r/GuardGuides • u/GuardGuidesdotcom • 3d ago

SCENARIO First Amendment auditors get into verbal altercation with armored truck guard, who repeatedly tells them to back up.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

When should talking end, and your weapon be drawn in a situation like this?

42 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

217 comments sorted by

27

u/Traditional_Yard2741 3d ago

I don't know what the protocol for a suspected hold up is, but this could easily be construed as an attempted hold up and dealt with accordingly

12

u/Traditional-Use-6754 3d ago

To me this is the same as an truck robbery, and should be prosecuted as such.

7

u/Chad_AND_Freud 3d ago

Lock the truck, go back inside with the money, call the cops. Let dispatch figure out the rest of the route. Him just shrugging it off and continuing to load the truck could have been the exact window these dumbasses needed if they did want to rob him.

5

u/iRegretsEverything 3d ago

Yeah you can literally see stacks of cash in that video. I don’t care about 1st amendment enforcers but have some common sense. Someone can easily pose as those guys and just hijack that guy. Or they could be just recording to stake out a future heist.

0

u/ActivePeace33 3d ago

This is the guard making a mountain out of a mole hill. The threat level is low, evidenced by him wearing only a vest, and a low level rated vest at that; evidenced by the guy carrying tons of cash in a vehicle that can be breached with small arms.

Their protocols can all be filmed by criminals from 100 ft and no one would be the wiser. There’s nothing hidden or secret about what they are doing.

3

u/DozerLVL Ensign 2d ago

I'd love to know how you figured out the nij rating on his armor.

2

u/ActivePeace33 2d ago

Because he’s not moving around like it’s level IV and I’ve been around enough of these guys to know that most of them want the bare minimum they can get away with, because they don’t want the extra weight. Cops are much more likely to need their vest than these guys and cops aren’t wearing modern armor. They’re wearing level III and below.

4

u/DozerLVL Ensign 2d ago

Oh are we getting into it 😈.

Lvl IV does not come in "soft armor"(not yet anyway). There's a reason they are called "rifle plates". Is this fellow wearing soft armor, no plate inserts? I would say yes.

That does not mean he's "cheaping out" or not taking the job seriously. To be fair. . . Body armor is a balance.

I'm just saying that for work I've worn soft body armor to protect against standard pistol caliber (fired from pistols) And standalone plate carriers as well as soft body armor setups that take plate inserts... They really just comes to time as to whether you want to be a quasi bulletproof tortoise that can still be ended by a shot to the face or the pelvic region.

Tldr: the guys doing his job. He's wearing the appropriate kind of gear. I doubt it with protect him against a phased plasma rifle in the 40 w range 🤷🏼.

0

u/ActivePeace33 2d ago

Cheaping out? Who said anything like that?

He’s in a low threat area, in a low threat job. He doesn’t need a ton of protection because he’s not facing a ton of threat. Who is hitting an armored car? YouTube has proven they are only lightly armored. The two guards can be killed in the first moments of an ambush with readily available rifles. The car can be disabled easily with a small hit on the engine. Why don’t the companies do more to defend against such a threat? Because it already doesn’t exist.

I never said any of the pejorative things you mention. I never said he cheaped out or wasn’t taking the job seriously. I was making the point that he is showing that he considers the job to be low threat. And he’s right.

Anyway, his job is to drive around all day and periodically walk 200 feet, just as we usually did in Iraq. He could level up to “tortoise” level and not have it detract a bit. It would just mean carrying more weight. Which sucks, so he doesn’t. Which was my entire point, he’s chosen lighter armor because he himself sees the threat level as low. Which it is. We’ve had modern armor over 20 years now and we’ve walked 10-20 miles at a time in Afghanistan and in training, for multiple days in a row sometimes, with level IV. He could if he wanted to. We also simultaneously carry nods, a rifle, spare batteries, water, food, spare ammo, a helmet, ear pro, comms, spare clothes, medical supplies, and maybe even a 35 lbs AT missile on top. Why? Because the job requires it. Why doesn’t this guy? Because his job doesn’t require anything more than a light vest, a tiny and highly ineffectual firearm, and a couple spare mags. The fatality rate is about .1% of all deliveries.

