Yeah! I can see the future (I had a great CC trainer).
Re: . . .I didn't hurt them physically)" -- Nice show of restraint. Not sure I would have managed that. -- Russ Walden Post Reply Top of thread Forum

Posted by: LateForLunch ®

11/28/2021, 15:10:00

Author Profile Mail author Edit

Not being a security officer with open-carry licensing constraints, you would be entitled to more freedom to react. 

My close-combat trainer (Air Force/'Nam vet named Mancini) drilled into me that using a weapon is viewed by CA LEOs as allowable ONLY to try to escape from a threat situation or help others under attack to escape - not to arrest/detain a felon. There is no "stand your ground" provision in CA criminal code. They don't pay me enough to do that. 

Mancini used to call every shot that was not on-target at the range a "lawsuit". 'Smart fellow. 

In the Mexifornia Open-Carry training/test, the one thing they drum into you is how you're obligated to AVOID using a firearm (or other weapon) unless there is absolutely no alternative to escape. 

In this case, I had strategic control of the situation (being in a vehicle/armed, I was protected). Since I initiated the contact (I challenged Aquaman as he was committing misdemeanor trespassing) the burden of keeping myself safe fell on me. I always had the option of withdrawing, even after he committed what was arguably aggravated assault with intent to commit murder, then began following me. 

Dealing with such suspects (loitering meth head vagrants) is a little like bull fighting.

The tricky part came when I tried to keep him in view after calling in the incident. It's my word against the suspect's until a LEO shows up (our body-cams are not great as evidence and there were no other witnesses around). 

I've read about CA cases where armed private security officers used their weapon (firearm or taser) on a suspect. Every time, the investigators crawled up their *ss with a microscope looking for a reason to prosecute the one who was attacked. I have accepted the fact (even if I don't like it) that any DA in L.A. county will make it their life work to prosecute any non-LEO who behaves like a "vigilante" by using a weapon (even a taser/or pepper spray) without an absolute necessity. 

LEOs (and especially the command-level LEOs and their political bosses) feel that vigilantism makes them look like they're not doing their jobs (imagine that) - so they go after vigilantes (or anyone who even approaches that definition) with equal or greater intensity than any suspect who attacked them.  

The testimony I've read by such unfortunate souls flashes quickly across my awareness and guides my decision-making.

Since I work in an area with Sheriff's deputies (not LAPD) there is a much greater chance they will actually show up and do their job. So in this case. 

Suspect went into custody without incident, no weapon discharged. Happy ending for everyone except the perp. Aquaman will swim in other waters, at least for a time. Mission accomplished. 

Hopefully a judge will slap a restraining order (or equivalent order) on him forbidding him from returning to the area to loiter or approaching/assaulting security officers on these specific properties.  

 






Modified by LateForLunch at Sun, Nov 28, 2021, 17:39:47


Post Reply | Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page