Incident Somerfields (Lounged)

[Administrator]

De-Lounged

[HonaloochieB]

MM you're correct, if no violence is being offered then only reasonable restraint should be applied.

Too many points and counterpoints on the matter amount to no more than spittle on a computer screen.

[Louisa]

HB, you are missing the point. MM has still not answered my question of whether or not he and others were present for long enough to see everything that happened and the reasons for it happening? We do not know all the facts (for the umtenth time!), so even if violence was not used the person may well have threatened violence verbally or signalled that they had some sort of weapon on them in which case more than "reasonable restraint" should be enforced to protect staff and customers.

Louisa.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> De-Lounged

...Big Up to the Admin.Man...quick to act and be prepared to admit he might have been wrong(though "wrong" he might not be!)...

[macroban]

Some of the security guards in Lordship Lane scare me. I do wonder if they have received adequate training and whether trainees that are unsuitable are weeded out.

I'm not sure whether the security guards in Somerfield are Somerfield employees or whether Somerfield contracts out this work. Does anyone know? If they are contracted out does any Somerfield employee have line management responsibilty for, and/or authority over, the security guards when they are on duty in the store?

[BJL]

After reading some of the posts here, I'm not surprised there's so much violence and aggression in this country.

[ratty]

God will judge them all!

[Marmora Man]

MM has still not answered my question of whether or not he and others were present for long enough to see everything that happened and the reasons for it happening?

I walked into the shop - there was no incident / violence occurring. I wlaked to the right by the wine shelves and freezer compartments, I had just collected my ice cream and was walking back to the check out when my way was blocked by this fracas. The "restrained" individual cannot have been offering significant violence / threats / noise or anything else for more than 30 seconds, if that - otherwise I would have been aware. My first thought, and that of many around me, was to assist the one man being apparently beaten up by three others - as I made a move to do this the crowd was informed that one of the three was "security" despite not being in any kind of uniform. (He may have been undercover - not that this would excuse his behaviour)

[HonaloochieB]

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> HB, you are missing the point. MM has still not

> answered my question of whether or not he and

> others were present for long enough to see

> everything that happened and the reasons for it

> happening? We do not know all the facts (for the

> umtenth time!), so even if violence was not used

> the person may well have threatened violence

> verbally or signalled that they had some sort of

> weapon on them in which case more than "reasonable

> restraint" should be enforced to protect staff and

> customers.

>

> Louisa.

Louisa I'm missing no point, MM witnessed an incident that disturbed him, in the way that employees were apparently dealing with a person who had been allegedely stealing from the shop.

No weapons on display, no threats to other shoppers that we're aware of. Just what MM reported and the indignation at what he thought was excessive behaviour and undue violence toward a supposed miscreant who was offering no fight back. Your extrapolations make no sense in the context of the original post.

The connection between shoplifting and house burglary is that they are both taking something that does not belong to you.

To try and suggest there is a moral equivalence between the two, which gives the right to use the same level of force in both sets of circumstances, makes no sense to me at all.

[Rabbler]

Good grief! Do you really think that anyone shoplifting will hold their hands up & say "It's a fair cop, guv?" I think not!

Bottom line is someone was caught tealeafing from Somerfield, staff intervened & the person was restrained, maybe got a bit of pain for it & verbally abused, but they were hardly beaten to a pulp, from the osunds of it.

What do you want the scurity to do? Hold hands; hug them; take them into the office for a cup tea, not forgetting the biscuits, until the old bill arrive?

If you were that concerned you should have made a complaint to the police at the time. I would say the shop is well camera'd up to catch everything.

[nunheadbelle]

I was in there around that time and as I came round the corner of one of the aisles, I saw a policeman talking on his walkie-talkie and a guy standing not far from him. I would imagine this was the shoplifter? He wasn't handcuffed or anything and was just standing there. Obviously I missed the bit when he was being manhandled and if I had seen it, I would have said something. I'm not one for standing back and doing nothing if I see an injustice being done.

[Keef]

The simple fact is, that getting a job as a security guard does not place you above the law, and you have no right to hand out punches and kicks to people.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Probably the most pointless post I'll ever make (and that's saying something) - pointless for the reason that those I'm arguing with appear to be beyond the simplest of arguments, lacking all perspective and narrowing their focus down to such fine detail that all meaning is lost, and yet the keep tugging away like a dog with it's teeth wrapped around a leg

The first thing that annoys me is when anyone adopts an "unlike most of you ANY NORMAL RATIONAL PERSON would...." - the audacity of telling me that I lack normality or reason is enough to make me abandon both and administer some swift justice of my own

Second is this idea that, once again, London has gone to the dogs compared with days of yore - it's an argument that has been dealt with before but, in short, if you think London has always or even ever been a place of tranquility you are beyond help. And if there ever was a time when for a short spell it appeared that way, the rest of the social mores that kept it that way would be unnaceptable to even those nostalgiaist