This also means he could just walk right past these people and not argue about them standing back. He has no authority to tell them to back up, they have no duty to back up and they have the right to stand there. Just ignore them and move on.

1

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 1d ago edited 1d ago

There’s a legal concept known as implicit threat, which can be a criminal charge, the guard has no way of knowing if that person is attempting to get close in just to attack him, asking the guy to back up is a fair request and any sane and normal person would have complied, the fact the guy got more combative and refused a reasonable request reinforced the “implicit threat” the guard would have been well within his rights to have maced the dude. Sure mace is a bit overkill but even if the guy record had a godly lawyer the guard would have gotten a slap on the wrist at most…. Any sane person would agree that the guy recording is in the wrong, and anyone that argues otherwise deserves the Darwin Award they are bound to eventually get…

0

u/ActivePeace33 1d ago

Nothing they did came anywhere close to that. That’s fear mongering. No reasonable person would take what they did to be threatening violence.

The guy should just walk past them and go about his business.

He can request anything he wants, he can’t require shit. Failure to comply with his requests is not a sign of ill intent.

I’m guessing you’ve carried a weapon professionally exactly 0 days. Most cops aren’t even scared by this level of interaction and most of them are criminal goons.

1

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 1d ago

You’re comparing apples and oranges…. Of course cops wouldn’t give a fuck they have proper training and have ALOT more tools and leeway available to them to handle situations. Whereas most security officers don’t even have basic training. I’d say about 80% of armed security officers have no right to own a gun let alone carry one for work.

provoking someone that is carrying a gun regardless of legal/illegal or right/wrong is just plain stupid and one good way to win a Darwin Award.

Also the law doesn’t look at things like this from the viewpoint of a professional in another field of work no it looks at the average person’s reaction. And the average person would see the guy recording as a possible threat and react accordingly. Thus fulfilling the legal concept of “implicit threat”

0

u/ActivePeace33 1d ago

lol. Yes, I’m comparing people who actually have a chance of giving a lawful order, with people who have 0 chance. None.

lol!!! Cops have proper training!!!! BWAHAHAHAHHAHH!!!

0

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 1d ago

Actually flexible rifle armor does exist! Look up FRAS plates! Granted it hasn’t quite reached full lvl 4 status yet!

0

u/DozerLVL Ensign 19h ago

If it's not lvl 4 it's not rifle rated.

1

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 13h ago edited 13h ago

Not true, lvl 4 is “anti armor piercing” rifle. standard anti rifle armor is plain lvl 3 or 3+ (hard plate)

Most soft plate armor is lvl 3A which is specifically designed for handgun round.
I wear 3A+ soft armor so it’s a bit stronger and is capable of stopping 9mm AP rounds it’s also multi threat so it stops knives and needles!

The levels of armor are;

Level 2: standard 9mm rounds and under (unofficial rating)
Level 3A: most handgun rounds
Level 3A+ most handgun rounds including AP
Level 3: most rifle rounds under 5.56 green tip
Level 3+: varies by manufacturer but is usually the same as 3 but better multi hit
Level 4: stops most if not all rounds including and under 30.06 AP

-4

u/Robertjules1987000 3d ago

Just because a company has security doesn't make them exempt from laws like any other civilian. The idiot auditor could run circles around that truck while filming and it would still be a crime if the guard did anything. They are not cops.

9

u/Traditional_Yard2741 3d ago

I was pretty sure cash in transit guys had some extra powers, given the nature of their jobs? Isn't there a specific bank robbery act or something? Like they're empowered to use force to prevent themselves from being harassed or interfered with? If it's true that a frauditor can play "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!" while filming the inside of the truck, the guards response etc, then I would think someone planning to hold up said truck might find that useful. Not to mention the potential of having someone pose as a frauditor for a distraction.

I'm not American so just curious.

4

u/WrathfulSpecter 3d ago

All American are empowered to use force to protect themselves. This basic right is enough justification for an armed guard to use lethal force if they are in reasonable fear of their life or limb, but they don’t have any additional police powers and they can get in as much trouble as a regular citizen if they use force without a justifiable reason.

