it is a company run by hardcore Christian fundamentalists. I don't think Jesus ever condoned putting someone in a choke hold.
edit: grammar.
4
I thought the bible was essentially a WWE novel anyways: violent and fake.
10
I don't think any mass produced clothing is worth choking and risking someone's life over.
2
Agreed. They are just things.
1
To Whom It May Concern:
I recently had the displeasure of viewing a recent video in which two employees of your Hollywood Blvd store accosted two deaf gentleman on public property in an attempt to illegally and forcibly detain them on suspicion - with no evidence of - shoplifting.
I am disgusted by the treatment of the two gentlemen and furthermore outraged at the lack of proper training Forever 21 has provided to its security. It is clear that the employees are unfamiliar with local state law, and even worse, had little to no value for the life of the individual whom was choked until I saw his eyes tearing and face turning purple.
I cannot emphasize this enough: the improper training of your employees nearly murdered one of your patrons.
For this reason, I will no longer patronize your store and will actively encourage others to do the same until your business has made it clear that it is taking active steps to not only rectify this sole situation, but to re-train all employees how to properly handle an already sensitive situation.
~[My Real Name]
78
If anyone wants to copy this:
the individual who was choked
9
+: Your security employees involve in this should be in PRISON right now.
2
To whom it may concern, drag >> TRASH
Right click, empty trash.
Thanks for the input!
-2
How correct is this information? Just making sure before we fire up the internet hate machine that we get the right people.
73
[deleted]
76
Can see the El. Capitian across the street.
9
[deleted]
1
That's not the problem though.
The problem is how do we know the video-takers ACCOUNT OF WHAT HAPPENED is correct.
Answer is: WE DON'T
It's obvious the video-taker was not involved in the event, and is only jumping to conclusions about what happened, or is basing his conclusions on what the witnesses at the scene speculated about what happened. His account could come from a biased source...or they could be outright lying.
In fact, the guy who took the video specifically says he doesn't know what happened, and whether or not it was justified
He also says that he "knows" something that is impossible for him to know. That casts some doubt on his reliability.
Notice in the video, there is no one involved saying "this is what happened".
For all we know, the deaf person WAS shoplifting and initiated the violence. He could have pulled a weapon on the guard before this occurred. He could have been stalking the guard for months for all we know.
There are some reports that he was indeed shoplifting, and initiated the violence. We should obviously be skeptical of these reports as well...but the important thing is to not jump to conclusions.
It certainly seems like this was handled poorly, but for all we know they didn't have a choice.
-4
You sound as dumb as the security guard.
1
Way too late, I hope they get pummeled with bad press over this unprofessional act. Whether they're stealing toothpaste or a fucking overpriced piece of clothing NO ONE has the right to be murdered over it.
47
[deleted]
3
too late even for to late
7
Settle down you too
10
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
1
before we fire up the internet hate machine
"Start up the IHM Charlie! Code 5!"
1
We don't have time for your silly logic. Shoo.
1
ah fuck that shit.... you had to be that guy didnt you? too late we are already harrasing the low paid bastards at that phone number.
1
[deleted]
52
some of these yelp reviews are hilarious. cant stop reading them
4
I just saw the video of the two deaf gentlemen who were brutally assaulted by your "security staff" and I am appalled at their lack of professionalism. I will never shop in your store and I plan to share this with everyone I know.
Utterly shameful...
via email
34
Just a tip, a statement like that implies that you'll never shop at their store, regardless of their response to the situation. Rather word your letter so they understand that their response will determine whether you, and others, shop at their store in future. Tell them that, as a customer, you'd like follow-up communication on what has happened to the security guards.
37
It's funny, I listen to a radio show and people call up all the time and say they hate something the host did. They say I'll never listen to your show in my life!
The host asks if they ever listened to the show beforehand. They'd say no and he'd say "have a good day then, we don't need you as a listener".
You threatening to never shop at a store that you most likely never shopped at before is not much of a threat. You are most likely completely out of their demographic.
2
haha yes... you are correct I would never shop their anyway... I could not possibly be further from their demographic. :-) That said, given the large outcry from folks (check their Facebook Page) I doubt their marketing and PR staff are trying to decide what percentage was a "bluff". They really do need to do something about the poorly trained security staff. Kudos to your for seeing through my veil of BS.
1
looks at username
Stand up to the man // And give him what for
24
I don't mean to change the subject but THIS is why we need net neutrality. The internet is the most powerful voice that "we the people" have. We see shit like this and we rage. And we react. We call and give these people hell. We distribute the video for others to see and it will end up in justice prevailing. I weep for the day when the internet starts getting dismantled to suit the big corps agenda. When an incident like this happens they will censor.
16
This happened in front of the subway entrance in Hollywood near where I live. The store hero_of_canton listed is at least the one they are outside of; not sure if that's where the security guys came from.
And, yeah, difficult to watch, but a nice lawsuit in the making.
7
I know I'm a little late for the party but you can also call their press officer and ask why they haven't issued a press release regarding the felony battery that took place by one of their employees:
Press Contact:
Kirstin Nagle
213-763-2855
Forever 21, Inc.
7
Emailing and calling now.
1
The security guards are likely employed by the mall, not XXI (Forever21). Calling the mall or the private agency that works for that mall might be more effective.
4
It's... not... a... MALL!!!!
It's on Hollywood Boulevard! It's a public SIDEWALK!
21
It's kind of like a mall, just outdoors and on a streetside
1
Actually they're on private property in the video. There's a line where the public sidewalk ends and the Hollywood and Highland mall property begins even though the tile is the same on both sides of the line.
It's kinda confusing but ask any of the people dressed as superheros there. they know where the line is because they're not allowed to step over it and pan handle on the Hollywood & Highland property.
1
[deleted]
0
What gives you that impression? Malls often have their own security, but many stores will also have store security. If there is security that is fast enough to respond to the sound of the detectors at the door going off, it's probably the store security. How would mall security magically appear there that quickly?
You may find this unsettling, but security is present in many of the stores you shop in, following you around on camera with multiple screen arrays like it's a flipping Vegas Casino. Some are even watching you in the dressing rooms. High-end stores have cameras that can zoom in close enough to read your credit card number while you're standing at the register.
The mall in general could give a rat's patoot about security for Nordstrom or Macy's or Saks, but rest assured that Saks is doing everything in their power to make sure none of their Prada walks off unpaid for.
14
Unsubstantiated. Evidence, plox.
2
"A place that needs a security guard at the door because of the bevy of potential shoplifters hanging around should be warning enough."
From a negative review of a forever21 store. Anecdotal, but it looks like they do have security.
1
Ex who worked security at a high-end department store; I've seen their camera room before when taking him lunch. I can't exactly provide you the evidence, you can either take my word or not. But you can go into Saks dressing rooms and see for yourself the placards on the wall that very plainly inform customers that the dressing rooms may be monitored by camera for security purposes. (They legally have to inform you that you may be being watched while you're undressing.)
This article mentions the cameras and monitoring booth at one location; notably, this isn't the location where I've seen them, so they obviously have the same general camera system at other stores.
0
[deleted]
1
This should be upvoted more. Do you really think the store condones this? It's their policy to choke possible shoplifters? Careful where you're placing blame. I'm mad too, but I don't think we should be getting mad at those who weren't involved or had anything to do with what happened.
2
its not a mall so who were they?
1
Assuming they are employed by the mall, do you think XXI will just sit back and watch their brand be damaged? They will sue the mall. Either way the guilty will be punished.
1
Thats not at a mall. thats hollywood and highland subway entrance
1
I just sent the video as a "Story Idea" to KTLA.
Any other media outlets that should receive this?
*edit: I have been conversing with a reporter at KTLA, who is now trying to find any real world contact info for the shooter/uploader of the video.
If anyone knows him, please PM me, so I can send it along to her.
For the moment, she is going to send a message through his YouTube account, but who knows how long it will be before he logs back in again, or whether he'll check his mail when he does...
*edit2: KTLA is currently working on the story, starting with a post here.
Some interesting developments brewing...
3
I just sent them an email that said, "Have you killed any deaf people today?"
3
YES! 10 min from me, My day is planned!
2
Step 1. Sign with link to this thread.
1
here's what I submitted to their online form. Feel free to copy pasta or do whatever, but the more outcry they get the more seriously they'll take it.
I just witnessed the following video on youtube.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fRv--C_vao
I am shocked and disgusted by what I see here. The backstory is that the two customers (who are both deaf) set off the security detectors while walking out of the store. They didn't hear them, nor did they hear the security guards commands to stop. After they were OUTSIDE THE STORE (beyond the security guards jurisdiction), the guard seen on the ground tackles one of the customers while the other one frantically tries to show him a receipt and try to communicate that they are deaf.
Security guards have absolutely zero authority outside the private grounds for which they're hired to protect, and have ZERO RIGHT to use lethal force on a customer unless they feel their life is in danger. This guard followed the customer onto PUBLIC STREETS. The guard even continued choking the customer after he tapped out SEVERAL TIMES, signaling that he was in danger of passing out (or worse).
The actions of your stores security forces is unacceptable. Personally, I hope the two deaf customers sue both them and your company for every cent they're legally entitled to.
If you want to hire MMA fighters to handle security, that's your business, but they need to be trained that they aren't in a cage match, and that they have no right to put ANYONE in a choke hold who hasn't pulled a weapon or threatened someone with bodily harm.
I'll be circulating this video around my circle of friends and suggesting a boycott of your store until the employees have been fired and your company issues a formal apology. I know that this is most likely not how corporate trains its security team and that this was a rogue incident and a bad hire, but it still speaks on the companies behalf when employees act in a manner such as this.
2
You may want to make a complaint via the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services as well. Their website with all the details:
2
Those fuckers.. tried to send my comments through the form:
Client Error
Your browser (or proxy) sent a request that this server could not understand.
If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster
1
Holy shit, I go there all the time! They just lost my business...unless H&M is beating up the blind or something I think they'll get my patronage from now on.
1
It's not like forever 21's an expensive store anyways, which makes this video even more wtf.
1
Go go gadget 4chan!
1
Yeah, call the associate at the store and bother her. That will really make a difference.
At least call corporate headquarters or something, christ. You're just hassling someone working minimum wage for something some other moron did.
1
This needs upboating. I live in Australia but I sent them a message online and if I still have credit on my phone before it expires tomorrow i'll use it all calling them.
1
Great, thanks. I sent them an email. Every little helps but I am sure they can just delete it.
1
Thanks. I just emailed them my thoughts - hit em where it hurts. I will never shop there, and I will inform family, friends and co-workers of this and they will most likely never shop there either.
1
This may have been brought up - but do we know that security answers to Forever 21? Not that the store shouldn't know our displeasure - but in many places, security works for the shopping complex or mall or what-have-you.
It could also be a security firm that they use. Can anyone make anything out from the uniforms?
1
Yes! Time to face the Reddit POWER!!! If they won't comment, we will go deep and make sure they get what they deserve.
1
Done. Just sent a email. I hope their inbox is flooded with emails demanding justice for them.
1
what needs to be done is the video needs to be sent to the police department.
1
Can I just add that it might not be THEIR security? They also might not have been able to do anything about it. For all we know one of the people complaining of his purple face was an employee. I know if I worked there I'd be watching the scene unfold!
The only people we can blame are those two security guards.
1
Of course it's their security. This is not a mall with mall-cops, it's a street-front shop. It's the shop's security.
1
Words!
1
[deleted]
1
Harassing the other employees at that specific store won't really do anything except torment the employees that (likely) had absolutely nothing to do with the situation and couldn't have prevented it if they wanted to.
I've been through something similar as an employee. I was working at a store where someone discovered a hidden camera in the ladies restroom. The woman who discovered it sued the company. It was suspected that it was an employee that placed it there as they would have been the only ones with access to the area where it was found. The litigation went on for about a year, and then it was settled (I believe). When it was settled, the story popped up in the media again (it came out when the incident originally happened as well). I had just started working at the store 2 weeks prior, and we had customers (and non-customers) coming in telling us what awful people we were. All I could tell them was I wasn't allowed to comment.
So, before you decide to verbally harass the store clerk, you probably should realize that they may not have been working that day or even employed at the time.
Protest in front of the store, boycott the products, contact corporate, but don't take it out on the 17 year old working the register. If you MUST yell at someone, ask to speak to the store manager who at least gets paid to deal with it.
0
[deleted]
-1
I always hate when people do this. Real classy posting up the store information like that. You know damn well that what happened isn't going to go unpunished, but you all need to take it into your own hands, even though the situation has nothing to do with you. It's childish, obnoxious, and uncalled for.
-7
I work as a security guard part time and I assure you there is absolutely nothing in our job descriptions that ever calls upon us to choke someone out. I won't even run after a shoplifter, I write a nice long report while I'm waiting for the police.
443
Yeah.. This girl I used to date with was a security guard. I told her that sounded dangerous for such a small girl.
She said 'nah, you're NEVER supposed to intervene. You're not supposed to jump them or anything. You just observe from a distance, and then call the police. If you ever did anything like intervene or even talk to them you're fired'
...
197
I worked at Target for years, and most of the security guards were these 19-year-old 120 pound girls. I figure that since they're not actually supposed to physically intervene in anything ("observe and report", right?) it might be an advantage that someone is less likely to attack them.
49
when I was hired at target, they told us the same thing. in fact, to drive home the point, the current security guard told us about someone who had chased a suspected thief into the parking lot, only to be stabbed 20+ times with a screwdriver.
he told us never to do that, because he wouldn't help us. "Imma be right over here, behind the doors with my clipboard, documenting what size screwdriver he's using... fuck getting stabbed for 10/hr."
59
I want to work with that man.
24
A waitress at a local buffet chased a guy out of the restaurant and got shot five times.
2
At the the Target near my house, the security guard is literally a little person. Super serious face, but I always just want to smile.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to hell for that.
1
Gary Coleman worked near your house!?!?
1
Target probably does apprehensions, but they should never be physical. I worked in Loss Prevention, and you NEVER put a hand on the person. If anything physical seems apparent, you stand aside and let them go, call the cops and have them arrested for shoplifting and assault.
The only time an LP should engage a person is if the have made every attempt to let the person go, but they still attacked the LP. This almost never happens. Our offices are even set up specifically so the agent and the witness are never between the suspect and the door, so if they decide to run, no one is in danger.
You never chase a person down. Not only does that provoke a fight, but it is not uncommon for someone to be hit running into traffic and bring a lawsuit. If you even suspect a weapon could be present, stay in your office and call the police, don't even attempt to confront them.
The biggest advantage for female agents is in locations that do a lot of floor observation instead of camera monitoring. Women aren't out of place anywhere in the store, but men often do. When I would work with a female agent, she would browse the racks and I would stand around looking bored and annoyed, no one suspects the guy who's stuck shopping with his wife.
1
Wow, that's all pretty interesting. I never knew how all the AP stuff worked -- they just walked around looking all aloof in their black uniforms, and we never knew what they were up to. However, the female security guards I'm talking about were always uniformed and just standing by the door, so I don't think being inconspicuous is a factor there.
I do remember one incident (unfortunately, I wasn't there) where an AP guy and an assistant manager (baddest gay dude ever, apparently) tackled a guy who had a knife and beat his ass a little bit.
1
it might be an advantage that someone is less likely to attack them.
So they are basically human shields then?
0
Human shields from what, shoplifters?
3
Maybe?
1
Observe and report.
2
That's the same thing the security at walmart said to us in orientation.
1
Brad?
raises eyebrow
1
Good to know!
1
XXI could fire him, but they're still liable. Any mall security people that did that bit of cordoning off of the area is liable as well. Man, I'm so fucking pissed off.
1
When my brother got arrested for shoplifting they tried to stop him and he ran. Two people tackled him. This was at Wal-Mart.
1
I'm a full-time security guard. Not a cop. Observe, report, go home.
44
I've worked security but it was at clubs and I've had to choke guys but it always ended well. I knew not to sink it in too deep. Did it more to control them and would usually talk to them during the choke and say "I'm going to let you go so don't get fuckin crazy" or "Once I ease up on this, you going to be cool" and always had it go well after.
I just want to point out that 95% of the time, you could diffuse the situation with words.
6
Unless, you know, the person you're talking to is deaf.
283
Man, deaf people never listen.
247
Huh?
