Poorly-trained security officer to say the least

[jmra]

I think no one intervened for awhile because everyone (except the mall cop, and maybe the biker gal) found it entertaining.

While I suppose the hands-on-the-throat was technically life-threatening, as a practical matter it was only inconvenient and infuriating --- instead of trying to fend off the hands, mall cop spent an inordinate amount of time fumbling for her pepper spray or stun device or whatever (another point against her -- she should practice accessing her tools under pressure).

Overall not an impressive display of professionalism, judgment*, or skill on either participants' part. Both got locked into monkey-brain antics and coudn't find an exit by themselves -- the guy at the end provided a face-saving way out of it for both of them (note how fast they broke up when basically all the guy did was say something and put his hand on.)

See Rory Miller's description of "Monkey Dance." Typically a young male phenomenon, but women have been trying to catch up to guys for years in lots of things. You've come a long way, baby! (If you remember that, you are not a kid.)

*I mean, really, counting to 10? My third grade teacher did that, and it didn't work very well then either...

She needs to pursue another career field.

[rp_photo]

IMHO, the root cause of this is a needless "paranoid" rule that goes against common sense and alienates mall patrons. To be consistent, are the guards also going to harass parents taking pictures of their kids?

Being a photographer as well as a gun owner, I have read many accounts of needless harassment of photographers where 9/11 (and probably now the Boston bombing) are used as a convenient reason. Only this goes a step further because the photographers were everday "civilians" using regular phones.

Photographers should't have their First Ammedment rights compromised over recent unfortunate events just as gun owners shouldn't have it done to their Second Ammendment rights.

[texanjoker]

IMHO, the root cause of this is a needless "paranoid" rule that goes against common sense and alienates mall patrons. To be consistent, are the guards also going to harass parents taking pictures of their kids?

Being a photographer as well as a gun owner, I have read many accounts of needless harassment of photographers where 9/11 (and probably now the Boston bombing) are used as a convenient reason. Only this goes a step further because the photographers were everday "civilians" using regular phones.

Photographers should't have their First Ammedment rights compromised over recent unfortunate events just as gun owners shouldn't have it done to their Second Ammendment rights.

I agree until it becomes a safety issue. This was not the case in this incident.

[rp_photo]

Perhaps the guard would have achieved better results if she had made traffic safety or loitering the issue vs. taking pictures. Most reasonable people will respect concerns about safety or loitering, but might find photography prohibition to be pointless and irritating.

[fickman]

I was stopped by private security guards from taking photos of the John Hancock building in Boston in 2004. . . the reason? "9/11."


I was across the street on a sidewalk and already had my picture, so I just went on my way.

The same thing happened twice in India. . . each time I already had my picture and simply apologized and went about the rest of my day.

If somebody brought up the Boston bombing, I'd be quick to point out that private photography is how they identified the bad guys and put the timeline together.

[chasfm11]

I was stopped by private security guards from taking photos of the John Hancock building in Boston in 2004. . . the reason? "9/11."


I was across the street on a sidewalk and already had my picture, so I just went on my way.

The same thing happened twice in India. . . each time I already had my picture and simply apologized and went about the rest of my day.

If somebody brought up the Boston bombing, I'd be quick to point out that private photography is how they identified the bad guys and put the timeline together.

I've often wondered about that. I understand that a property owner can provide rules for people who come on their property. But if you are standing on a public sidewalk opposite their property, I'm not sure under what authority a private security guard could attempt to control your actions on someone else's property. Property owners who want to control how the public comes onto their property, particularly when that property is open to the general public need to provide those rules in advance and in writing, not make them up as they go along after the fact.

I seriously doubt that if LEOs had arrived on scene at the OP after the security guard told the people to leave that they would have taken any action except to reiterate that request. Actually, based on what I saw from the video, I'm not sure that the raven was mall property to start with. That is based on the barriers around it. Typically, city streets include the berm area and the guard rails. I didn't get a good look at what was behind the guy who got out of his car to stop the fight. It might have been more of the mall and that would certainly cloud the control issues.

For me, this is one of those situations where an armed society is a polite society. Before I got my CHL, if a mall cop had gotten into my face like this one did, I would likely have responded. Now, for sure, I would walk away or at least call LE from a more remote position.

[rp_photo]

Epic fail on so many levels. She really needs some therapy, some professionalism, and some anger management. Clearly not a single person in the crowd took her seriously and that is what really steamed her up. Counting? Really?

Perhaps because the rule about not taking picures anywhere on mall property seems absurd and hard to respect, especially by the connected Facebook/Youtube generation who photograph and video everything.

[rp_photo]

I was stopped by private security guards from taking photos of the John Hancock building in Boston in 2004. . . the reason? "9/11."


I was across the street on a sidewalk and already had my picture, so I just went on my way

They had no authority to do that, but whether you care to remind them of that is your call.