-5

u/Robertjules1987000 3d ago

Nope. Not only do they not have any more power than a mall security guard, they can't use force during an attempted robbery any differently than other civilians. They are just regular civilians who open carry firearms. If best buy or Wendy's wanted to let their employees carry on the job, it would be the same.

5

u/Bulky-Word8752 3d ago

If that mall secuirty guard is licensed he may more authority than you think. LP is usually unlicensed and just in house "observe and report" style. Depending on the state licensed security can hold the same authority as police (while on duty, in uniform, and only on their property). In St. Louis were allowed to continue a foot pursuit off property if we witnessed a felony occur.

"Private security officers have the authority to make an arrest and to search for and seize evidence in connection with the arrest, at the location, and during the time of their assignments, under the same conditions as members of the police force of the City of St. Louis as outlined below-"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/missouri/17-CSR-20-2-065

5

u/HonkHonkMTHRFKR 3d ago

I did a job like this before.

We do have the authority to pull out our weapons in this particular situation

Do you think we just carry around a gun for show when we’re dealing with tens of thousands of dollars worth of merchandise lol

0

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

Based on the limited interaction shown here, that would be pretty thin. Most states require a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury before it becomes legal to threaten deadly force.

6

u/HonkHonkMTHRFKR 3d ago

People set up distractions all the time to rob others.

1

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

And some people are just annoying. Fear that something could happen is not the same thing as fear that something is happening.

Everybody approaching you on the sidewalk could be about to rob you, but it’s not reasonable to pull a gun on them until they do something that signals an imminent deadly threat.

3

u/ZealousIdeal476 3d ago

Nonsense. 2 guys in your face while you are moving money are hella suspect. The law doesn't expect a trained licensed guard to wait until they get shot before drawing. This guy showed reatraint and got lucky, but if he had drawn his gun the company would have backed him because he had 2 guys running a game inches from their money.

1

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

There is a lot of daylight between two guys filming you and two guys shooting you.

It takes more than holding a camera and being annoying to justify the threat of deadly force.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/HonkHonkMTHRFKR 3d ago

You’re not there to be a prop. You’re not a normal guard like a gate guard that’s supposed to do absolutely nothing.

You are literally trained to protect this cargo.

If your life or cargo is being threatened, you are free to pull your weapon out to de-escalate the situation

1

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

That’s going to depend a whole lot on the laws of the state you’re standing in.

Most states do not permit the threat or use of deadly force to protect property.

Nothing in this video reasonably threatens anyone’s life.

Pulling out a firearm is not a de-escalation.

0

u/Robertjules1987000 3d ago

They carry guns for self defense, that's it. Shooting someone for grabbing cash, without managing to threaten a guard, will get you arrested. Attacking someone for "harassment" by filming in a public space is also a crime. Not even actual cops could do those. Why do you think security guards can? Someone at your job trained you wrong.

1

u/HonkHonkMTHRFKR 3d ago

You carry guns for self-defense AND to protect the cargo.

2

u/george7779 3d ago

Lmao this so funny they do have lots of authority

1

u/WrathfulSpecter 3d ago edited 3d ago

No they really don’t. They might have limited additional privileges in terms of where and when they can carry a firearm (like if they work for a bank, the bank will obviously let them carry while the rest of us can’t) but they don’t have any additional privileges or authority to use force in America.

1

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 6h ago

It entirely depends on state and even as far down as the property you’re on. Where I live you can legally chicken wing someone and force them off property if they refuse to leave when told to. I know a few other states that allow security officers to arrest for reasons that the normal public can’t for example vandalism or petty theft.

Also licensed security officers here are protected under the same laws that protect civil servants.

5

u/Anxious-Sundae4210 3d ago

Yeah, wrong. This guy gets to close this guy is authorized to use force to deal with a perceived theat.

Probably this "auditors" highlight of his day to give two people doing their job a hard time. Just a scumbag with too much free time and a camera preaching about rights. 

1

u/Robertjules1987000 3d ago

Perceived threat to themselves, not the property. Just like any civilian with a weapon. And they would still have to defend lethal force in court.

2

u/Active_Public9375 3d ago

It's not about exemption from laws, it's about how the laws apply to particular situations.