63
Thats so horrible ,but it made me laugh. That joke on this thread is very conflicted..
2
True true... and to be honest, I never considered it. I did think about things like someone might have heart issues or breathing problems and things like that which is why I would never use a knee mount like that guy in the video but yeah, deaf... maybe a silver lining is this video will bring more awareness of the deaf and there struggles.
12
deaf and their struggles
How unfortunately appropriate in this context...
5
*their
4
Paper and pen work wonders.
-1
(rimshot)
1
Choking someone is the worst thing you could do to try to subdue them. You could break their windpipe or cause other life-threatening injuries. You don't block off someone's way of breathing or blood flow to their brain in order to calm them down, it will only cause a survival reaction which you will be at the other end of. You should have been fired.
73
Don't worry, people in bars essentially get away with everything they do because the cops will never see them initially pounce on a guy and the guy is drunk so cops just arrest him. Bouncers know this and that is why they do what they do. But what they do is never ever legal.
17
Tell me about it. Once, a guard (outside a bar) dragged me into a employees only room and started hitting me in the face. He was trying to make me fight back, so he'd have a reason to take a real punch.
The reason? He thought I had fake ID. I said I didn't.
Fucking psycho assholes these people.
Oh, and what did the police tell me? Well, they advised me against doing anything, since they basically said it was my word against the word of everyone working in the bar, even though nobody saw it (they said they did, though).
Great night out.
8
Gee, my mind is now at ease. Thanks.
1
Well, I don't know your experience with it is but I can say it was very effective in subduing the people I used it on. Much better than trying to hold someone back that is fueled up with adrenaline.
You are right about the possibility of breaking a windpipe but only when the bone of the forearm slides up across the windpipe and pressure is given. Some schools don't allow beginner students to use this type of choke for this reason. However, I used the standard rear naked choke, which does cut off blood to the brain. It's a move I have put on hundreds of times in training. In training, I have every intention of choking the guy into unconsciousness but when using it on someone untrained, as I stated, I never sunk it in deep. I didn't expand my diaphragm or bring my shoulders in (the correct way) to cut off blood. Or flex and yank back (the incorrect way) either. It gave people in the hold a chance away from the fight to calm down and realize continuing their behavior was a lose lose situation.
9
Armchair warriors. Don't worry about it dude, you're doing it right, carry on.
4
As someone who has been on the receiving end of many a choke hold, playing dead is the BEST way to get the aggressor to stop.
I usually play dead for another 5-10 minutes to make the person think they have hurt me. Sometimes I hold my breath or breathe very lightly if they are checking me for breathing. Scare them into thinking they caused brain damage, or severely hurt me, and they are grateful they aren't going to prison for murder when i get up.
1
In training, I have every intention of choking the guy into unconsciousness but when using it on someone untrained, as I stated, I never sunk it in deep.
Wait, so while training, you try to choke the shit out of your partner, but in real life you're a little more polite?
-1
[deleted]
-12
says man comfortably sitting in his armchair and not having drunk angry people around him
3
hey! im drinking beer! that counts for something.
14
I don't know... breaking a wind pipe seems like it would subdue most people.
1
I think it would make me grasp for air until my flailing body ceases to have any energy left to kick, eye-poke, bite, scratch, or any other way that my old reptilian brain will think up while I'm desperately searching for air.
1
I'm pretty sure that his story implied that he was a bouncer at a club. Typically these people actually need to get physical, as there is a lot of alcohol in people's systems in these places.
1
It's hard to break someone's windpipe, and if you know what you're doing you're rarely going to put it in danger. When choking someone you can either try to cut off their air supply (very slow, hard to do) or cut off the blood supply to their brain (very fast, easier to do, requires much less strength). Most blood chokes involve putting the neck inside a joint and squeezing, since there's pressure on both sides of the neck, and away from the windpipe there isn't much danger of hurting the windpipe.
It also is relatively low risk:
The "blood choke" is currently used by numerous police departments in the United States. Some departments consider it a choice when lethal force is justified; however, it has experienced a resurgence in popularity with law enforcement since close examination of statistical data has revealed the carotid artery submission technique to be relatively safe. A study conducted by the Canadian Police Research Center and posted by the Force Science Research Center in the United States stated 52.9% of the uses left the offender uninjured, 41% sustained minor injuries and less than 6% required minor outpatient procedures. There were no recorded incidents of hospitalization or fatalities[citation needed] and the injuries were considered incidental to the application of the technique.
Now sure, it's riskier than doing nothing, but presumably if you're trying to subdue someone they're being violent.
1
I think doing any kind of harm to someone's neck (one of the most vulnerable parts of our body) while they are drunk is asking for something bad to happen. And as a bouncer to a club you are held liable for ANY damage that results from you choking a drunk person out, and it WILL come back to haunt you if you aren't extremely careful.
0
Sometimes when a person is drinking and filled with adrenalin the only way to control them and hold them back is to control their head and neck. You do this with a choke hold, there are little to no other holds that will accomplish this without the risk of them still being able to strike at you and get away to do the damage they had intended to do in the first place so I definitely wouldn't say he should have been fired for this.
1
Yeah but when there are people fueled on testosterone and alcohol it's a very different situation to being a mall cop.
9
I agree that some mall cops are fueled on cheap liquor and adrenaline, but what is your point?
16
I work as a bartender and if the security guys aren't on top of things and willing to physically remove people, things can escalate quickly which puts other patrons in danger. With shoplifting this isn't the case.
2
I do security in bars and clubs too. Most people can be handled by bringing them to the ground and locking them up without a chokehold. I prefer to bring them to the ground, get them on their stomach, put a knee to the back, hold their head down and grab one arm back. It's not as easy as simply using a chokehold, but it gets the job done without escalating to a chokehold. Some people need to be dealt with in a chokehold fashion, though.
7
Yeah, the environment where you work might be different from where I did. Going to the ground was the last thing I wanted.
1
I do more personal protection. Going to the ground is something you anticipate in order to restrain someone. Going to the ground is still better than a chokehold IMHO. Most of the time, though, people I deal with in the bars can be restrained without going to the ground or using a chokehold. We both know it's also possible to put them on the ground without going to the ground yourself. It's obvious why you'd want to avoid a chokehold, but mounting with the knee can hurt someone too, especially if they have respiratory or pulmonary issues. But you're right, going to the ground should generally be avoided (as should a chokehold).
FYI: I work throughout NYC and the tristate area.
3
gay bar?
1
I knew bouncers who told me most confrontations became ground fights and thus they would trained in Jiu Jitsu or some other form of grappling.
2
Different situation though. You run high risks of assholes at a club getting violent, and even then, you eased up if they stopped fighting.
This poor kid somehow resisted the natural urge to punch, kick, flail, and kill while being choked out. I would have stopped tapping after about 10 seconds and started doing anything I could, even it meant clawing out eyes.
1
My buddy whispers in their ear "you're gonna die tonight" right before they pass out when he does this. He loves his job.
1
So I'm assuming that you were instructed to use force and thus allowed?
1
This is a very different situation from some mall cop chasing someone down and choking them. You were acting to stop what I assume was a violent individual from hurting you or someone else. The mall cop was trying to stop someone that wasn't putting anyone else in danger but he assumed that they were stealing something that probably wasn't even worth that much money. He has no excuse.
1
[deleted]
1
Keep choking people. Eventually you'll lose the odds and kill someone. Enjoy your manslaughter charge, you fucking neanderthal.
-4
Sounds like someone needs to be put into the choke position until they calm down.
4
[deleted]
2
What's your lawyer think is going to happen?
1
[deleted]
2
Well I hope everything works out well for you. Thanks for the details.
2
get a lawyer. I think you'll be fine and perhaps have a counter-suit.
1
I'll keep that in mind.
1
So if this happens to me, can I punch him square in the face?
1
Yup. Stores figure "shrinkage" into their cogs.
1
Some guys just have some macho complex they have to bust out at every opportunity. Give em a badge or a tapout shirt and they go crazy.
1
This is what I was going to say. Policy is to not confront shoplifters at my store. It's just not fucking stupid. You'll either get a lawsuit, lose a customer, or get stabbed over a shirt. Our policy for preventing shoplifting is actually to "greet them." Pretty smart, if people know they're being watched they aren't going to steal something.
1
In college I worked at Wal-Mart as a stock man. They would call us on the walkies if they suspected a shoplifter. We were not allowed to touch them, only surround them and hope they go willingly. We could chase, but only in the hope they would tire out. Touching was an absolute no-no.
1
[deleted]
1
Came here to point this out, wasn't sure if it was just a Canadian thing but I learned in law class that no guard ever had any power to detain you. If they did, you could have them charged and they'd be in more shit than you'd have been if you stole something. If you set off the alarm, you're well within your right to keep on walking out the door.
1
A guard has no more power than any other private citizen. The problem with citizen arrests is that the arresting citizen is liable if the suspect turns out to be innocent.
1
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
1
Might have been an off duty cop. He kind of looked like one.
1
Agreed, the title is most likely (understandably) mistaken.
1
[deleted]
1
*loser ... Loser.
1
Are you legally obligated to stop for the alarm? I never have.
369
No.
280
Be careful with simple answers. Most states allow shopkeepers to detain you - albeit only long enough to check your bag. And that's if they really suspect you of shoplifting - it doesn't apply to just stopping everybody. And most states have strict requirements to allow such stops - the shopkeeper usually has to see the shopper take the item, hide it, leave, etc. all without ever taking their eye off the suspect.
So those Best Buy drones cannot keep you as they have no reasonable suspicion. If you do actually steal shit, and they only search your bag they usually have that right.
44
"And that's if they really suspect you of shoplifting - it doesn't apply to just stopping everybody."
Exactly, if you are walking out of walmart and the alarm goes off because a security tag in your bag wasn't deactivated, you do not have to stop, regardless of whether the greeter tells you that you need to or not. They have no recourse and if they try to forcibly detain you then they are in the wrong and you can sue them over it.
Once a transaction has taken place the contents of your bag is legally yours and they have no right to search it or your person, or detain you for refusing to allow them to do so.
33
Even worse is the power trip some guards try to pull on you when they want to check your receipt and bag on the way out, regardless of suspicion. If they object I just keep walking and tell them "Private property. GFY."
8
What about the signs that say "We reserve the right to inspect all bags, purses, containers, etc."
6
That is simply not true in all cases. In states that grant a shopkeepers privilege, the store can detain you if they have legitimate grounds to suspect you of shopkeeping. It's important to note that you do not have to have stolen anything for them to have legitimate grounds to suspect you. And it can easily be argued that setting off an alarm constitutes legitimate grounds for suspicion.
If you're just walking to the door and they ask to see your receipt and search you bag just because they feel like it, that's one thing. But setting off the alarm is a different thing in many cases.
1
Nor to you need to show your receipt at places with a guy posted at the exit door asking to see it. Just politely decline and keep on walking.
1
But just remember: cops are dicks and can do anything they want. They'll usually side with the security and find some stupid reason to arrest you. If you don't have a ton of money for a lawyer, you'll usually end up getting screwed in the end.
1
regardless of whether the greeter tells you that you need to or not. They have no recourse and if they try to forcibly detain you then they are in the wrong and you can sue them over it.
The cop that hangs out by the doors however..
0
the right to detain somebody doesn't give them free will to assault you.
4
... I never said it did. I was just replying to the response to the question "Are you legally obligated to stop for the alarm?"
1
GEE REALLY
0
Shopkeeper's privilege varies greatly from state to state
2
There isn't a state in the union where this would not be considered felonious assault and battery.
2
Honestly I would refuse to let them search me. I'd have them call the Cops and then let the police take a look. Just a question of principals.
2
The store can make a citizens arrest, but they have to be careful because you can counter sue for false imprisonment if they turn out to be wrong.
1
Now, what about in Canada?
1
Not positive, but I doubt any state allows it just for suspecting. I imagine if you turn out to be wrong, regardless of your reason for suspicion, you are in big trouble for false imprisonment.
1
Be careful with simple answers.
Succinct, profound advice. I have a new maxim.
1
I worked on a Wal-Mart case where I was able to see all of their internal documents. You'd be really surprised at how many security guards get fired for detaining people without following four incredibly strict rules that are nearly impossible to accomplish... and yet there were still hundreds of files on shoplifters.
You have to visually see them pocket the item firsthand (no cameras), have the person in your line of sight 100% of the time, have a second person see them on the camera the entire time, and follow them out of the store. If your line of sight is broken ONCE, you can't even talk to them - they walk around a corner without you being about a foot away, no dice. And even then, you are absolutely prohibited from touching them. Any minor deviation costs you your job.
I've had the buzzer go off on me before (after legitimately purchasing the item), and the door greeter asks to see my receipt - I ignore them and keep walking. They can't even follow you.
Corporate management would MUCH rather lose a $10 item than face a lawsuit.
1
Most states allow shopkeepers to detain you - albeit only long enough to check your bag.
Illegal search and seisure. Once I pay, it's MY fucking bag. They have ZERO right to search me.
1
First, since you're taking a phrase found in the Bill of Rights, I'll mention the 4th Amendment has no bearing here (and we're not talking about seizure anyway) - that only applies to the government and does not apply to shopkeepers.
And again, people have to beware of simple answers, especially with the law in the U.S. There's what, 60 different governments in this country that have criminal codes? The cases listed here uphold laws which allow employees to reasonably detain you. You may not like it, but your statement that they have "ZERO" right to search you seems to conflict with the laws and precedents that the courts have deemed legal.
1
If someone could provide sources for this info it would blow my mind.
I am curious of what the consequences would be if you didn't stop for a shopkeeper? I find it hard to believe that you could be charged with not stopping.
I have not done any research in to this, but I would be inclined to think that in some places it might be legal for them to stop you, but that doesn't mean it's illegal to not stop for them.
1
If you google "Shopkeepers Privilege" you'll find more resources.
Here's a list of laws that may help. The first result, Ohio, states:
(C) An.... agent of a merchant pursuant to division (A) of this section may detain another person for any of the following purposes:
(1) To recover the property that is the subject of the unlawful taking, criminal mischief, or theft;
Now there's a good point you bring up - when writing a law, the law must have a punishment to go with it. I remember hearing cases where laws are written but with no corresponding punishment - if people are found guilty, then they don't go to jail or pay a fine, because there's no law obligating them to to dos. Perusing Ohio's arrest laws I can't find a reference to a punishment for evading private detainment, so who knows.
3
At the Best Buy I worked at, we could only stop someone if we saw them stealing something, and we had a two second window to do so because once they were completely out the door we could not stop them. Also, we rarely detained them. One guy tried to walk out the fire exit with two PS2s, didn't really know that the door pops back for a second and he got hit in the mouth. By then we all knew what he was doing, so my manager walked him to the front of the store, had the guy place the PS2s down, and leave.
1
[deleted]
1
Well deaf people always did want to be treated equally...
I don't think he choked him out because he was deaf.
Equality in action?
0
No, you have nothing legally binding you to the store after your transaction is over. Don't want to show your receipt, don't, but they can't stop you from leaving the store.
123
I had to explain this to the guy at Fry's the other day. I'll show my receipt at the door if there's no line, but if it's gonna waste my time I'm skipping it.
I got chased into the parking lot and they threatened to call the cops. I said okay, gave them my business card, and left. They didn't quite know what to make of that and I haven't heard anything since.
131
You know, last time I did that I found a small item in my pocket that I had forgotten about.
I kinda felt guilty.
36
Why did you put a small item in your pocket that wasn't yours?
83
What items are you putting in your pocket before they're paid for?
67
Ouch guys, it wasn't intentional. I just wanted to grab something on the way out and my hands were full so I pocketed it until I got to the register. Then I started talking to a friend and forgot about it.
I just thought it was interesting that the one time I dismissed the receipt checker was the one time I stole something.
22
That actually happened to a good family friend of mine. He ran in quick to buy a toy for his son's bday and it was a large box. While there his wife asked him to pick up something small and he put it in his pocket b/c he couldn't hold it and the box. Of course, he totally forgot about it at the register, set off the alarm when he walked out, and he remembered the item in his pocket. He tried to reason with them, that he didn't mean to not pay for it, but despite the fact that he dropped a pretty penny on the toy and the small item was a couple of bucks they wouldn't let him go. He was arrested for shoplifting.
8
I've stolen from FRYs before. If you've ever dealt with their customer service, you would agree that they need to have things stolen from them...
