This just happened at the @Walgreens on Gough & Fell Streets in San Francisco. #NoConsequences @chesaboudinpic.twitter.com/uSbnTQQk4J
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @scottsu @LyanneMelendez and
The guard did what he was trained to do. He would have been fired had he did more to stop the crime due to liability. Society has nothing to do with it. I'm not responsible for the actions of others. Spotlighting the ugly truth needs to happen. So #1 and #4 are the answers.
4 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @ToddDecker @scottsu and
I would have thought security guards are there to stop people from stealing, and I mean that, not challenging you, I’m surprised to learn they are liable if they try to prevent someone from stealing.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GangstaMcThugg1 @ToddDecker and
Seems a worthless job if they can’t actually secure anything.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AirMail_Tweets @ToddDecker and
Super agree. What’s the point?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GangstaMcThugg1 @AirMail_Tweets and
The security guard is to discourage theft. However, in a blatant case like this, the guard gathers evidence (the video) to turn over to the police. And then if there's a trial, the guard will be a witness for the prosecution.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
In cases where the suspect is armed? Do you think the policy should be the same? Or do you think a trained armed guard who could protect the store and the people inside would be better?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.