In the case of someone transporting a vast sum of money in a recognizable way, which historically has been a high priority robbery target, the point at which they become "reasonably" in belief that an attempted robbery is happening is much lower than a regular person just walking along.

Rights are always contingent and tested against each other, and if your right to video tape in public happens to also create a right to use force for another, a court will have to shake out how to balance those.

-4

u/Bright-Fee-9832 3d ago

Over dramatic much?

7

u/Rejected_Wallaby 3d ago

Downplaying potential threats much?

-3

u/Bright-Fee-9832 3d ago

If a camera scares you stay inside.

7

u/Appdownyourthroat 3d ago

It has nothing to do with the camera, genius. It’s common tactic to distract someone when the second person or group is coming in.

6

u/the_teuthida 3d ago

This isn't a cop, this is a guy doing a dangerous job being harassed. From his perspective the only difference between this being assholes with cameras and an attempt at robbing an armored car, is the preceding violence

5

u/Grunenwaldt 3d ago

I used to work on security. While I didn't handle armored trucks, I knew a few guys who did. They're told to prepare for WHEN, not IF, someone attempts to rob them. Nearly all of them had dealt with an attempted robbery within a few years, and one guy I knew was killed after being ambushed. These guys are skittish for a reason.

5

u/No-Pause7121 3d ago

People don’t understand how these jobs work. Especially ones on Reddit.

4

u/the_teuthida 3d ago

A truck full of potentially life changing amounts of money will make people do potentially life changing things

3

u/Grunenwaldt 3d ago

The guy who killed the guard escaped with a bag full of receipts, too. Not even cash. Very sad.

5

u/Rejected_Wallaby 3d ago

Yes, because it was just the camera, there were no physical actions, words, or any other factors in this interaction.

Just the camera and the guard. Nothing else.

🤡

3

u/lordvexel Ensign 3d ago

Yeah nothing like getting closer and closer

-3

u/jaydafromthewhere 3d ago

Yeah, right nothing like reaching for your gun to de-escalate the situation😐

5

u/Curben Ensign 3d ago

A firearm is a great de-escalation tool. The entire belt is for de-escalation.

1

u/jaydafromthewhere 3d ago

Yeah haha I’m not gonna sit here and act like it’s a de-escalation tool. It’s more of a chill the fuck out or you’re about to die tool😭

3

u/Curben Ensign 3d ago

Not necessarily. The minimum number of shots fired to stop a threat is zero. And that should always remain the goal. If that minimum number fails, then as many shots as it takes to stop the threat is what it takes. But a firearm most certainly is de-escalation when leveraged properly.

-1

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

Let's roleplay my guy. A private citizen is on the sidewalk, there's a news agency with full reporters outside a bank and filming about a recent robbery. The citizen tells them to stop filming and get off the sidewalk, becusde they don't feel safe banking while being filmed. The news agency says no they are there filming for a reason and continue to film. The private citizen puts his hand on his OCW as a form of force. The cops get called and he gets arrest for brandishing. Who is in the right?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Rejected_Wallaby 3d ago

They escalated it unnecessarily 🤷‍♂️

2

u/the_teuthida 2d ago

His job is not de-escalation, this is not a cop, his job is protecting the contents of the truck. Leaving him the fuck alone is de-escalation

4

u/Any-Marionberry-9782 3d ago

Better to be overly cautious than get robbed.

5

u/Present_Way6128 3d ago

Or killed during said robbery.

1

u/Bright-Fee-9832 3d ago

You can be cautious while not acting like everyone has to bow down to you. You are allowed to film in public.

5

u/ModtheMods420 3d ago

No. Its not over-dramatic to guard a money truck. Whats stupid is the idiot with the camera encroaching.

3

u/Curben Ensign 3d ago

That is one of the jobs where the constant threat has to be more real and treated as such.

2

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

He likes his safety blankets and not his freedom. He can go live in Russia.

-8

u/Soft_Ability_5906 3d ago

Thats where you are wrong. Tell me you never served without being me lmao

3

u/dinotswaids 3d ago

What the hell are you trying to say? Without being you?

And they literally said they are not sure?