0
PAW PAW?
-7
That was dumb, they do have the right to ban anyone from the store. They could ban you. Next time give them nothing. Make them call the cops to ID that plate. It would be a false police report.
7
Haha, I see your point, but I'd get a good laugh at them trying to ban me from the store. I've already given them thousands of dollars and I'm not planning on stopping. If they decided my money's no good for them then I'll go someplace else that doesn't treat a great customer like a criminal. :)
10
This generally is their only recourse if they didn't see a person steal the item in question. You can refuse to show them your receipt, I do all the time. They do have the right to tell you to never come back. Getting it enforced is another thing. My name in any situation where someone demands my name is "Steve Jones"....but that is another story.
3
I'd really love to see a store ban enforced at WalMart, Frys, etc. Too many people shop there. Store bans only work at rinky-dink places.
1
Costco is even worse. There is no merchandise between the checkstands and the exit. There is no way to get from the exit back into where there's stuff to steal. What, am I going to do smuggle out a palette of chips under my shirt without the checker noticing?
1
With Costco, you pay a fee to be a member and agree to show your recept before you leave. You do have to show it there.
18
Some of the people shopping at Costco could easily smuggle out a pallet of chips under their X^X-L shirts.
4
At Costco it is part of your membership agreement. If you don't like it, don't shop there.
3
All they're really supposed to do is put a mark on the receipt so that you can't go back into the store, grab another item, and use the same receipt to walk out.
When they're checking your bag and poking around, that's just the guard doing that for his/her own amusement.
I offer the receipt and hold the bag, closed up, in opposite hand. They won't ask for it because they have no reason to.
1
So it's a matter of principle then? Seems to me that if you were in such a hurry it would have been faster to just show your receipt.
1
I'll show my receipt at the door if there's no line, but if it's gonna waste my time I'm skipping it.
Sometimes it's faster to show my receipt, and I do. When it's inconvenient I'm not going to bother with it.
1
As someone who works up at the front an electronics store (temporary position for a month during my training until I'm moved to Technical Service), I hate people like you. I only get paid $8.50 per hour and I have an incredibly boring job (greeting customers, directing them, directing sales associates who don't care that someone actually needs help buying a $5 product and sometimes won't even cooperate with me, then finally just signing receipts and hoping nobody is stealing anything because I'm really not qualified to know the difference). The least you could do is cooperate - ESPECIALLY when the cashier tells you to leave your receipt out for the person at the door. I've had customers look at me like I was insane and throw their receipts at me before walking out. Just because the registers are right by the person at the front doesn't give you an excuse, either. If anything, that makes you look even more suspicious.
We don't know how responsible you are with your receipts. As I've been told, the biggest reason why we mark receipts is to make sure people aren't finding littered receipts on the street and scamming us. We have a system where we mark every item before it leaves the front if it's a return/exchange, but sometimes cashiers screw up or someone gets a hold of the stickers (it can't be hard to get your hand on those label guns... heck, just work in ANOTHER store and you'll find one), then bam, your rushing attitude has contributed to us losing money.
Unless you have a legitimate reason to rush out (you're late somewhere, someone is in need of medical services [what are you doing at a store that would need to check your receipt anyway? Walmart types pretty much only check your receipt if it looks like you're buying expensive stuff], etc.), calm down, Speedy Gonzales, and just make our lives a little easier, please. I even have to check receipts when two of our employees were with the customer and are currently carrying out a ginormous TV. This isn't just me being a newbie and trying to follow all of the rules to make a good impression on the managers. Even the employees who stopped giving a damn a long time ago stop carrying the product and tell the customer to show me their receipt.
I just now looked up what type of store Fry's is. An electronics store. Wow.
-5
That's cool, but I'm not going to be inconvenienced because of your store's inefficient system. We have all had shit jobs, myself included, but that's really not the point. I'm the customer, I'm not obligated to stop for you, and I'm not going to apologize for it.
edit: also note that in my original comment I mentioned that I will show my receipt if there's not a line. I wanted to clarify that I'm not an anti-receipt checking moral crusader, or anything. It's about my time and your store not having the right to it, especially after I just threw down $XXX.
7
Excuse me, but if you can't catch the fucking thief before they even get near the checkout lines, you really need to find a different fucking job, because I'd never tolerate that sort of incompetence.
I hate people like you, totally incompetent and not even worth the 8.50 you're getting. No common sense, no critical thinking skills, just a mindless fucking drone tied to policy.
You're the exact kind of person I knocked out in Memphis Tennessee in a Wal-Mart. They laid hands on me before they ever asked to see my receipt. I put their skull through the plate glass and let the security cameras clear my name.
Assholes like you should not be allowed anything more than a fast food job.
7
I don't care. I didn't agree to help you with all your internal bullshit.
2
Walmart types pretty much only check your receipt if it looks like you're buying expensive stuff
Bullshit. Most of them check anything that's not in a bag - I've been stopped, while also carrying shopping bags and receipts, for things ranging from cat litter to toilet paper to a $2 plastic ball that I bought for my son and let him carry. That one really pissed me off, and was the last straw that resulted in me finding other places to shop. I shopped there for certain things because they're cheaper there and I'm trying to cut back, but if they're going to treat me or my child like a criminal over a stupid $2 toy I'll spend my money elsewhere.
2
Our rights are more important than your loss prevention. Fuck off.
1
receipt or not. nothing ever binds you to occupy a property.
34
Hmm. Prisons come immediately to mind.
42
We're talking about stores. We all know prisons are a different situation.
6
[deleted]
3
Failing to produce a receipt does not establish probable cause. There are six universally accepted steps to establish probable cause. "Not showing a receipt" is not one of them.
12
Even after they exit the store?
2
Links to 26 states where this is true? Or is this blatantly false..
-3
Well that's simply a false statement.
1
Unless it's part of the membership requirements, i.e. CostCo
12
You dont have to stay, but they don't have to let you back in.
70
Costco can't prevent you from leaving. That's unlawful detainment.
32
Thanks for making that point for the hundredth time this thread. The point is that your membership is invalid if you leave.
9
Damn right; not only that, but if they detain you against your will (kidnapping) they have committed a felony. You could also take them to civil court to seek damages.
5
You agree to it when you purchase your membership. To leave the store with merchandise, you consent to have your receipt examined.
Jackass tries to prove you don't have to stop: http://www.tombom.co.uk/blog/?p=209
Quickly pointed out to him at the bottom of the page is the member agreement telling him he's wrong. CostCo is NOT your standard store...
http://www.costco.com/Images/Content/Misc/PDF/WlcmeBro_021808.pdf
3
you can leave, but not with your shopping.
1
Sure, you can skip the receipt showing at the Costco, but they can revoke your membership for not complying with their rules. when you purchase a membership there, you agree to abide by their rules.
In fact, if you don't show your receipt on the way out, ANY store can refuse to do business with you for not complying with their policy. You do not have a right to enter a business, they allow you to enter their business. This is why you see so many smaller chains have signs that say "we can refuse service at our discretion". As long as they don't discriminate by race, sex, etc....
1
Not sure about the states, but in Canada a private citizen does have the ability to make an arrest if they witness a crime being commited. That is, provided they use only reasonable force, and that a peace officer is notified immediately.
1
Then they can cancel your membership, and ask you to leave...
Possibly there's a breach of contract argument but they'd have to demonstrate losses for that to actually cause a problem to you.
1
The only exception to this is if you're a member of a club store that requires receipt showing as a condition of membership (like Sam's Club). Having said that, there's no legal agreement on earth that would allow this kind of fuck-up.
2
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
1
I never show my receipt, but one time the walmart greeter physically blocked me from leaving for a few minutes. I requested the store manager, he got the security manager, the security manager wouldn't let me leave either, finally got the store manager, he told them to get out of my way.
Police refused to take a police report. Said I'd have to just take it up with the store management.
1
The alarm only goes off if an item from the store goes through it without being taken off. The error is made by the cashier mostly. The security doesn't automatically know the cashier made an error, so anyone who just keeps walking should be dealt with as if they, not cashier-error, were the cause of the alarm. You have to be some sort of anti-social fuckup to just keep walking if you aren't deaf.
-11
The alarm only goes off if an item from the store goes through it without being taken off.
Unequivocally false. I had an implanted medical device that could set off store/airport/etc. security sensors depending on how sensitive they were set. I carried a special medical device registry card on my person at all times that identified the device's serial number, my name (which could be matched up to my ID), the name of the doc who implanted the device, the date of the surgery, and the name and phone number of the manufacturer. It's special when you set off store sensors on your way into the store. "Yep, I'm smuggling your merchandise in and dropping off. Kthxbye."
(I also had to carry a medical registry card for 3 months that warned that I could set off radioactivity sensors at airport checkpoints, etc. I'm pretty sure that regardless of the two cards, the combination of my naked person being able to set off both metal and radioactivity sensors would have been enough to make me highly suspect as a human bomb. I avoided airports that whole time, just in case.)
2
Ok, your 1 in 10,000 case is unique. You set off the alarm, they come see what's up and you show them the medical device card. The other 9,999 times it goes off from an item going through the doors, some of which are stolen.
1
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO CORPORATE POLICY AND DOING WHAT I'M TOLD
AND TO THE PROFITS FOR WHICH THEY STAND
ONE NATION UNDER CONTROL WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR NONE
1
You don't bite the hand that just sold you a product you wanted for a reasonable price just because they have a less than perfect theft-prevention system. The anti-business shit goes too far. Yes, the cop shouldn't have choked him, but this is a 1 in 1,000,000 case where a cashier didn't deactivate it, and the person happened to be deaf.
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopkeeper%27s_privilege
So yes. That said, they can only detain using reasonable measures and are under full liability.
So at most you can tell them to stop or put your hand on their shoulder to hold them there. Except if say I have a shoulder injury and I say you made it worse... you're paying bigtime bills. Or tell me to sit on the ground. The absolute key is that even if I am worst case... their detainment methodology must allow me to peaceably retrieve the receipt. Those security guys took bags away, choked and pushed them away. Specifically denying the factor. They get no detainment protection and are liable for battery and false imprisonment.
In addition... 5-10 minutes is the best you can get. If you stop me and I have no obligation to let you search my bags or anything and I have no obligation to move anywhere to further back in the store. The cashier needs to get over there to say yes or no.
68
Steps I follow if I get hassled by security for shoplifting.
- Allow them to search my bags
- Never leave store property, return to the cashier or customer service desk and demand my money back (especially good if you made a big purchase).
- Never return, tell everyone I know that x store treats you like a criminal and you shouldn't shop there.
That's it. I don't over-react, don't do anything unreasonable, but in the end the store ends up losing more money (in business) then they would have if I had actually shop-lifted said item.
Just for the record, this only happened one time. But I would gladly do it again.
15
Innocent until proven guilty is my reaction. Show me the security tape where it looked like I put something in a bag or pocket and I'll gladly show you, otherwise you're overreacting. Since I have never once shoplifted and never intend to in the future, if someone stopped me, forcefully or not, I would tell them I am not a shoplifter and they can go to hell for the false accusation. If they did use force they would be in for a much worse surprise. My private property cannot be searched or seized by anyone, security guard or not, just because they feel like it.
7
But what if the store only refunds your returns with store credit??
2
Then you ask to talk to the manager. He will give you your money.
1
"Its 'cause I'm black isn't it?!" works too.
Gives them really confused looks if you are white.
Bonus points if they are black.
2
next time someone asks to look in my bag I'm doing just that.
1
That's easy to do when you can clearly communicate with the people accusing you of shoplifting.
1
Well obviously.
1
Why would you allow them access to your possessions?
1
Would you also let them search your car before returning your merchandise, if they asked to?
1
I do this. I had to do it the other day when Best Buy tried to stop me after buying Starcraft II. They also claimed I couldn't return software. It was fun to show the idiot that it was unopened and they must take it back.
I went to GameStop instead. No problems.
1
So yes.
No, let's read the wikipedia entry, shall we?
Reasonable suspicion: The shopkeeper must have reasonable grounds to suspect the particular person detained.
Failing to show a receipt does not establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause (I'm not sure what the wikipedia article is on about, most jurisdictions require probable cause not the much lower threshhold of reasonable suspicion, for example the kentucky statute someone else posted earlier). There are six accepted steps to establish probable cause to detain a suspected shoplifter without engaging in false imprisonment. Failing to show a receipt is simply not sufficient.
3
As you say, most states that follow this rule have codified it, rather than relying on common law. I do not know what the law in CA is.
In this particular instance they failed to stop when the alarm sounded, and then failed to produce a receipt. Obviously they had a good reason for both, but it was not, as you said, simply their failure to produce a receipt. Setting off an anti-theft alarm may constitute probable cause in this jurisdiction.
1
Be careful - the answer to the poster's question is NOT "yes." You are not legally obligated to stop for the alarm - that is a very different thing from the shopkeeper having a (potential and variable by state) right to detain you temporarily. The responsibility is the shopkeeper's, not the customer's.
3
Thank you for posting the correct law. This needs to be upvoted--most of the other comments are either wrong or misleading.
Not sure what you mean by "they . . . are under full liability." The point of the shopkeeper's privilege is to remove the shopkeeper's liability for what otherwise would be false imprisonment and in some circumstances (such as this video) assault and battery. Also the shopkeeper's privilege does allow the shopkeeper to conduct a search.
I am worried that some of these comments might encourage ineffective or counterproductive behavior. If you set off an alarm, the store will likely have the requisite reasonable suspicion required to detain you for a short period. The privilege to detain includes a privilege to use reasonable force. In such a circumstance showing them a receipt will likely eliminate any reasonable suspicion and they will lose their right to detain you.
Arguing with them about your rights or their rights will probably not be effective.
The security guards in this video may have had a reasonable suspicion but they did not use reasonable force or detain the man for a reasonable period (i.e., they committed assault, battery, and false imprisonment at a minimum).
2
Thank you for posting the correct law.
He misapplied that law. Failing to show a receipt does not establish grounds to detain a customer.
Not sure what you mean by "they . . . are under full liability."
If they injure the suspect, they are liable. They may use only reasonable force.
The point of the shopkeeper's privilege is to remove the shopkeeper's liability for what otherwise would be false imprisonment and in some circumstances (such as this video) assault and battery.
Again, they are only immune if they use reasonable force.
Also the shopkeeper's privilege does allow the shopkeeper to conduct a search.
Yes, it does, if they have probable cause. A merchandise alarm does not establish probable cause. Not even close. The courts and juries know that the alarm going off is more often an indicator of a cashier's mistake.
I am worried that some of these comments might encourage ineffective or counterproductive behavior.
I'm worried that someone misapplying a poorly written wikipedia article instead of the actual law may encourage people to surrender their rights.
If you set off an alarm, the store will likely have the requisite reasonable suspicion required to detain you for a short period.
They will not. See above. It is well known that this usually indicates a mistake on the part of the staff. They cannot establish reasonable suspicion for something that is usually their fault.
In such a circumstance showing them a receipt will likely eliminate any reasonable suspicion and they will lose their right to detain you.
They had to have probable cause to stop you (note that the wikipedia entry is wrong here, they say reasonable suspicion, that isn't true).
The security guards in this video may have had a reasonable suspicion but they did not use reasonable force or detain the man for a reasonable period
This happened in California. The corresponding section of the penal code is 490.5 (f) 1:
A merchant may detain a person for a reasonable time for the purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner whenever the merchant has probable cause to believe the person to be detained is attempting to unlawfully take or has unlawfully taken merchandise from the merchant's premises.
The security guards need far more than an alarm tag.
9
Yes, it does, if they have probable cause. A merchandise alarm does not establish probable cause. Not even close. The courts and juries know that the alarm going off is more often an indicator of a cashier's mistake.
Do you have case law to support this? If not, do you have admissible expert evidence relating to same? For that matter, do you have the financial resources to press the issue in litigation? This is hardly the foregone conclusion you're suggesting it is.
I'm worried that someone misapplying a poorly written wikipedia article instead of the actual law may encourage people to surrender their rights.
As a law student, I find this attitude very frustrating. Yes, you can certainly insist on your strict legal rights. Or you can take 10 seconds to show proof of payment and be on your way. It'll likely save you more time in the long run. In extreme cases, it may save you from serious injury at the hands of overzealous store security. The hollow self-satisfaction of asserting you strict legal rights won't cause your bones to heal any faster.
