It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by c776560
reply to post by kimish
You do know that, by stating that you miss the guys point?
He was just pointing out that the guard was FOLLOWING the law.
Yet, you have to drag in personal opinions of what and why you think a fifteen year old should be shot.
Was this in Europe, your comment would be hated to death, or your comment would be different.
Please see from different perspectives as people are run down by cars every day and no shootings occur like this one and we are merely discussing the law and the justification of the actions of the guard.
If you have more opinions like these, please head over to Stormfront, create an anti-teen forum and ramble about that kids shouldn't be skatin' on the sidewalk no more.
If you wish me to be more exact let me know. I hate being dragged into some of these discussions as people like to attack me forexplaining the law and refusing to condemn an action that was lawful and justified.
Originally posted by Shamrock6
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
yes, they did. and again it looks like you're gearing up to apply 20/20 hindsight to a situation you weren't there for. you've asserted all along that the guards should've thought more about it before they fired on the car, and you've injected things like 'hes a teenager and probably a bad driver.' as justification. so look at the facts, not suppositions, the guards had available to them at the time: they'd approached this individual, within their mandated patrol area, once and he fled. he then reappeared and they attempted to approach again, at which point he jumped in a vehicle and struck one of the guards before attempting to flee. at that point they have a valid reason to fear for their safety and the safety of others because the driver has already shown blatant disregard for life and society by striking an individual with his vehicle and attempting to flee. they were fully justified in shooting. just because you seem to have a negative opinion of private contract security doesn't change the facts.
and fyi, where i'm at, armed private security guards have full arrest authority, granted to them by the state criminal justice services branch, to arrest, detain, and investigate any crime from jaywalking to murder that occur within their patrol area.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by schuyler
Wait....they were shooting at a car driving away from them next to a school???
A facility with armed security patrolling the perimeter has absolutely no business near a school. Again, I cannot believe that I have to even point this out.
Originally posted by Shamrock6
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
as for flipping your lid because there's a site with armed guards near a school....thats comical man. there's a police station less than a mile from a high school, alternative school, and elementary school. oh em gee the horror they have guns near a school!
Several students who go to the nearby Secondary Academy for Success (SAS) saw the incident. They say the boy was recently kicked out of school, but showed up on campus Friday morning. He was chased away by campus security. That’s when he ended up in the FDA parking lot.
A witness said he heard two gunshots, and then saw about 15 kids duck for cover and scatter.
“I just stood there at first and then I was thinking about running behind a parked car,” said Syndi, one of the students who saw it happen.
Another student called it “blatantly stupid” for the teen to go there because students have been told the FDA parking lot is off limits.