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.
Normally I'm very critical about citizen militias -- to myself. I understand the role they've played historically, and how it's vital that a free country should be able to have a citizen militia. But I'm usually depressed by how narrowly 'gung-ho' they are, and can somewhat understand those who see them as dangerous.
Originally posted by nenothtu
Originally posted by switching yard
Private security companies have zero jurisdiction unless they are duly deputized by county and I doubt that they have been.
'jurisdiction' otherwise revolves around authorization by the controlling authority, and involves the ability to detain (not arrest, subtle, but legal, difference), and turn the offenders over to sworn officers, who then place them under arrest.
[edit on 2010/6/17 by nenothtu]
Originally posted by merkaba93
I would view private security contractors who are choosing to disobey the law of the land, the Constitution, and deny private, sovereign, US citizens the right to access their very own public property as owned by "We the People", as criminals and traitorous and should be delt with accordingly.
Originally posted by ANNED
Originally posted by nenothtu
Originally posted by switching yard
Private security companies have zero jurisdiction unless they are duly deputized by county and I doubt that they have been.
'jurisdiction' otherwise revolves around authorization by the controlling authority, and involves the ability to detain (not arrest, subtle, but legal, difference), and turn the offenders over to sworn officers, who then place them under arrest.
[edit on 2010/6/17 by nenothtu]
The problem with that is how do security guards "detain" without using force.
Touching someone is force(assult) unless the guard has been assaulted by this person.
on public property all the person has to do is cross there arms (a show of non force) and walk away. and the guard can not use force then.
The guard can not legaly then grab them to restrain them.
and the guard can not force them to go anywhere as that would be kidnapping.
So how does the guard "detain" them,
Oh i am a ex federal security officer. so i do know the answer.
observe and report.
www.globalresearch.ca...
www.unknowncountry.com...
PRIVATE security is RESTRICTING access to PUBLIC property
Originally posted by sean
Wow! That guy is walking a thin line on his authority there. Won't confirm who is employer is, or name, or show ID which all private security has by the way. He has to show ID when asked. That's breaking city code right there.
Originally posted by Redwookieaz
If one of those glorified mall security guards tried to keep me off a public beach I would break my foot off in his arse! I don't care what you try to tell me to the contrary that is public land and I would have no problem showing them exactly how far their "authority" goes on a public beach. *Answer: They have no power on a public beach!*
Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
LISTEN UP FOLKS - (sorry)
This video is Really alarming to me because, I watched the entire C-Span grilling of Tony Hayward today and No One asked him about the Corexit and I found this very strange.
There is really something going on here if no one is willing to talk about the Corexit, including the EPA who had ordered BP to stop using the dispersant and they ignored the order.
There is a thread on here that talks about the possibility that this whole business is related to the dispersant industry and BP is making money on using this Corexit stuff.. that's banned in England because it's so toxic they won't stand for it.
More investigation needs to be done on why no one is willing to talk about this stuff.