3
I just saw this. You seem to assume you are the arbiter of what constitutes probable cause and reasonable force. You are not, unless you are a judge. Admittedly, I shared my opinion on how these legal standards would apply to the facts contained in the above video. It looks like we agree that the men in this video used unreasonable force. We disagree on whether setting off an alarm establishes either probable cause or a reasonable suspicion for detaining a customer. Which standard is used depends on the jurisdiction, but I will go with the probable cause standard given that this happened in California (btw, I did not base my analysis on the Wikipedia article--I based it on a Torts treatise).
I have authority to support my opinion. In In re O.P., 2004 WL 2713941 (Cal. App. 2004), the court applied section 490.5 (which you cite) to the following facts:
"As appellant and his friend walked out of the store, the merchandise sensor alarm immediately went off. They were already through the front door, but Negre asked them to return into the store. They walked through the sensor area again, and the alarm went off again. Negre asked appellant to remove whatever was triggering the alarm. Appellant removed a portable CD player from his pocket and handed it to Negre, and said that it probably triggered the alarm. Appellant walked through the sensor area but the alarm went off again. Negre instructed appellant to walk through the sensor area four more times, and the alarm repeatedly went off."
"Negre testified he locked the store's front doors with his keys, and placed the keys under the register. He again asked appellant to remove whatever was triggering the alarm. Appellant removed a CD package from his clothing and dropped it on a nearby table."
Id. at *2. The court held for the store. Although this is an unpublished opinion, it is indicative of what at least one judge thinks, which is more persuasive than our opinions.
You might find a case reaching the opposite conclusion--though probably not in California. Either way I would encourage you to avoid conclusory statements about something as nebulous as probable cause. At best you will convince people that the law is more concrete than it actually is, and at worst you will be wrong (as in this instance).
1
So I'm guessing a full choke-slam would open them to some liability?
2
You are reading that wrong. It works about the same as citizens arrest. They can detain you IF they have reasonable suspicion that you have attempted to commit theft.
I realize that we are 2 steps shy of a police state but no, not showing your receipt on the way out is not cause to believe you have committed a theft.
1
This is bullshit. I've worked as store security and we're allowed to detain. The process is that we witnessed them hide the item, watched them the whole time they're in the store, and watched them leave without paying for it. If they fight back after we tell them they're under arrest, we can use reasonable force (matching what they do) to control them.
1
I think you may be the guy who caught...uh... a friend of mine so long ago...
1
Lets get really specific here: The question was asked whether someone is legally obligated to stop for an alarm. The shopkeepers privilege revolves around the reasonable belief of the shopkeeper. (Not the obligations (or lack there of) of a citizen)
Although in many jurisdictions merchant's do retain a privilege to detain and investigate this does not mean that an alarm means someone has to to stop.
1
The shopkeepers in Nethack were way more hardcore than the guys in the video. They wouldn't follow you across levels though.
0
I never stop, once my wife was walking into borders with our son and she tripped the alarm. The guy asked my wife to stop and she refused he then stepped in front of her aggressively to force her to stop. I heard my wife say my husbands coming (I'm 6"4 290lbs). I ended up just kinda scaring him and then asking for his manager, never saw that guy again.
54
For some reason after reading this, the part in Star Wars where Chewbacca roars at a little security robot during his fake detainment came to mind. I am a nerd.
13
[deleted]
0
muscle weighs more than fat.
1
I run a couple of small businesses, service not retail but a lot of the same rules apply. Anyone who runs a business knows the #1 rule: don't piss off your customers. When you start a business and begin dealing with the public, or just work in a customer-facing position, you quickly realize this country is positively crawling with stupid, irrational, self-entitled people you want to put in a chokehold. But so long as you are getting their money, do anything you can to make them happy short of giving them a complimentary blowjob. Asking "What can I do to make this right for you, sir/ma'am?" are magic words. Frequently the unspoken answer is "I just wanted to hear you kissing my ass." - and then you get the business.
Rule #2 is don't piss off your employees. Employees who respect you and have a stake in the business (even an intangible stake, like the feeling of being a valued team member who doesn't have to worry about being fired) are much more productive, and will practice Rule #1. More carrot, less stick is the way to go with employees... keep the turnover to its absolute minimum possible level. I think of firing someone as a failure on my part - I hired the wrong person for the job, or I wasn't able to help them avoid whatever circumstances forced my hand.
Preventing customers from defrauding you or stealing inventory is a rule, but it comes way down the list after the first two, unless you're getting robbed by armed thugs on a weekly basis. So unless there's clear observation of someone stealing inventory, customers should not be hassled, ever, and ideally they should never even see a security guard. I let my accounts receivable slide for 90 days before I even bother a customer about it - usually if they haven't paid by then, they don't intend to and need encouragement. If I ran a retail operation that needed shoplifting prevention, my security would be plainclothes and look like any other shopper, until they are needed, then they would take off their jacket to reveal their shirt that says "XYZ Store Security" or whatever.
I'm sure someone will argue that "Make A Profit" is Rule #1, but I would call it Rule #0... all the other rules are the way you make your business profitable.
That is why I don't understand why there are overzealous security guards at all these big stores like WalMart, Borders, Fry's, etc. Maybe with the huge bureaucracy they only see the bottom line, and they lose sight of what's most important about running a business.
5
Frequently the unspoken answer is "I just wanted to hear you kissing my ass." - and then you get the business.
I'm not in any business, and this customer is always right bullshit gets on my fucking nerves. Loud obnoxious stupid people that think the world revolves around them. I wouldn't mind seeing a few of these uppity shits get choked-hold sometimes.
2
It's always a temptation... but if you want to succeed, you need their money. I don't even think of unruly customers as people, I think of them as unpleasant interactive objects I need to successfully manipulate to separate them from their money.
On the other hand, if the customer's bullshit is actually making it unprofitable to deal with them (ex: the "grinders" who try to get a discount for every little perceived problem), it's simple to ask them to take their business elsewhere.
2
Wait... he stopped your wife because he thought she was trying to smuggle stolen goods into Borders?
5
Yah I assume so, he wouldn't really say why he got aggressive with her and since he knew he was in trouble he turned into super nice guy.
1
In their defense (as much as I hate to take their side), they have every right to prevent you from going into the store. Of course, you maintain the right to just turn around and leave.
1
Sometimes I wish I dated bigger guys expressly for this reason.
0
6'4" 290lbs is linebacker big. 220lb 6' if probably enough.
6
Actually the average linebacker weight is more around 230 to 240. 290 is huge.
1
Just date a guy with an open carry permit. I guarantee that'll be scarier.
3
But what if she wants a guy with all his teeth?
3
ditto.... sigh
1
[deleted]
-1
Big guys like us are intimidating to almost everyone, I love it.
-2
No, which makes it assault.
36
Actually, it's battery.
Assault is the threat of violence. Battery is the use of violence.
147
Well, I learned something today!
Edit (follow-up question): If you hit someone with brick from behind without first threatening them, is it assault-less battery?
55
I think that would be attempted murder.
2
Actually that depends on where you are. Assault can be physical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault
24
True. I should have also expanded on assault in U.S. law. It also includes physical threat, such as waving a knife or bat in a clearly violent context.
2
Depends on where you are. In Canada, for example, there are no battery laws. Everything is classified under assault.
15
Same in Utah.
1
In Canada, assault is the criminal offence, battery is the tort. You can charge someone with assault and sue them for battery
1
battery is an unconsented-to touching, not necessarily violent, and not necessarily direct. assault is creating an imminent apprehension of an unconsented-to touching.
5
So what's assault and battery?
1
Except in for in Utah, they are the same thing.
1
It is Assault and Battery at the same time because it requires both to commit the act of hurting someone illegally.
You cannot have one without the other.
1
[deleted]
0
Excellent! The bigger the charge the better in this case.
-1
What? Really? That's stupid. They're synonyms.
-5
You used to think they were synonyms, but you were wrong.
There's a reason people are charged with assault and also charged with battery.
4
No they're not. Assault is almost universally verbal. It's literally the difference between saying "I'm gonna smack you bitch", and actually smacking the bitch.
2
They carry different legal definitions, though.
2
Which allows you to defend yourself.
0
You don't have to stop for the alarm, but certain stores like target do have asset protection to deal with those situations. I'm not sure about their protocol, but there were a few instances i can remember where they used handcuffs. They can't arrest you, but they can detain you until the cops arrive to deal with the situation. I have the feeling that the handcuffs are only used when someone is being a danger to the other customers. In this case, the guards are just being assholes who think they can stomp people out for any reason.
9
This is incorrect, depending on the state you live in. For example, in California, only a peace officer can detain you without arresting you, and they must have probable cause. (An alarm going off does not generally constitute probable cause.) For a private citizen, employee or not, security guard or not, to detain you requires that they perform a citizen's arrest. So yes, they can also "arrest" you. In order to do this without becoming liable for false arrest however, they must do the following:
- They must see the shoplifter approach the merchandise.
- They must see the shoplifter select the merchandise.
- They must see the shoplifter conceal or take the merchandise.
- They must maintain continuous observation the shoplifter to ensure they haven't simply set the item back down.
- They must see the shoplifter fail to pay for the merchandise.
- They must approach the shoplifter outside of the store.
If they haven't done all of these things, they have not witnessed a crime, and thus, have no just cause for an arrest. When this is the case, it becomes false arrest, unlawful detainment, etc. It is a major civil liability for the store (and may become a criminal charge if they assault/batter the individual, assuming they're innocent) if they don't follow these rules. That's why they exist.
Of course, these rules vary from state to state. Check yours to be sure, and as always, talk to a lawyer to be absolutely sure.
21
I was just the produce guy. As i said... somewhere in this thread, I don't know the AP protocol. I just tended to the produce and backing up the register every once and a while. If i ever saw blatant shoplifting, i would have to tell AP. If I ever made an attempt to stop said shoplifter, i would have been in deep shit. The first thing they teach you in the store is to let AP do their job the way they are trained to do it, if you aren't AP, its not really your problem.
On a different note, we seem like a match made in heaven.
10
My wife might disagree.
0
Excuse me...excuse me...I know my rights! GallonOfLube told me so...
1
You are absolutely correct in what you say. In fact, the person in this video should have pressed charges with the police on the scene for assault and battery. Any honest cop would have cuffed the security guard and taken him in if the victim wanted to press charges.
1
No, the cop would have taken a report and reviewed the evidence. Cops don't tend to arrest security guards, even when there's been a pretty egregious rights violation. Right now, an authority figure has accused a consumer, regardless of witnesses and evidence, which may or may not have even been shown to the police. However, this is all admissible as evidence in a civil trial.
2
any source for this or are you talking out of your ass?
0
Anyone who's worked loss prevention can confirm this, and Google is your friend. And no, "security" does not inherently equal loss prevention.
0
I used to work for Bestbuy. The protocol, at the store I worked for anyway, said that if someone left the door, they [loss prevention] were under no circumstances to follow or attempt to apprehend.
20
And this will be the video they use to illustrate why.
7
The Target I worked at owned the parking lot for their corner of the mall. There was this one instance of some homeless guy that would come into the store daily, buy compressed air dusters, go outside and huff them right in the parking lot... One of the AP guys was outside one day while the guy was out there huffing away. He started yelling at the guy and chased him off the store property. Other than that, I never once heard of anyone leaving the store to stop someone. Even if a cashier was handed blatantly counterfeit money, they had to accept it. Employees were not to take the law into their own hands.
6
So lets say i had monopoly money...
9
I worked at Office Depot and it was the same. Even if they walked right out with something under their arm the most we could do was get their liscence plate and call the police. Under no circumstances were we to intervene.
2
I remember the LP training at my department store was that if someone made it out the door with product, it was far too dangerous and was an "uncontrollable situation." My first question to my supervisor was "why wouldn't he hypothetically pull the weapon indoors?"
There was some kind of answer stammered...
Usually it was just a stand-off between 2+ security workers and one shoplifter. It almost never came to a scuffle; but if LP had to engage someone in-store since they instigated a fight, that person was immediately put into a light hold, cuffed, stood up, and marched back to the security office. Total ground-time was around 40 seconds max. Like I said though, scuffles were extremely rare.
1
I worked at Best Buy for awhile too. I wasn't a yellow-shirt, but that's what they told me in the break-room as well. My store hired scary-looking bouncer types for the door job, simply because they looked intimidating. They wouldn't do anything if you were stealing something, though.
1
Target has about the best security a retail place can have.
1
They may carry handcuffs but if they put them on a customer, especially one who did not ste--actually, it doesn't even matter. They would be so, so very unbelievably fucked in court.
Assuming one hires a competent lawyer.
1
I'm pretty sure the only reason they have them is to stop someone who is punching random customers in the dick.
1
I will defer to your expertise in this particular scenario. I just try to keep things moving without undue friction.
1
They can only do this if you fail to assert your rights, by the way, this is why Target et. al. will usually only hire off duty police for that job since technically an officer is never off duty, they don't fall into same legal trouble someone making a "citizen's arrest" would.
1
No, but a notable exception is if they saw you shoplifting. If they did, your rights pretty much go out the window and they can forcefully detain you.
2
Nope. I used to work in a supermarket when I was younger, and people who shoplifted, even if caught, could simply walk out and do a runner, and there was nothing we could do to stop them. Ofcourse in the time I worked there, everyone who did shoplift and get caught always stopped and waited for the police to get there.
1
It's actually a little-known secret that most items don't even trip the alarms (or at least where I am from in NA they do not).
1
Where is NA? North America?
2
It is either sodium or narcotics anonymous.
2
Where he's from is not applicable.
2
Not Anywhere.
2
Yeah, North America. More specifically, stores in the Midwest U.S. and Ontario, Canada.
1
Of course not. I never stop.
1
You don't have to stop for the alarm, nor do you have to show them your receipt. There is no law that states this.
Some special stores like Sam's Club and other "membership" stores have their own policy requiring you to show your receipt. They can't legally stop you, but they can revoke your membership and may actually ban you from their property (in which case, they can stop you from entering the store and detain you, I believe, as you would be trespassing on private property)
1
They have no right to tackle or intervene. Store employees (which I'm assuming these guys are) are only supposed to ask/yell for you to stop or come back. They aren't allowed to touch you or detain you. You're supposed to let them go in the case of a shoplifting because you never know, they might be armed and the store never wants to pay for your medical bills/funeral. At least that's what I have been told to do. I've been employed at multiple retail locations throughout the years.
1
In my state. Yes. You are legally obligated to stop for the alarm. It varies from area to area though.
1
I always keep walking because i dont steal therefore i know, with 100% certainty, that if it goes off its a mistake.
1
[deleted]
1
If you have not stolen anything: no.
If you have stolen anything... still no. That would be self-incrimination. And for the record, if you were being followed by the store-security, by tripping the alarm you are past the point of no return and there is no talking your way out of it.
1
I usually stop because a few times they forgot to remove the electronic tag and so I'd have to go back anyway to get them to take it off.
1
No, nor do store security forces have any right to stop you if it does go off. Even if they watch you steal something. If they touch you or restrain you in anyway you can sue the shit out of them
-10
This is not true. If you were seen shoplifting and you resist apprehension they are allowed to use reasonable force to detain you. If you did not shoplift, however, this is an easy to win lawsuit. I worked the cameras for a very large department store in a major city when I went to college and we would arrest a lot of people every day. If you resisted, you got handcuffed. The police would then come pick you up.
If this guy didn't steal anything he's going to see a decent payout. Odds aren't bad the store will just offer him $50-$60k up front to go away.
32
He's gonna get a lot more money than that. Hopefully the guard does some time.
22
I'd rather have the company's money than the guard's time. One is awesomely useful, the other is worthless.
17
Two words: false imprisonment. If you do anything other than search my bag on the way out, you will be sued to oblivion by me.
8
If they have reasonable suspicion that you've shoplifted (whether or not you actually have - an alarm going off probably suffices), they may detain you using reasonable methods for a reasonable amount of time. If their conduct meets this test, it's not false imprisonment. However, I sincerely doubt that choking someone out would ever be considered a reasonable method in any type of shoplifting situation, though.
You want my source? It's my bar review outline. Or you can Google "shopkeeper's privilege" for yourself:
http://erickregalado.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/security-guards-false-imprisonment/
12
You can sue all you want- if a trained loss prevention agent observed you leave the store with unpaid merchandise he will win and you will lose.