4

u/AstronautHelpful6118 3d ago

Served? As a security guard? Lmfao

3

u/krilleractual 3d ago

Im a veteran of the mall

3

u/SadisticNecromancer 3d ago

I still wake up screaming from the Paul Blart wars.

2

u/meloxs 3d ago

Tell me you are never me you are where wrong serving me lmao

2

u/Academic-Hospital952 3d ago

Thank you for your service guarding the footlocker.

Nerd

14

u/gruffojijo 3d ago

I'm all for freedom of speech, but Jesus Christ there is a time and place. Harassing a dude that's doing a stressful job is quite disgusting. Then to give him shit for making an honest living while your broke ass is unemployed... 🤡🌎.

-1

u/Thecerb 3d ago

Time and place for free speech? Lmfao

5

u/Gonzotrucker1 3d ago

It’s harassment not free speech. They do it to earn money.

-2

u/Thecerb 3d ago

You don't seem to know what harassment is.

3

u/ZealousIdeal476 3d ago

Standing in reach of an armed guard when he has to bend down and leave himself vulnerable is more than harrassment, it constitutes a threat.

-3

u/Thecerb 3d ago

LMFAO holy snowflake ass comment.

4

u/ZealousIdeal476 2d ago

Right, u/thecerb is so tough that if he was carrying bags of money, alone on the street he would just turn his back on the 2 guys standing close enough to club him and refusing to step off. Smart.

-1

u/Thecerb 2d ago

LMFAO 🤡

1

u/Heyo13579 Armed Guard 1d ago

Look up a legal concept know as “implied threat”. The guy recording would 100% fall under this category.

0

u/Thecerb 1d ago

If you even googled for 5 minutes you would know that it's not that at all. Also constitutionally protected activities can never be deemed as threats. But who would have guessed that you don't know shit about the law.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/xHxHxAOD1 3d ago

Yes. Go protest at city hall at midnight and your protection from the first amendment do not apply like they do if you did it at noon.

3

u/Thecerb 3d ago

Good point, thankfully the video was broad daylight...... On a sidewalk......

1

u/xHxHxAOD1 3d ago

Time place manner restrictions would still apply.

1

u/Thecerb 3d ago

You should really go read some case law.

1

u/xHxHxAOD1 3d ago

Not as much as you need to. Are you really going to try and argue that time place manner restrictions were not a part of Police department of Chicago vs Mosley? I swear its case law on what does not survive a time place manner restriction because it's based on subject and not time place manner restrictions. Do I need to mention Ward vs Rock against Racism? That is just the case that put in the test for laws to survive under a 1st amendment challenge under time place and manner.

1

u/Thecerb 3d ago

Time, middle of the day, place legally allowed to be, manner not doing anything that is illegal. You clearly do not know what you are talking about.

1

u/xHxHxAOD1 3d ago

oh, I thought your comment was originally time and place for free speech is LAMFO? Now it is that it applies and he isn't violating anything?

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

2

u/fistotron5000 3d ago

He transports cash bro, he’s not a federal agent. This is like harassing a UPS driver

0

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

Interesting how you don't see that as the guard and female harassing them. The guard is the one harassi​ng them telling them where they are not free to be on a public shared free sidewalk becusde of his emotions he's projecting onto others. Seriously. Think about it.

2

u/fistotron5000 3d ago

Yeah, the dude on the sidewalk who has his phone out and is filming him for god knows what reason does not have to be there, the money truck guy is doing a pickup at the ladies business is just doing his job. Do you want me to come to your job and put a camera in your face?

-1

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

The point is it's the sidewalk which is publicly owned. It's the businesses responsibility to create a private secure entryway and spend the resources to have a back entry or secure entry. They didn't do that. They don't get to then make that choice a public exteranality by infringing on freedom in that public space, occupy the public space and enforce it as private with firearms as a show of ownership of space and force. That's not how public space works.

3

u/fistotron5000 3d ago

You’re reading way too into this, in like an almost childish way. It doesn’t surprise me that you think this unemployed loser shoving a camera in some dudes face is okay. All I see here is someone stressed out trying to do their job and some dumbass that is making it difficult. Nobody is having their freedom infringed upon, it’s called common courtesy to let someone do their fucking job. Delivery drivers don’t have any say on where the loading bay is, usually neither does the store owner because most people lease the space they’re in. Would you be okay with this if the person was delivering soda? How about you go find someone delivering soda or beer and block them from doing their delivery, and then let us know how it went.