Thirdly - do-gooding as a bad thing. This whole idea that "if's" and "buts" are the root of crime - pathetic. Do-gooders and saying if and but are what got you the vote for example Louisa. Then again I suspect you dismiss the idea of democracy we live in and long for the kind of country that is able to mete out a swift kicking to any transgressor. Those countries exist. Good luck with your femininity, boozing and vibrators in those countries

Fourthly - the idea that those of us arguing against the actions of the security guards are somehow on the side of the criminal. If those criminals have no respect for my beliefs I'm hardly surprised - they don't have any for yours either. What bothers me is not the criminal but how the rest of "us" conduct ourselves. There is a sense that, whatever the reasons behind the kicking, some people like violence for it's own sake. Possibly because they were brutalised when they were young themselves who knows. Still, anyone who has ever said "did no harm to me" in my company is usually living proof that it did.

Security Guards are there to prevent crime and detain those who break the law - they are behaving criminally themselves otherwise. This they know when they take the job - no point crying "foul" afterwards.

There is loads more "wrong" with some of what's been said but as this is already a pointless post I'll stop there

[SeanMacGabhann]

oops - part 4 cross-posted wiv Keef

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Advantage of being older is that we can say,like Max Boyce,"I was there"...London circa 1966-1970 onwards for a while.

I could walk anywhere at any time day or night with little worry that I,as an innocent bystander would be caught up in crime(like that poor Guy in Walworth Costcutters last week).There were organised Gangs(well-documented) but the average Guy in the street was rarely involved.We DID pick up complete strangers in our cars in the street.That was widespread if people were going your way,some would not think twice.We could walk in and out of Council Blocks-now many are High-Security!..Newspaper vendors often simply left their papers in the street for anyone to buy and leave their money in a pile on the street.They would not have done that if there was a risk someone might nick the lot!.You knew your Milkman/Postman etc...Your Family DID live within the same Community.My Aunt lived next door.Another one's Gardens backed onto ours(I was passed over the fence!)All My Dads 7 Brothers/Sisters lived within 2 miles of Peckham etc...there was a real sense of Community.Now different Groups WILL look after other Members of that Groups(Read other Forums) but WILL NOT,usually,go beyond that!.If I broke down in the road (4 times in London) I KNEW strangers would help.Complete strangers in Lewisham,Deptford,Crayford and Walworth)..also picnickers in Brighton who changed our tyre for us(but thats another story)Can you imagine that now?...East Dulwich mmy be different but if anyone was in difficulties in the street there would be a host of people to intervene,Now?..Most are too scared to!..Marmora Man helped someone recently while,he said,2,000 others just watched.People are scared and there were NOT knives around,in general.

It was very safe then and we would play out all hours without worry,you could not say that now,surely.

[Brendan]

Jesus a million post overnight. I can?t be bothered to read them all. The whole thing really annoyed me though because the hubbub in the street held up my bus up on the way home last night.

And all because people are arseholes. One arsehole decides to steel. Then some other arseholes think that because they caught the first arsehole they are somehow vindicated in getting their cock swinging jollies by dishing out a beating.

Arseholes! >:D<

[MitchK]

This is the problem with having a Somerfield in the high street. Wouldn't have happened in Waitrose.

What a bunch of lily-livered liberals. It's probably the highlight of the security guard's job to beat up some shoplifter. Do not deny him his fun!

[Mark]

It's a shame some people didn't get punctuation beaten into them as a child eh Tony? I did, in fact, I was beaten into a comma for 6 months.

[Brendan]

Case in point.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

MitchK Wrote:

> What a bunch of lily-livered liberals. It's

> probably the highlight of the security guard's job

> to beat up some shoplifter. Do not deny him his

> fun!

....Exactly! and even if the Guy was innocent it will make him think twice about even thinking about it in future so WIN! WIN!..>:D<

[candj]

Mark Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's a shame some people didn't get punctuation

> beaten into them as a child eh Tony? I did, in

> fact, I was beaten into a comma for 6 months.

This just makes me laugh. My computer came with a spacebar at least! Sorry off topic. :(

I just cannot even comment on this thread because it seems so outrageous and people have for some reason become so polarized on the issue. A suggestion would be to adopt the Saudi Arabian model and cut people's hands off for stealing.

[Asset]

or behead them even.

[candj]

Sorry Asset, beheading is for murderers, rapists (something very difficult to prove in SA as you need 5 witnesses), drug traffickers and armed robbers. Cutting off one's hands would allow Mr. Somerfield one more attempt at stealing (and thus allowing the Somerfield staff one more go at using him as a punching bag), then he'd have to start using his feet or get an accomplice.

[Asset]

It's alright, don't apologise candj, I was being facetious.

[Brendan]

They aren?t big on online facetiousness in the Arab world asset. That would have lost you a finger.