4
No, if they see you steal something, it is not false imprisonment. It is sad people actually upvoted you. The law is a google search away.
1
I think you're also allowed to use reasonable force to defend yourself.
1
I remember reading in an iama that security needs to have eyes on you the entire time to be able to detain you. If they lose sight for even one second they can't detain you.
1
True but there was some flexibility. If you stole a large item and it's in a bag or your pocket where I can spot it outside of the store (or the outline of it) then I can go roam around until you leave. There's also the handoff to the camera operator who will just keep you on tape the whole time.
The LP agent knows its his ass if he makes a bad stop. Better to just let someone go, more often they come back and steal again until they're caught.
1
I'm not sure how the laws work where you live, but we were told by our managers 'do not block the way, do not touch the person, let them do their thing and you watch and remember.' Shit, we even had a guy in the store swinging a crowbar into TV's, idk what his deal was, but the people in the store at the time just kept a clear perimeter so that other people wouldn't get hurt, and let him whack away until the cops came.
1
Someone told me that if you are injured, lawsuit settlements are partially based on the medical bill. If you are innocent, make sure this is as high as possible (ambulance ride, specialists, month long hospital stay, PTSD therapy, etc). IANAL though.
-1
Not in California. The only thing you can legally do in cali is politely ask them to come back inside, trick them into a room you can lock, and call the cops. The second you touch em, its game over. Cause unless your a sworn law enforcement, or have power to arrest some other way ( bounty hunter for example ) you have no legal right to detain another individual unless its to prevent harm to some one. I fucking hate zealous mall cops and security guards like these assholes. Its a sign of utter stupidity to risk a physical confrontation for what the average rent a cop makes.
-2
You're wrong. I was a LP camera operator in a very large California store. If you resisted you were pounced on. It was also recorded and saved. These cases went to trial, the store won and the defendant lost.
If you have a store's property the agent for the store has the right to arrest and detain you until the police arrive. We did it every single day.
3
They have a right to reasonably detain and restrain you ON store premises. Even then it certainly does not include choking you out.
Once outside the store on public property, they are just plain old citizens and can't even restrain you, they can only ask you to come back to the store and take down information.
In no case are the deputized and as such they are always liable for assault and injury damages in any case unless it can be proven absolutely that the injuries were incurred while they protected themselves from the alleged shoplifters assault.
-6
Incorrect, they are allowed to detain you off premises. You don't know what you're talking about.
The choking was inappropriate, yes. This does appear to be a bad stop.
11
No, sockpuppet is right. The main point that I think sockpuppet isn't stressing is that the detention requires the individual to actually witness the crime. You can't just suspect someone of stealing, or think that they looked like they are someone who might have stolen something. It's just like citizen arrest and you have to be equally careful, there is significant civil liability for false arrest.
8
They have no legal right to detain you at all. They are not trained to do so, and the law does not accept their training as sufficient.
0
That is completely wrong. If they see you take something, that is reasonable suspicion and in that case they can detain you. If you fight, they can tackle you.
2
Any decent human being would cooperate. I mean it only goes off when the magnetic strip from an item leaving their store goes through the door. They have every right to ensure people don't steal from them. It's pretty fucking shitty to not cooperate with the business who is providing you products, in the rare instance the cashier didn't do their job.
-10
In return for my cooperation in helping them catch the mistake of their cashier not doing their job properly, I assume your store will be prepared to offer me some sort of cash incentive? Discount card? Rebate slip? Free ice cream cone? No? Well, then there's not really any incentive for me to give my time. The store isn't providing me products, I'm also providing them money. That's what they get in return for the products I'm getting, nothing more.
5
No, it goes of when ANY source of induction goes through the door, and it doesn't know which way it is going through the door. It could be the tag from another store, from a library book, or from other metallic/magnetic objects that don't contain those strips at all.
2
You mean the extremely common instance the cashier didn't do their job. Half the time I leave a store, the alarm goes off. No I'm not stealing anything.
2
They have every right to ensure people don't steal from them.
They do not, however, have the right to stop you. At all. Period. If they stop you, that is an illegal arrest. Their only job is to call the police. They cannot stop you, grab you, choke you, or even chase or follow you. Even if they see you walk out with unpaid merchandise, they cannot sto you. You can even tell them that you've stolen, and they are legally required to let you pass, as they do not have the proper authority to detain you.
-2
No, if you walk out with unpaid merchandise, I can tackle your ass. Most store's policy is against that though. You are confusing store policy with law.
You are essentially saying that I can walk into your house and start taking things, and you can't stop me.
1
A store with employees is different from a home. In a home, I myself would personally own those items, and if somebody is stealing on my personal property, I can (reasonably) fuck them up.
With a store, those employees don't own the items that are for sale, and the property is open to everyone to be on, so long as they don't abuse that right. When a person walks out with an item, it's not depriving the actual employee from anything. If they tackle you, that is a felony, and they're going to jail.
As I read earlier, they can reasonably detain you for a small time, but only if there is a reasonable suspicion of theft. If they randomly stop you and then detain you when you refuse to let them check the receipt, thats illegal.
1
Businesses follow different laws that residences, yes. But no, legally, they cannot physically detain you. It's fasle imprisonment and you'll get sued so fast you'll shit blood.
You are essentially saying that I can walk into your house and start taking things, and you can't stop me.
No, I'm saying that I can't keep you captive. I can beat the shit out of you, but I can't actually keep you where you are.
I actually had a cop explain this to me. I was chasing after some dumbass kid who was hanging out of his car window while driving down the road. During this, he managed to hit my car with his. I called the cops, and the kid was trying to flee, so I followed him. He went up into somebody's driveway, and I blocked him in so he couldn't get out (he ended up hitting my car again while trying to do so, though). The officer who later reported to the scene explained that even if that was my driveway, I am not permitted to prevent him from leaving the property against his will, even if he is committing a crime.
Nicely enough, he didn't do anything to me about it. He was more worried about locking that little prick up.
0
Taking videos of mall cops is hereby forbidden
366
this is an excellent comment.
5
[deleted]
66
this is an excellent comment.
9
I'm going to upvote MyNameIsSaad's comment because I'm completely batshit retarded.
-5
what i meant to say, concisely, was it mimics an excellent point about lawmakers banning and punishing the videotaping of police. had there been no video of this, it would have been business as usual without justice. and that shit is wrong.
2
[deleted]
-1
And in about a year I'm sure that it'll be made a law.
3
[deleted]
0
Unfortunately you're very right.
-1
Somebody is about to get very rich very soon, whilst someone else is about to get very unemployed.
326
And hopefully very incarcerated.
273
Who gets more jail time? This guy or the flight attendant that told everyone to fuck off then jumped down the slide with a couple beers?
75
They get the same sentence, but afterward the flight attendant gets a TV show.
125
So true.
1
The flight attendant is undoubtedly a terrorist, he's done.
1
I'd say this guy, because I'm biased and know what it is like to deal with cunt customers.
3
This guy or the flight attendant that told everyone to fuck off then jumped down the slide with a couple beers?
Damn fine point, this is likely an issue for state courts, the flight attendant's probably headed to federal court.
2
please link me to that
1
I read that as
And hopefully very incinerated.
I like this idea better.
4
Not just regular old incarcerated. Goddamn SUPER ULTRA INCARCERATION
1
hey hello, internet lawyer you seem to have zero understanding of the law in the real world... nice...
0
I wish both of these things happened to me.
2
As opposed to what? Slightly unemployed?
1
fired, out of a canon, into the sun
2
in D?
1
I fucking hope so. This is just unreal.
1
sweet irony...the security guard gets a 1 time UFC contract and gets chocked TFO by someone who IS trained.
1
[deleted]
0
from the youtube description-
he was nearly choking you to deaf by the purplish color you had on your face.
ಠ_ಠ
234
I guess I'm going to hell for laughing at it.
36
From the title:
Staff Tackles and Chokes "Deaf" Shopper suspected of Shoplifting
"Deaf"?
2
"Staff"
3
That's what got me.
2
Fuck, that's outside my jurisdiction.
2
[deleted]
-2
Notice to deaf people: Carry a canister of bear mace. If anyone starts being violent towards you or you are threatened in a way that you do not understand, mace everyone. Everyone.
229
For rectal use ONLY.
162
Liberally apply to assholes.
29
Or directly to the forehead!
1
... Ouch.
2
I am not turning a brown eye to this.
0
Downvoting you, because I think GravityKing's comment needs to be the first one after Howard Beale's.
So I'll Downvote, even though I usually dont. For the sake of humanity, you understand.
0
Notice to people who think it's ok to spray someone with bear spray:
It's considered a possibly lethal substance to humans and is therefore assault with a deadly weapon.
62
It's considered a possibly lethal substance to humans and is therefore assault with a deadly weapon.
This is why I always pack a pistol around deaf people. Problem solved.
51
haha, thanks for making me laugh.
2
[deleted]
1
This is why I always pack a pistol around deaf people. Problem solved.
This is why I always pack a ziplock full of bacon laced with poisonous treedart frog blood around other redditors. Problem solved.
1
How the fuck are you getting upvoted so much? Bear Spray is nothing but a large canister of pepper spray which is non-lethal deterrent carried by cops and civilians alike. It is totally legal to defend yourself with pepper spray in MOST jurisdictions when threatened. Some states, have certain restrictions on pepper spray though.
6
No it isn't. It's double the legal limit of human-applicable pepper spray. It has lethality warnings on the canister.
3
That's called marketing. Do you really think "rattlesnake eggs" shouldn't be exposed to room temperature?
-5
When you buy bear spray you have to sign a waiver stating that you understand the intended use and dangers and will not misuse it or use it on humans. It is serious shit.
1
Doesn't Dog the bounty hunter use bear mace?
2
I have a can right here. It says danger do not use on humans. On the can.
4
Oh I know, it can make people who just happen to be downwind of it go blind. I would not be surprised if it was classified as lethal. That's why it's strange that a bounty hunter would be allowed to use bear mace, and if he is allowed to use it, and it is a lethal weapon, then why not just use a gun?
3
It's CYA and marketing "Dude, this stuff has to be bad ass, it says it can cause blindness!"
-1
I always thought bear spray was weaker since they usually only have 1-2% Capsaicin and people sprays usually have around 15% Capsaicin and that the difference was range. Is there something else in the bear spray?
2
The legal limit for human pepper spray is 1%. BEar spray is generally double that.
2
Hmm, happen to got a link siting the law for people? I am actually a bit curious about this.
-edit- never mind, after a bunch of digging I found the info. I was confusing OC with capsaicin.
2
In a situation like this could it be considered assault with a deadly weapon though? The deaf guy presumably didnt know what was going on and if anyone else was to get attacked like that with no clue as of why they would be easily justified with using bear spray or any other type of defensive means in that situation.
2
So is knowing karate in some places.
2
Yeah I was kidding.
2
Choking someone is also assault.
2
Depends on the state.
1
upvoted for thinking.
1
Downvoted for not thinking/researching. Bear Spray is pepper spray in a large can.
1
No it isn't. I have a can right here.
-1
Hey I know how about carrying a legal self defensive weapon that can be used for protection ohhh wait I can't use it even if I wanted in that type of situation because I will still get a crapper when it comes to going to court and ect.. So why if it is legal and use as a defensive method people can't use it without getting in a shit load of trouble why not just make it illegal??
1
Bear spray isn't intended for use on humans. It's for use on fucking 800 pound bears.
2
My hands are considered deadly weapons but that doesn't stop me! RAWR
1
Some states allow people to carry personal protection pepper spray which is not as dangerous as animal pepper spray. Pennsylvania is one state where pepper spray can be purchased at many retail stores. (Just saw a small keychain fob pepper spray can for sale in the auto department of a *mart the other day.) New York also allows people to carry pepper spray, but only firearm retailers can sell it here AFAIK.
1
Dude, they can't hear you...
8
Dude, he wrote it.
22
Dude.
...I just want to fit in.
8
Dude, it's ok! We're all friends here!
1
What?
1
This is correct. Deaf people can only read braille. Here:
:: .. . : : . .: : :: ::: .: : .. .::. :. :: .
10
g-KkJkggkKk-GHg, you say? You make no sense, sir. Prepare for bear mace, good day!
2
GUYBRUSH!!!!
1
It would be funny, but deaf people can see text, so the joke is on you?
-1
It's a perfect defense too because his deafness will protect him from the effects of the mace. Also, his targets will never hear it coming.
5
I guess I do not understand how mace works.
2
Does that make you mad as hell?
Are you going to take it anymore?
1
I like your style sir...
1
Vuvuzela?
1
notice to deaf people: taking advice from random rambos on this anonymous forum can get you shot.
1
or you are threatened in a way that you do not understand, mace everyone. Everyone
Yes. You have your instructions from the reddit squad. Now go, and cause insane havoc hither, thither, and of course ... yon.
Now be off, before we place a reddit nerdninja move on you.
1
Hide 'ya wifes, hide 'ya kids, they macin' EVERYONE!
1
Hide 'ya wifes, hide 'ya kids, they macin' ERRBODY!
ftfy =)
1
can you follow up the outcome and post the result so that we know what happened later on?
176
My sentiments exactly, I'm waiting for that post-endgame thread that brings the rushing thrill of justice.
16
I keep checking back on this... hopefully we'll get some results here.
2
If memory serves me (in)correctly, someone awhile back wanted to make a subreddit to keep track of things like these. Does anybody know?
1
You mean, you want to know what ever happened to the whateverhappenedto subreddit?
3
News source from KTLA reports the deaf guy was found with stolen merchandise , was charged with robbery and being held for $55k bail. This report was updated at 9pm pst on the news site.
Google in the news section "KTLA guard choke deaf".
1
NooO! I refuse to believe this!
1
[deleted]
159
[deleted]
72
Cute blonde there.
45
[deleted]
63
You want a fat, awkward brunette? They're not as elusive as you think.
5
"I can't go on without her. God where's my Cyndi Lauper?"
2
Just to the left of her?
1
[deleted]
1
You sir, deserve an upboat for "thick cute dorky brunette", a man with taste, I like that.
1
Hollywood is a hipster town. You won't find girl without huge sunglasses, bleached hair, and a fake-bake tan for several miles outside the city limits.
-4
An arrow pointing to an Asian guy?
14
I think the arrow is pointing at the car...
1
Eh. They're a dime a dozen out here in LA. Seriously.
4
Do not see eyes. Do not want beady eyes. Insufficient evidence.
2
She's reaching for a gun!!!
1
she is most likely out of your price league... and probably a porn actress.
1
Except she ruins it with those ugly glasses.
1
Is the dude in the black shirt/black hat you? Because if not, he's really concerned about being in the photo.
38
Lol, yeah. That's me. I never look happy. I work with tourists.
46
I never look happy. I work with tourists.
I feel you, bro. I work at the Pike Place Market... fucking tourist trap.
3
Ever heard you look like George Costanza?
1
Tourists do suck- it's like once people leave their hometown their entitlement meter goes berserk.
1
Quit scowling and go talk to that blonde girl.
1
Why is there an arrow pointing at the Asian dude?
2
and now we can stalk you at your store. Do you sell anything worth stalking over?
2
Bring money.
2
You.look.like.somewhat.fatter.young.brother.of.Fedor.Emelianenko.:D
2
That Asian guy's going to log onto the Internet and find a picture with a giant red arrow pointing toward his head.
2
Thank you for that picture. I made some important notes.
0
Clone stamp would have worked better. But yeah, that nails it. I pretty much want to procreate with everything that walks around here.
2
Even the drunken transients?
2
Is there a high frequency of gorgeous blonds walking down the street, gorgeous being the girl in your photo?
0
Yes. Sometimes much much more gorgeous.
1
get the guards name :)
9
[deleted]
6
I was going to say this... when internet justice is truly needed, no one raises the anchor. I fear this case guy will be scott free, unlike those bullies who simply calling the dean and showing the vid to will likely fuck their college careers, this guy really needs to be given a little thanks for his job protecting the world from deaf people.
1
fucking cowboys.
5
What did you do? Watching? Happy?
1
Something tells me, something will now be done about it. I'm pretty sure this video is going viral. I'm pretty sure a lawsuit is about to anally rape someone. (unless it is 'settled' under the table to avoid publicity)
1
Well they kinda are now... (in the fucking movies)
1
You should testify.
1
[deleted]
1
What a great moment to steal stuff from that store.
140
I want to fly to California to steal stuff from there out of spite. Of course, I would take the little beepy makers off before I walked out... or likely just toss the clothes in their trash cans, as I am not a fan of that store as it is.
3
Actually you can buy sheets of the sticky sensormatic tags on the net. Id be leaving them all over the floor, sticky side up so they'd adhere to the bottoms of everybody's shoes. See how much fun they have tackling, detaining and stopping everybody.
EDIT: HOLY SHIT There's a Forever 21 in my area. BRB
11
After this incident there is no way that store or the mall will allow security guards to even think about touching a shopper. Grab a whole racks worth of clothes and dump it in the bin right outside.
Although, you probably will be caught on camera and will be prosecuted.
4
Unless it is a violent crime or a serious robbery, surveillance camera footage is usually ignored. I worked at Best Buy when I was 19ish and we had a guy walk around the store and put item after item into one of the shopping bags provided at the front of the store (which no one ever uses, so it was automatically suspicious). Once he decided he had enough stuff, he took off for the emergency exit on the side of the building and jumped into his buddies car who had been waiting with the engine running. I was an installer in the car audio department, and was sitting outside the rollup doors taking a break when I heard the commotion on the side. A few employees ran after the car trying to get a plate #, but no one was able to. I asked my boss what was going to be done, and he basically said nothing. If they had a plate number that would be one thing, but he said it was very unlikely that they would use the tapes to prosecute.
4
Looks like I'm going on a stealing spree at Best Buy this weekend. Thanks!
8
How long ago was this? Anymore it seems like their security cameras are good enough they could tell the brand of watch the guy is wearing, should be easy to identify him. Not sure if they have cameras outside at the local store or not though.
1
If those are anything like the Forever21s in Chicago, they sell cheaply made, generic clothing. I can't imagine how someone would steal anything of value.
1
im a security guard and I can tell you that there must be room for compassion in this business. those men didn't present any danger. in fact, he was tapping out. BSIS would fine and revoke both these guards Guard Card for how they treated those customers. This is an affront to the business. They will be sued and they will lose. No matter what you say, bottom line is once he could hear that the guy was deaf, he shouldve stopped restraining him. These guys will face the ramifications.
139
It's wrong regardless of whether he's deaf.
63
youre missing the point. its not wrong to detain someone under suspicion. its wrong to do it to a deaf person who cannot defend himself. had that man been able to comunicate, that wouldnt've happened the way it did.
-6
No - you're missing the point. He attacked him, and choked him out. Security guards do not have that right - talk about unnecessary force! Makes it more sickening that he's deaf, but wrong even if he'd have been hearing.
9
[deleted]
3
Yes. this is very very very true.
2
yes you do. again it depends on the company. trust me, ive been at places where you can detain (target, Fry's) and then places you cannot.
0
Deaf people are just as able to defend themselves, they're not physically disabled.
We can only judge from what we can see and from what we can see this is completely over the top, but if the deaf guy started the violence (I have seen many regular people flip out for no reason at all) when the guard stopped him then it is his own fault. It may have been an over reaction but violence begets violence.
2
As a guard you have no authority to detain anyone. The guard broke the law the minute he touched him. Whether he is deaf or not is irrelevant. And no one is under any obligation to stop when leaving a store when an alarm sounds. There is no law stating that you must co-operate with store security.
I know a lot of people in the retail industry, and they all have standing orders to never touch anyone suspected of shoplifting. All you can do is call the cops and hopefully the cops get there before they leave the store. Businesses would rather lose the merchandise then face a lawsuit.
2
I wont continue to waste my time here. but in conclusion. no one is oblgated by the law to stop. and if they dont, depending on the agency and state (here it is CA, I am also licensed in this state) you are well within the bounds of the law to physically detain a suspect against their wishes until the police arrive. ive one this numerous times. you know people in "retail". I AM a security guard in CA. you CAN stop them. go to Target and try to steal something. when the guards detain you, try and file a lawsuit and throw all your money away on a lawyer. your choice. regardless, im done here.
0
its not wrong to detain someone under suspicion. its wrong to do it to a deaf person who cannot defend himself.
Incorrect. If a person can be detained who is under suspicion, then a deaf person who is under suspicion can be detained. The issue is NOT whether or not these two individuals can be detained. It is the fact that they were violent. This would be equally bad if they were hearing, although I think if a hearing person started shouting that they had a receipt the guards would have stopped. They obviously don't know sign and didn't bother to get someone who does. Fuckers.
1
I know where you're coming from, but the fact is, there isn't a different law for deaf people - what the security guard did was wrong - basta.
1
Upvoting this in the hopes that you are right
10
I assure you, I'm right. at least about the lawsuit and them being fined and having their Guard Cards yanked. BSIS doesn't mess around with these types of incidents. I want people to know that not all guards are lazy and stupid and not all are overzealous assholes like these guys. Some of us are genuinely interested in public safety.
21
Guard Cards are a real thing?
7
in the state of California at least. theyre a precautionary. The FBI runs a background check and you have to be trained in certain things (like CPR, Defib etc...) Its a federally issued license. and uneccesary force is a big deal to BSIS (Bureau of Security and Investigative Services) and theyll take your guard card away with a quickness.
16
Well, good to hear. Have another upvote, lol.
1
I was reading to post this, lol. Someone did not pay attention in their powers of arrest class, the "reasonable force" part. Instead of playing UFC, why not just cuff them? This is why I don't like LP people not having both handcuffs and defensive tactics training.
2
agreed. its as easy as cuffing them and then sitting them on thier ass. which these guards didnt do.
1
[deleted]
2
that is even considering that this guy is even BSIS licensed.
1
im pretty sure he is. that's a large corporation and they're uniformed and undercover. There's a great chance they're licensed. a corporation like that wouldnt risk unlicensed guards.
1
I don't think it will make any difference in this case, especially when the two deaf guys sue the security company out of existence.
1
yes, it will make a difference. had those two men been able to hear and heard the alarm and kept walking, they wouldve been stopped (and depending on the level of resistance) the situation wouldve been explained and dealt with (person at register didnt scan my item, for instance) or had they resisted it wouldve gone own this way. Don't get confused. im not defending these guards in the slightest.
2
BSIS would fine and revoke both these guards Guard Card for how they treated those customers.
I need to learn to quote. I was responding to this particular comment. After this, they'll get their cards revoked and they won't be able to get jobs as bouncers for Scores, I would assume. I certainly wouldn't hire someone who got their previous employer sued out of business.
1
indeed
1
So people should be lodging complaints via the contact details on the BSIS website then?
1
yes. and if we find these guys names we cantrack to see if theyve had their cards revoked.
1
In your opinion, do you think they will do any time if convicted in civil or criminal court?
1
no, they wont. and that unfotrunate. but they wont even be able to get a job guarding a marshmallow
1
Consequences will never be the same!?
1
hahahahahahaha
1
take note: if you ever need to get a black guy's attention because he is choke holding your deaf brother, just call him a nigger. I'm sure he'll stop whatever he's doing to go deal with you instead. there's not many times where I would advocate calling someone a nigger, but this would probably be one of the best cases to do so.
112
you can downvote this all you want, but you guys do know that calling that guard a nigger would have been the best way to get his attention off of choking
47
you can downvote this all you want, but you guys do know that calling that guard a nigger would have been the best way to get his attention off of choking the deaf guy and got him to start choking you
FTFY
51
who cares? at least at that point he would stop choking the deaf guy.
12
As bad as it may sound, better him than me?
Er, that didn't come out right.
4
Whatever works, I guess.
1
Well at that point, I could defend myself, right? Intervening to physically stop the guy may have been legally tricky, but defending myself if he assaulted me would be pretty straightforward legally.
1
Sure. Is that really your best solution, though?
2
well, you think of a better one. here's what you have to work with. he's a black security guard in california for a mall store. work with it and tell me your solution.
5
Or pull out some churches chicken.
2
Reminds me of Chris Rock's shtick about the one time it's OK to call a black guy a nigger...
1
Possible outcomes for calling a security guard choking your boy out a nigger:
1: Guard lets go, calls in cronies, chokes your ass.
2: Guard does not let go, calls in cronies, pops that pimple your buddy calls a head right off, then proceeds to beat the fuck out of you.
I'm not convinced that this is the best route.
1
Murdering his parents with a wrench would have worked too... Just sayin'.
1
That was the first thing that popped into my head as well. Racial slurs directly spoken in a condescending tone have a way of getting attention that is unrivaled. They also tend to get your ass beat into oblivion. In a situation like this, you'd want to get the whole crowd of onlookers to chant it with you. Given the ridiculous abuse being carried out here they may have even gone for it.
1
You could only work it into your comment 4 times?
Hey racist douche, you aren't trying very hard.
0
you try and think of a way to get a black guy's attention faster
4
No it would have redirected his choking onto someone else. That someone else would have commited a verbal assault and possibly a hate crime.
-1
calling someone a nigger isn't a crime thankfully
9
Especially when they're acting like one.
3
Screaming it at a mall cop surely will land you in some kind of trouble, though. Disturbing the peace or some kind of mischief charge.
2
just make it passive aggressive like "I sure hope there aren't any niggers strangling my friend"
7
I distract them with Fried Chicken, Water mellon and fatass bleached blond white girls in Tweety Bird shirts.
"YO NIGGA, YOU WANTS SOME FRIIIIED CHICKENS N WHITE WOMEN?!?! DEN QUIT BEATIN DAT DEAF ASS AN LETS GET SOM"
28
[deleted]
6
reddit is not 4chan
1
Shut up faggot
4
obvious asscobra is obvious
0
... torn between labeling you some negative thing while at the same time applauding you for the truth.
1
There is never anything wrong with telling the truth even if it makes people uncomfortable or isnt politically correct.
Besides, who doesnt like fried chicken, water mellon and white women?
1
bleached blond white girls
0
Bitch too skinny.
1
Also another tip, if two guys are fighting and they are on the ground you just call them gay. It really stops them from wanting to continue "touching".
2
Excellent point.
1
take note: if you ever need to get a black guy's attention because he is choke holding your deaf brother, just call him a nigger. I'm sure he'll stop whatever he's doing to go deal with you instead.
Or he'll ignore you, because its not like its the first time he's been called that before in tense situations - and take out what anger that does generate out on the guy he's choking.
Try this: Yell "fire", or "Thank god, here come the cops". Heck, even kicking him in the head is a better response than being a passive-aggressive bigot.
2
even kicking him in the head
you will go to jail for doing this
2
Someone could have tossed him a basketball, bucket of fried chicken, or a white woman to get him to disengage. It would be a lot safer.
1
I believe you have finally found the appropriate use for "Race Baiting".
1
upboat for great justice.
1
Pro tip: If you ever need to get anyone's attention because he is choke holding your deaf brother, run at him and field punt him right in the face.
You may destroy one face but you can save the other by not resorting to shouting something racial which is liable to get the crowd ready to kick your ass as well.
1
run at him and field punt him right in the face.
enjoy jail
shouting something racial which is liable to get the crowd ready to kick your ass as well.
they can enjoy jail as well then, attacking someone because they said nigger is likely to land you there
2
Aggravated assault at most. And given the circumstances, I doubt it.
1
I also don't understand why you honestly think that if you kick a guard in the face, the other guards won't beat the shit out of you too.
your plan sucks, mine is still better.
1
What store or security company allows it's staff to assault people outside the store like this?
Nevermind the question WTF could he have stolen that would be worth tackling him like that, but once you are outside the store on public property, that secuirty guard is just another guy who can ask and try to convince you to return to the store, but attack someone? That's assault.
Not cool...
And when the guy on the ground is clearly giving up and tapping and could be subdued (if that were even appropraite) by simply holding him down, he keeps chocking him... someones got too big of aspirations of being on UFC...
Fuckin pathetic.
103
Even if the security guard was a cop, the behavior was completely unacceptable. Have you ever seen a cop choke someone like that? I've watched dozens of police videos and I've NEVER seen a cop choke someone. This security guard should be in jail.
15
I've seen ONE cop choke a person while on my way home from school. Small cop against some big guy (about 6' 4" at least) and easily 230+ pounds of what seemed like an athlete's body. He was breaking windows at a coffee shop when the cop tried to mace him. The mace didn't work, so the cop just jumped on his back and choked him until he tapped out, then forced him onto his stomach and cuffed him.
It was fucking awesome.
16
Alright, I get what you are saying... in a situation like that obviously a cop is going to use any tactic he can to come out on top of the altercation (and rightfully so). I was mainly just saying that no cop would use a tactic like that as a way to take down a criminal unless it was necessary for the safety of the officer and the people around.
and by the way... that does sound pretty fucking awesome.
10
WTF could he have stolen that would be worth tackling him like that
This was my only thought the entire time I watched that video. What product in that entire shopping center is valuable enough that you need to choke the life out of someone just because you suspect they might've taken it?
3
Yeah- Forever XXI sells a bunch of cheaply made, pretty much wear-once clothes to stupid girls at prob 500%+ markup. They could let a truckload get shoplifted every day and still turn a massive profit. The bad publicity is easily a far more significant loss for the company. These guards were just idiots whom either Forever XXI, the shopping center, or the private security company they worked for failed to train properly.
2
Its actually battery but you're right on besides that.
2
I'll bet it's not the their policy to handle shop lifters this way. That being said, they should still be liable.
1
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
0
Very possible that the deaf guy started the violence.
Even so I think it was pretty clear he was submissive a long way before the end of the skrimish and excessive force was all over the place.
2
[deleted]
1
Holding your breath to turn that purple seems difficult and unlikely... the position, size and apparent strength of the security guy make it very plausible that he was really choking him out. I suppose we can wait for official statements, however (and yes I am pulling the likely card) it seems unreasonable to believe it was anything but being choked out.
Also the resistance put up is natural if you are being choked out. It's fighting your very basic instincts to submit calmly in a situation where your air and blood are being restricted. You can see that while the deaf guy does put up some directed resistance, it's all the kind that is designed to keep his attacker at bay, he doesn't really strike or kick violently but rather uses his limbs to keep space. Also near the end you see him being restrained simply by virtue of the security guard on top of him.
It's a difficult line when restraining people, you have to do it in such a way that you assert dominance and force submission, however if you do something that is inreasonable to submit while doing, then you void the whole point. For isntance a joint lock submission request basically imobilizes the person and they will likely submit rather than have a joint ripped out of socket. However choking someone out is a bad restraint method because it violates your survival instincts to submit during this process (and if you tap out as the deaf guy did and the submission doesn't end, it puts your fight or flight in high gear because then you don't even have hope of submitting anymore, you must now simply escape and protect yourself). It's like trying to beat a child until they stop crying... it's counterproductive.
Lastly yes people are jumping to conclusions, perhaps the deaf guy was violent originally, maybe this is part of a ring of deaf criminals that knock over stores all the time, but that's the reason courts work on reasonable doubt, there is ALWAYS reasonable doubt, even after the evidence is in, there is missing information, miss remembered and just plain lies to deal with.
I don't see how any reasonable evidence could change my stance that was unecessary force to restrain the individual. Ultimately it was pretty clear that a lot less could have been done and still imobilized him assuming he is not armed (which I think he is not due to the follow up with the cops and no weapon being revealed).
1
[deleted]
-5
Reasonable force. He shot a mosquito with a nuclear bomb.
15
I agree.
0
That is only partially correct (at least in my state and I believe the vast majority of them). Suspicion of shoplifting is enough to detain someone, however even that exists only on store property.
6
It may be legal to detain them in your state, but I bet that it's also legal to act in self defense. I'd take that chance and see who's law trumps the other's.
2
[deleted]
1
Inside the mall is private property and those are probably mall guards.
-1
They're not in a mall. They're on the sidewalk along fucking Hollywood Boulevard.
5
Most store security people have a room temperature I.Q., and are literally incapable of thinking outside the "box" of their training. Then, when things go sideways, the more determined they become to dig in and continue their trained response.
These situations aren't a Deaf Thing, a Racial Thing, an Authority Thing, or even a Lack of Training Thing... They are a lack of intelligence thing.
94
it's absolutely a lack of intelligence thing. instead of blind sticking to training, though, it feels more like a bored wannabe tough guy's "oh shit i get to see some action" response, akin to hammering a nail with a sledgehammer
51
True. I've never heard of a retail security person who didn't want to be a cop. Many are enrolled in law enforcement classes and/or serve as police reservists to increase their chances of getting into the majors, too. The point? The sado/control/gotta-be-boss/adrenaline urge that's the hallmark of the police personality is definitely there in the majority of cases. Almost certainly when the security people in question are male 20/30 somethings.
23
I can understand that way of thinking and i do believe there's a huge amount of private security guards believing their some kind of law enforcement officer. Please do remember though that there are a many of us who take our jobs as shop investigators and private security very seriously, professionaly and with a great sense of pride in what we do. I am only 23 and work as a SI and have never wanted to be a police officer. I enjoy my work immensely and i see my self as "setting 'em up" so the police can "knock 'em down". Bad pun i know but it's easily understood.
19
I got caught shoplifting with a friend when I was 15. Both of the security guards were very polite actually, and one of them even complimented my sneakiness.
5
Shut the fuck up, Paul Blart, we all know that it's you.
2
aw you just like to look down the shirts of the cashier girls.
1
I like how I think you have big ears now.
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate on security guards, I think they (you) serve a much needing purpose. I just picture you as having big ears now.
1
That's funny because I had a buddy who was a Scout Sniper in the Marine Corps, and also a security guard at Target. Basically the opposite. I doubt he'd be willing to get into any type of physical altercation while wearing a plastic badge at Target.
3
Sounds like your buddy doesn't need to grandstand to prove himself, and knows how to think on top of it.
Such people are not the sort commonly encountered in retail (theft loss) security, however.
5
I hope you don't have kids. I just read the first half dozen comments on your userpage and it is full of declarative statements that you are presenting as fact, when in fact you are just talking out your ass. Don't pass this attitude on, please.
2
Hmmm... let's test the validity of your concern. I do in fact have a kid, and he's a grad student at Harvard. In physics. lol
1
If only they were sticking to their training. I can pretty much guarantee that nowhere in their training did it say to take down and choke anyone who sets off the alarm and doesn't stop.
1
I like your broad generalization of security people having low IQs. Maybe they should be more like you and make generalizations about people. That way, when they alarm went off, they would have immediately assumed this guy was stealing and... oh wait nevermind
30
I don't think you doubt it for a minute... you just couldn't resist the opportunity to make a witty, contrary response.
8
stop thinking outside the "box"!
3
You are clearly a sadist and want to hurt people just like these security guards. I can tell because most users named jk1150 are like that.
3
You think the security guy was TRAINED to act illegally? This lawsuit just got much better.
4
In the sense that "control the situation" is always taught as the top priority when dealing with the public. The problem here is that the concept of "control" was taken (much!) too literally.
1
If you read this comment from outside the US, their IQ is even lower. Interesting.
3
hmph... I learn something new about myself everyday.........
2
Room temperature on a Celsius scale, apparently.
2
Who the fuck would train a mall cop to choke someone out?
1
He thinks it is necessary to maintain control of the situation. That's the training, not the choke hold itself.
1
Who upvotes stupid blanket generalizations like this? How about, most of snorgsniffer's posts are made by a guy with performance anxiety. Most of the time snorgsniffer is sniffing his underwear while posting comments.
1
[deleted]
1
The only way to fix that is to make the stores suffer financially every time lack of intelligence becomes a factor. e.g. situations like this.
1
Except giving the stores incentive to hire smart(er) security people wouldn't increase the supply. They'd still have to hire from what was available, and average-and-above people tend not to be interested in that sort of work. Think TSA. The literal minded idiocy of that bunch is something even the goverment is embarrassed by, but they can't do anything about it. No one with a brain wants anything to do with them.
1
How fucking snoody. There are dumb people who are nice and cautious too.
1
Just think only 2 IQ more and they can be TSA at our airports.
1
I was a security guard, but where I was, this was the only "room" we had. http://i.imgur.com/FAn0r.jpg
0
So making huge, sweeping generalizations is now what we call thinking outside the box?
0
Rubbish. This has nothing to do with intelligence. These are not situations where anyone has deep thought, its all instinct. and the instinct is tough guy power trip.
0
[deleted]
-1
This is sickening. How much money does the lawyer need? I'll donate!
91
Are you kidding? He's gonna have lawyers lining up to take his case, no money up front. It's a guaranteed settlement.
199
Yeah, I'm sure deaf/handicap advocacy groups are just waiting for something like this
85
How did they hear about it?
Sorry.
335
In some places, they'll take your leg for a comment like that.
61
I do not approve, but i still loled. Have an upboat.
18
I hope they also pursue criminal charges as well for assault, unlawful detainment and kidnapping, at the very least.
2
I know where you're coming from but never donate money to a lawyer.
8
For a guaranteed case like this? No lawyer will ask for money upfront. You talk percentages with a clear cut case. The lawyer will try for the maximum amount he can, so that he can maximize his cut.
3
My blood is absolutely boiling. I don't think a video on the internet has ever made me this angry.
I was SCREAMING at my monitor and my wife was like, "Babe, wtf?"
I am absolutely infuriated at the fact that not a single person pulled that fucking jack ass off the guy. I am ABSOLUTELY PISSED.
Am I the only one who wanted to jump into the screen and kick the guard in the fucking teeth?
There is no combination of words in any language that could possibly begin to describe how pissed I am about this.
And I'm sorry, but fuck the no training BS. Training or not, a decent human being would KNOW that this is not what you do. I want to cave that motherfuckers teeth in with my shoe.
WEQt$%^y@#$%@#$%#@#$tg erafw$r^taer bgSRE
90
OSUW#^&@#(&&#@@##@@fyyiw7 sgwiq?
10
Agreed. My brother is deaf, and this kind of thing makes me want to go to town on those fucking assholes.
3
I don't think a video on the internet has ever made me this angry.
I have something in a 'Dog getting punted off of cliff by soldier' that might interest you.
2
nope, the only other video that's infuriated me more was the nanny abusing the toddler. I'm gonna ignore my buddhist training for a sec and say that they should put those security guards in a locked room with that woman, pipe in some crying baby music, and tell them she stole a syringe full of steroids and is concealing it somewhere on her person.
2
Yep. Also, it was completely clear that the guys were deaf. Why is it that NO ONE around the scene attempted to explain that to the guards? Probably wouldn't have done any good. Maybe they already realized that and didn't care. But it seems like a level-headed person may have been able to intervene, at least with the guard that was standing.
1
Ditto man. I am right there with you.
1
What were you screaming?
Also, why isn't someone like you ever at the scene among thousands of people when this shit happens?
1
[deleted]
-7
I'm not saying I'd blindly rush in and attack. Of course I'd evaluate the situation.
Either way, an alarm is going off and a guy is being choked purple by a security guard who has no right to do so.
Sorry, but the whole situation is quite clear.
I'll go try and grow up now. :rollseyes:
8
[deleted]
-2
"Sorry, but you're a fucking moron if you really believe that."
Do you have the number of someone I can call who can give me those growing up lessons?
PS: Don't give me YOUR number.
5
Sorry, but you're a fucking moron if you really believe that.
easy with the namecalling, asshole. :)
4
If i see a rent-a-cop choking ANYONE, it doesn't matter what they may be, then I intervene. At worst, the guy being choked is a serial killer who tried to take out the big guy. Since when does that give the big guy the right to severely threaten anyone's life? Since when does any possible scenario allow someone to choke someone out in public?
This is what we call a slippery slope. The guy being choked out is innocent until proven guilty. He is in serious danger of being killed and we're letting wild possibilities get in the way of trying to prevent a death?
1
And what would you have accomplished by kicking the guard in the teeth? This is the reason why police officers, EMTs, etc exist. Don't take the law into your own hands; don't try saving someone by doing what you saw on TV; don't run into a burning building.. unless its your last option. Stay off the meth, pal.
-19
I would have removed the power hungry borderline retard from the neck of the innocent DEAF MAN.
Meth? What I saw on TV?
Give me a break, dude. Police may exist for a reason, but the legal system is full of holes and can often be total horseshit. I'll gladly suffer the consequences.
The simple FACT is that the guy had no right to be doing what he did. NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER.
I personally believe any human, though, has every right to protect another human if they are being treated unjustly.
So yeah, I'd kick his fucking teeth in and save the, AGAIN, innocent deaf guy from being CHOKED.
Don't like it? Fuck off.
18
Also, in that situation it looks like he could have died.
8
Dude, he absolutely could have.
But hey, jonknet is right. We should have just let the guy remain CHOKED until the local authorities arrived.
Sorry, but every human has a right, nah, an OBLIGATION to help another innocent human being whose life is in danger, and his was. Period.
Grow a set of balls and quit making excuses for being a pussy.
LOL LETS CALL THE COPS. COPS ALWAYS DO THE RIGHT THING LOL.
Moron.
14
You knew he was innocent before you saw the fight.
Wouldn't you feel pretty shitty if you broke up a fight you just randomly walked into, and the guy winning was the good guy? Now you're stuck in a pickle: you can hope the bad guy runs away, or they might both come at you. Or the bad guy knocks you flat and kills the good guy. The good guy will probably kick your ass regardless of all outcomes. It helps to think what course of action you would take in these simple scenarios that could pop up in your life BEFORE you actually encounter one.
My point is, maybe we should think about our actions before we do them.
1
Youre one of those people we always hear about who just walks right by a woman who is being raped in a public area because youre a fucking coward.
5
No. No I wouldn't, and no I'm not. So, fuck you as well.
It would suck if I accidentally broke up an orgy though, mistaking it for a gangrape. Man, wouldn't want to be on that end of the stick.
0
Well that's what the police are for, right? Why would you stop and help her?
You see... This is the problem with your argument.
1
If I were to witness anyone doing this to another person I would immediately intervene. It doesn't matter if it's a person of "authority" or not.
4
Ok, Internet Tough Guy.
If this were Obama vs Bush, or Your friend vs an Enemy, or Anybody vs Bush... come on. You'd let it go on. Admit it. You should leave some room in your Reddit creeds for exceptions like these, otherwise life will be difficult.
0
I'll comment as i did on youtube:
I work as a shop investigator in Norway and this makes me ashamed of my profession when i see a "colleague" handle a suspected shoplifter like this. Violence and physical duress should be the very last option in any shop lifting situation. Communication is the key to being a shop investigator. I am baffled, shocked and saddened by what this video depicts. Using chokeholds on a non-aggressive person is beyond fucked up. i have no words...i am shocked. On behalf of SI's everywhere i apologize.
I do not know the law's in the states but in Norway where i work any citizen have the right to stop another citizen if they are seen doing something illegal i.e shoplifting - thats the basis for being a SI in Norway. That said - using violence is always the very last thing to do. In 99% of the times i stop someone for shoplifting, be it a 80 year old woman or a 25 year old bodybuilder there's no physical alteration. Communication, communication, communication!!. Speak - listen - understand do all of these things before reacting. I dont know how much training that alleged SI had but he's either a complete rookie or not an SI at all. If he is an SI its just pathetic and sad. I can feel my anger swelling when im looking how that customer is treated.
We have 2 laws/rules that we have to be very careful with if there should be a situation where it is nescessary with violence. I'll try to explain them in english as best i can (excuse my english if it's lacking).
-
Formåls paragrafen / Means to and end: If for example someone tries to run from me and i know they have stolen i have the right to stop them and hold them until the proper authorities can come (police). I do not on the other hand have the right to stop the person then jump on his head or in this case use a choke hold.
-
Proposjonalitets paragrafen / Im not sure what to translate it, but i hope explaining what it means will get the idea across.
If a person i have stopped for shoplifting hits me, i am by norwegian law allowed to hit him back. I am not allowed to pick up a chair and crush his head with hit. If the person in the video (EXAMPLE) would have smacked the guard - i would NOT be allowed to use a chokehold on him, i would though be allowed to physicly restrain him from further causing me harm - but in a manner in proportion with that of which he has done to me.
84
You commented on YouTube? Gross.
52
Seriously. I hope he gets tested.
1
What? Come on.. you're telling me you never trolled those Justin Bieber videos? It's mighty fun to do on a slow day.
1
Hey, let the man have his naive hope.
1
In the US most states allow a citizens arrest if the citizen witnesses a felony. That's it.
And during a citizens arrest, the citizen does not get the same protection police officers do, that means if they violate someones rights, they are prosecutable in criminal and civil court.
That is why you don't get to tackle someone and assault them... you aren't a cop or deputized and so you are not given the right to do that.
In the US store security can detain you for suspected shoplifting within the store until polic arrive, how far that goes I am not exactly sure but I think it stops short of physical assault.
Once outside the store on public ground, the store employee is just another citizen and so can ask you to come back in and resolve the issue and/or take down information to provide to the police if you flee the scene.
They are not allowed to touch you.
You can literally blatently steal something and if you get outside the doors, stand right on the sidewalk and open said thing in front of security and all they can do is ask you to come back in the store. They cannot assault you in any way.
That said it's obviously stupid to do so as they have you on video and can follow you to your car to get your plates.
Anyhow, that's how things work in most of the US... sorry SHOULD work.
7
In Norway i work on behalf of the owner of the shop and we are allowed to stop you wherever we want if we are 150% sure that you have stolen something. I have driven after people for 2 miles that i knew had stolen but had ran from me and stopped them at the next shop they were going to steal at. But we have to be 150% sure - if there's a slightest chance you did not steal i will not stop you. it's better to let one shop lifter go once in a while then stop 40 people who did not steal because of a hunch or something you "might" have seen. People first, property later.
11
[deleted]
1
Also, what are the Norwegian units for certainty? Or for that matter, percentages?
3
2 miles would be 20 kilometres, or ~12.4 US miles.
2
1KM = 1.6 miles.
2
In the US most states allow a citizens arrest if the citizen witnesses a felony. That's it.
Once outside the store on public ground, the store employee is just another citizen and so can ask you to come back in and resolve the issue and/or take down information to provide to the police if you flee the scene.
They are not allowed to touch you.
In many jurisdictions of the United States, the courts recognize a common law shopkeeper's privilege, under which a shopkeeper is allowed to detain a suspected shoplifter on store property for a reasonable period of time, so long as he has cause to believe that the person detained in fact committed, or attempted to commit, theft of store property.
If they have probable cause or reasonable suspicion (depends on local laws) they can use reasonable force to detain you at the store or in the immediate vicinity thereof.
4
As someone who has allegedly shoplifted and been asked to step back in the store. I can attest this is true.
2
Did you go back in? Allegedly?
1
I said "no" and walked away with the huge bulge under my shirt. allegedly.
2
When I worked security in California, the law was basically we could make citizen's arrests, just like everyone else. To do so, you either had to have reasonable suspicion of someone committing a felony (like a guy with blood all over his shirt holding a knife) or have someone testify right there or personally see a misdemeanor. Then if you do the steps to make a citizens arrest and the cops have to take the person into custody. If you detain them, it automatically becomes an arrest.
2
I'm gonna guess that word Proposjonalitets would be proportional?
2
[deleted]
2
thank you :)
1
Do you remember the incident in Trondheim a couple of years ago, where police officers choked a black man to death within the police headquarters? Living in Trondheim, I remember there being lots of news coverage of it. Were the police officers prosecuted?
1
Also living in Trondheim, it was at NAV (Social services office). The police officers, to my knowledge, has only been investigated by internal affairs and are still employed by the police.
1
The Eugene Ejike Obiora case, yes i remember that. The police officers were aquitted in court because the chief prosecutor came to the conclusion albeit their force had been to much - they had not received the proper education in that kind of a hold that they used on Eugene Ejike Obiora.
1
upvote for longest comment.
1
I think there's as vast a difference between the Norwegian social safety net and the American one, as there is between a Norwegian "shop investigator" and an American "security guard".
1
Do elaborate :-)
0
Except communication-communication-communication will NOT work on a deaf guy... Until he sees you. At which point you're probably choking him...
1
Why would it not work?. Use hand signals?. Write on a piece of paper?. Gently tap him on the arm and make him understand that he has to stay and show a receipt. Communication is not just yelling or talking. Be creative.
1
That second one sounds like it could be translated as 'proportional response' or something similar?
1
Thank you thats the word i was looking for :-).
1
How'd you manage to fit all that into 500 characters or less?
1
You are forgetting one key point: this is happening in the US. This type of "shoot first, ask questions later" sort of behavior is now common place at all levels of authority. Look at how tazers have been common place now. It is practically accepted that if you piss off a cop that you're going to get tazed.
1
I've never seen a shoplifter set off an alarm; they usually remove the tags inside the store and therefore are arrested because of that, not because of the alarm. I have however set off the alarm countless times, either because the salesclerk forgot to remove / deactivate the tag, or, in one occasion, because I forgot to go to the cash register to pay (I have ADD).
So statistically, not assuming anything about what we're seeing here except that the guy is deaf (obvious enough by the sounds he makes), there's 99% chance he wasn't shoplifting. He just set off the alarm and evidently didn't hear it.
1
I've stopped hundreds of people shoplifting who didnt understand how to remove the alarms and set them off.
1
And how many tens of thousands of false positives have you had?
1
I can count on one hand the times i've stopped people and they had done nothing. I don't stop people on a whim. It's better to let a few shoplifters go then stop 100 people who had done nothing and humiliate them in public. But that's how my company works. Other's might not be like us.
1
In the UK, it's normally abbreviated with 'PLAN' - Any use of force against another human being is ok, as long as it is proportional, legal, accountable, and necessary. That goes for civilians (when doing a civilian arrest, or, indeed, in any other situation which necessitates assaulting another human (and yes, any touching is technically an assault) ) and police alike.
1
This is painful to watch.
More like infuriating.
Distressing! I'm squirming and wanting to intervene. How can they be so FUCKING stupid!!
[deleted]
[deleted]
yeah, I couldn't see the other side but it looked liked he was trying an anaconda but didn't have the right angle and grip. Worst pass of a guard I've ever seen and his base on the mount was weak. I know every fighter out there is wishing it was them this dude tried to fuck with.
Mostly the power trip. The security at our store is thoroughly trained but the adrenaline gets going and they do dumb things that they know full well they aren't supposed to do.
Not untrained, just stupid.
I was a security guard at 17. I didn't get any training whatsoever. I could still tell a dude is deaf. I dealt with a few disabled and mentally challenged people, never needed to fight them or even touch them.
"Can I see your receipt?"
-Signals to ears
"Are you deaf?"
-Nods yes.
Then I'd just show them a receipt I kept and point to it. I'd use that to deal with people who didn't speak English or French (I'm French Canadian).
I have a friend who works security, on his way to becoming a cop. He LOVES when some one gives him an excuse to beat them up. Same kind of guy that tells you what the fighters are doing wrong in the MMA paperviews. He will make a great cop.
Yeah, not one fucking person stepped in to help. They all gather around to watch like a bunch of slack-jawed yokels.
One (or more) people were yelling something along the lines of, "Hey, stop that!" and "He's turning purple!" and other such comments.
It's tough, though, what do you do? Attack the security guard? I imagine most people stood around in disbelief, someone (or two) probably called the cops, and a handful tried to convene by yelling.
it's definitely a psychological thing. it's very easy to pass the buck when there are a bunch of people around. i think it's called the bystander effect.
They did help. It would have been nice if they stepped in but they taped it which is the reason we are all up in arms about this now.
If you step in to 'help' in a situation like this, the first thing a cop responding will see is 2-3 guys beating down a security guard.
At first, people didn't know what the hell was happening - for all they knew, this guy was a legitimate threat. As it progresses, though, you do see more people gathering and trying to intercede via the other security guards.
I always wonder why there never seems to be any of these Reddit vigilantes in the crowd, the ones who say "If I were there I woulda kicked some ass!" No, you wouldn't. You would be confused and unwilling to put yourself at risk for a complete stranger who, while in distress, was not about to die.
I'm sure a lot of them were worried about getting into trouble with the law if the interfered.
Because of the shit head like our friend up above who say they would send you to prison if they were on the jury because violence is never the answer, let a court sort it out after you have ended the guys life because he broke his neck trying to get air into his lungs from your choke.
[deleted]
I think I want to start carrying pepper spray. These punks/'security guards' needed to be sprayed because THEY were the problem.
I don't want to physically hurt them. Pepper spray would have resolved this rather quickly.
No it wouldn't have, and don't pepper spray a security guard you keyboard warrior.
Most problems like this can be solved by a couple cans of pepper spray and a baseball bat.
might want to check the common law definitions of assault and battery
The problem with pepper spray is that it would get everyone in this situation. If I was the guy being choked I don't think I would choose to use pepper spray in this particular position.
This is what happens when you don't go to school.
The deaf guy probably went to school.
What I don't understand is why there is row after row of people doing jack shit.
Because of people like this and this who are idealists, not realists and would gladly send you to prison for doing the right thing.
Because they have no clue how close a line we walk between life and death (1/8" of skin separates your jugular from the outside world, less than 20 lbs of pressure can snap your spine) and "violence is always wrong."
classic bystander effect, also known as Genovese syndrome
A few were saying stuff, some were taping it and I'm sure a few people called the police. If anyone tried to step in and physically separate the guard from the guy, you can bet his buddies would have thrown that person down too and they'd be arrested. Unless you have a group of people large enough to hold all the guards back, you're just going to get thrown down too and probably arrested.
Classic example of the bystander effect.
Search for "bystander effect" on YouTube. There are a lot of good videos demonstrating this phenomenon.
Sickening
No kidding. I imagine if I was there that jerk woulda caught a flying knee to the head as he kept submitting that dude after he tapped. Cause I don't give a fuck like that.
/once punched a guy in a fast food joint for blowing spitwads at people
Sadly, intervening when the person doing the act is security is not a good idea. You can get arrested, expulsed, barred access in the future. People I know dont care much about getting involved, but dont want the law on their ass for it.
Seriously! All he wanted to see was a receipt and that retards throat is trying to eat that poor mans hands!
Yeah, after watching this I'm pretty pissed. Not entirely sure at who, though. Just pretty damn angry at something.
I am angry at the guy who didn't let his friend speak to him, and at the guy doing the choking. I don't think I could resist kicking a swift kick to either of them.
I'm bawling. I guess my anger comes out via tears. Just seeing them completely helpless to what's going on and unable to communicate... bah. :(
Someone already posted the link on Forever21's Facebook page.
[deleted]
Bystander Effect
[deleted]
Both infuriating and painful. Made me sick in my stomach...
[deleted]
Seriously, is whatever he was suspected of stealing worth more than this lack of human decency?
In this day and age, Answer = Yes.
[deleted]
[deleted]
You can tell they weren't cops because the deaf man was still alive.
Don't you mean he wasn't being shot repeatedly with a tazer? That's a total cop move.
...and didn't have a lamp forced up his ass.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry - seriously.
[deleted]
aww damn!
Downvoting you because not all cops are murderous bad guys.
[deleted]
Um, there is no way in heck I would ever let a plain clothes "store security" employee touch me while I am outside of the store on a public street. That is assault and battery. Now given this was a freakishly large 6 foot +, probably 250 lb + store security guard. But if that had been me, and he had me in a head lock, I would have tried to punch him in the face. And when I was on my back while he was still reaching down to grab me, I would have certainly kicked him in the face. On a public street, store security guards have exactly zero authority over you. They are civilians and nothing more. But you have to be careful to be sure that you are on a public street, and not a private thorough-way or otherwise (i.e. a pedestrian walkway between stores, and the security is grounds security rather than store security). In that case, I'm not sure of the legality of a security guard physically restraining you.
And before we jump to conclusions, we should be reminded that the video started after the two were already in contact. We have no idea what happened before then.
I thought most of these stores have policies of just letting people steal the shit and calling the cops. It isn't worth the legal questions. Looks like these guys have a case even if they did steal something.
did they even try to question them about it first or were they just like. ALARM... YEA!!!!! TACKLE YOU BITCH!
I mean, there is probably insurance that pays in theft situations. If you buy renters insurance, then you probably have insurance that pays for your stuff if it gets stolen. If you have car insurance, then you probably have insurance for stuff stolen in your car.
So yeah, why are they killing themselves like that.
Nah man, if you fall to your back, you drop into full guard by wrapping your legs around him, then slip your right leg over his shoulder and tuck it underneath your left knee. Lock down your left leg, grab his arm and pull it across your body while leaning back and compressing your legs as hard as you can.
Viola! Triangle choke.
It'll take about 11 seconds for him to lose consciousness.
I don't think they can retrain you forcefully in any case. But i may be wrong... any lawyers here?
As for having "exactly zero authority" I think it is just that sort of "I KNOW THE LAW" mentality that gets people injured.
In a citizens arrest situation, I think depending on the place in the world there may be a rule (but IANAL look it up yourself YMMV) that goes something like:
<Actually, I'm deleting my post and just linking to a guy who wrote on the topic>
This guy says:
He also writes:
And, I think shopkeepers are different than a citizens arrest because they have a special additional privilege to detain folks individually suspected of shoplifting, but there differences. Review the shopkeepers privilege in your jurisdiction and it may allow the person to use force to detain you just like a private citizen can use force to detain a pursesnatcher. As always, this obviously depends on where in the world you are, but some places are different.
If he's choking you then you are better off breaking his thumbs. Just pull those fuckers back. It's pretty hard to punch directly above your head with enough force to get him off.
This, and why was everyone respecting their authority? Stander-bys could've gotten involved, they weren't dealing with police here...
No, there is no law that says you are subject to any security guards at any time. They have absolutely no authority over you. They are as much a deterrent of crime as a fake video camera someone buys to put on the wall so people think they are getting filmed. They are civilians through and through and that was full assault and battery.
Shopkeeper's Privilege has already been linked in the thread. (This was excessive....but "absolutely no authority" is not a correct statement depending on jurisdiction.)
This common law is up to the judge to decide if it was proper detainment or not. However, it is almost a voluntary detainment as it is NEVER allowed to use force to detain someone as it is assault and battery under all circumstances.
Its even more disgusting watching a bunch of people standing around doing nothing.
Were you listening closely? People were shouting out at the thug to stop. If you're talking about a physical intervention I would say people are hesitant to initiate one because 1) they don't want to face the consequences of initiating an altercation with an "authority" figure and 2) do not know the history of situation and are confused hence them not being decisive enough to pull them apart from each other. Bystander effect was in play, but it's even trickier knowing what to do in this particular situation because of the two reasons I've stated above. It is insane that he could've died by the hands of that bastard. The deaf man would be passing up a grand opportunity if he doesn't file a lawsuit.
I think #2 is especially true. They don't know the history or what exactly is going on. But I think once the guy started turning purple I'd have kicked the security guard in the balls and ran away.
If I had seen a man yelping his loudest towards the crowd, I would have assumed he's deaf. There's no reason why the security couldn't put two and two together: a man yelping instead of asking for help or trying to talk to the man along with multiple hand motions and him pointing to his ear... pretty clear indicator. If I was there I would have done something. Immediately tell someone to call the police and try to intervene and yelling at the top of my lungs, "HE'S FUCKING DEAF YOU IDIOT!"
This is really painful to watch.
No man, there is a limit. Under no circumstances is a civilian allowed to do that without it being assault. Even if they want to call themselves security and suspect someone shoplifted.
It was obvious to me, extremely obvious, that the man was using excessive force to the point he was jeopardizing the persons life. I would have jumped in to very much equalize the situation.
But the world is full of lazy doubletalking cowards. This is the reason why the bystanders just stayed there.
Believe me I know. I'd like to believe that I would do the same and maybe I would and maybe you would yet I wasn't there so I cannot say that that's what I'd do.
It's the bystander effect
It's hard, because you wouldn't know the guy is deaf, and you wouldn't know if he did or did not steal something. The real problem is just that things escalated out of control due to lack of communication.
[deleted]
Is the security guard even allowed to touch him, legally?
ninjaedit: I asked that question before I watched the video. Now that I have, I also wonder why no one asked wtf was going on and/or called the police.
No. But - and this remains a bit unclear from the video IMO - if the man actually shoplifted something the security guard is allowed to. Either way he used excessive force in this case and will probably get in some sort of trouble.
If the guard witnessed the man shoplifting he's allowed, and the beeping of the tag detector does not count as "witnessing".
Current security guard, ex loss prevention here. You are correct. I'm sure it varies from state to state, but unless you witness someone pocketing something AND have maintained surveillance of the individual, you are likely going to be sued if you commit battery on someone you “think, kinda probably stole something.” And rightfully so.
[deleted]
There was a case in Maryland back in the 90s where three guys were accused of shoplifting items which they had bought a day earlier from an Eddie Bauer store. They were all detained and one was made to take off the shirt he had actually purchased before being allowed to leave.
They sued Eddie Bauer and were eventually awarded a $1 million settlement for false imprisonment. Moral of the story is that if you're a retail business, never assume to know whether someone is shoplifting. Let them leave and call the cops.
I think if I had witnessed this in person, I would have felt very conflicted.
On one hand, that guy's face was going purple. I would have wanted to try to get the guard off him, even if it meant a sucker punch to the side of his face.
On the other hand, I wouldn't want to be arrested.
I think I would have been more confused. I'm minding my own business walking through a store and suddenly there's commotion and two security guards are trying to restrain a guy. I have no idea what they guy just did. I'd be worried and unsure about the choking, but for all I know the guy just pulled a gun. It would take me a while to get that they were both deaf. And then what?
But knowing what I do know, this video makes me incredibly angry, because you don't choke somebody for over a minute just for setting off a shoplifting alarm, ffs. And they were idiots not to realize way sooner than anyone else that these guys were deaf.
Right, WE have the advantage of seeing the almost full scenario.
Most of the gawkers are seeing the aftermath, which to them was a mentally handicapped man distressed over the takedown of a shoplifter.
How is deafness a mental handicap?
Well to be fair, you don't "know" anything now.
The guy who took the video is somewhat misleading in his language.
He says "this is what I know"....but doesn't tell us how he knows it, and some stuff it's very clear he is just guessing.
One of the things he says he "knows", is basically impossible for him to know...so that casts doubt on his credibility.
He also explicitly asks for information about what happened...which ipso facto means he doesn't know...
... and says he doesn't know "if it was a misunderstanding". Which again shows that he doesn't really know what happened....
There are people saying he was on drugs and getting violent. It could be they felt it was unsafe to let him go...they may have felt if they let up he'd hurt someone.
Those people could be full of crap...who knows...certainly not us.
We simply don't have enough information to know if what they did was justified or not...hopefully it will come out.
Also, why did the guard feel it necessary to physically restrain this guy so such a harsh degree. It was pretty obvious he was trying to comply despite not being able to breathe.
Yeah he was obviously tapping out. For someone who seems to love using wrestling moves on ordinary people, the security guard had a hard time understanding that.
"I told him to say 'Uncle', but he keeps trying to hit my arm. I'd better choke him harder."
[deleted]
[deleted]
You might have a legal footing but in the mean time the other security guards will jump you and defend their partner and in turn restrain you in the same way. You'll probably at least be arrested even if you don't end up charged. For most people getting beat up and arrested isn't worth jumping into a fight especially if they don't know what initiated it.
[deleted]
Assuming the shopper was innocent of stealing and simply didn't hear the alarm or the guard's commands to stop, the most ethically correct thing to do is command the security guard to stop, and physically restrain him if he doesn't comply. The smartest thing to do is verbally express your disapproval, get it all on video, and volunteer to be a witness in court later.
Punch him in the head. then flee the scene. duh
That's how they felt in pre-WWII Germany...doh.
I stopped after a minute. It's dreadful. :-(
To top it off... try to read the youtube comments.
Not as painful as me jamming chopsticks in that motherfuckers eardrums when we get names and addy's.
One more thing in california it is illegal for rent a cops to restrain anyone.
Reminds me of a dream where you are trying to scream or run, but can't.
I fucking screamed because It was so frustrating ...
[deleted]
true could the sound be any worse
Agreed. Every time I read the title of this post, I cringe. "Here?" Really?
Remember guys: To prevent a chokehold, simply put your chin down as far as you can so that their arm cannot reach your adam's apple.
The more you know...
What happened there was just awful.
Horrible...
Why did no one interfere?! My gut feeling was to run up and kick the suit holding him in the head. Then the camera panned to show a crowd of fat assholes watching. So much rage...
I actually cried.
Not only is it painful to watch, its hard to understand how people can stand there record it, I mean someone should step in out of that crowd, 1 person
Fuck niggers.
[deleted]