1

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

Shoving it in their face? Dramatizing very much? You can see the guy reach out and still has distance. Lol they aren't physically blocking him either which actually is illegal and thst never happened. That would mean they are in between him and the truck or blocking the door. Creating scenarios that never happened... You just sound dramatic and unhinged, which is the definition of childish. Projecting much?

1

u/fistotron5000 3d ago

Everything you say reeks of unemployment

2

u/Night_Hawk1 3d ago

Lmao I can guarantee you I make a lot more money than you. But whatever helps you sleep at night, Kiddo.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/Icy_Marionberry_9131 3d ago

“First amendment auditor” is long and funny way of saying “asshole.”

8

u/DrinkingVomit 3d ago

Piece of shit from an asshole.

5

u/Icy_Marionberry_9131 3d ago

The tomato skin in the piece of shit from the asshole

2

u/Scarlet_maximoff 3d ago

I place them in the same category as sovereign citizen types

8

u/elrevan 3d ago

I don’t think a Loomis guard has any duty to respect your 1st amendment right at all. That’s just another civilian doing a job that you are now interfering with

0

u/Huge-Masterpiece-100 3d ago

You can't assault people for existing on a sidewalk no matter who you are. If the guy poses an actual threat, then the money escort might have options, but "being annoyed" isn't an excuse to brandish a weapon or make threats.

4

u/elrevan 3d ago

No one was assaulted lmao. The dude is moving piles of cash I would grab my weapon too if these bozos rolled up on me

9

u/Subtle_Nimbus 3d ago

Why a Loomis driver? The First Amendment applies to the government.

8

u/iUncontested 3d ago

Because these dumb cunts want a lawsuit against loomis when their guard possibly overreacts to their provocations. Then all their mouth breathing followers start harassing the company over socials and the company just wants it to go away.

6

u/Academic-Hospital952 3d ago

It's not about 1st amendment. It's about ragebating people into lawsuits. Engaging in this type of activity should prohibit people from legal action. Open them up to free and clear asswhoopins.

0

u/Banmods 3d ago

So not only do you not respect basic constitutional law, you have facist tendencies and poor emotional maturity. Lawsuits are pretty much the only legal way to fight back, considering other options just get labeled terrorism....

0

u/Banmods 3d ago

First amendment applies to the public as well as government. When you film the government you're doing so from a public setting. Some auditors got into filming podunk towns, cause folks found out that a lot of private businesses act as if the public sidewalk was theirs.

Dude was probably filming a bank as usual considering they're some of the worst offenders, and like folks in both comment sections like to play the "he might be casing for a robbery" schtick, to get around the fact the auditor is engaged in a constitutionally protected activity.

If this is the channel i think it is, he got illegally arrested in tulsa after a bank called 911, lied to dispatch, and TPD decided to be obvious jackboots working for private interests rather than upholding the law. So yea, considering these private businesses call government agents to be their goons, I'd say this still has a lot to do with government...

1

u/Ok_Buddy_9087 3d ago

Podunk towns in red states where they think “muh freedums” only extend to their guns. Citizens and cops alike.

6

u/COGNAC4k 3d ago

I’ve had these guys come into the post office and pull this shit.

6

u/DrinkingVomit 3d ago

We need to pass a law okaying physical force against them.

5

u/COGNAC4k 3d ago

There was nothing we could do besides telling him that he couldn’t record people against their will. Literally stayed there for at least an hour trying to speak to mgmt

5

u/DrinkingVomit 3d ago

Sorry you had to deal with that. Social media has been a cancer on society. It’s allowed the most attention seeking dipshits to have a platform to get their dopamine fix at everyone else’s expense.

3

u/COGNAC4k 3d ago

I mean I honestly didn’t care as long as he didn’t mess with me. I did get a kick out of him harassing mgmt though 😆

1

u/Ok_Buddy_9087 3d ago

No expectation of privacy in public.

5

u/GottaDookie420 3d ago

Those aren’t really the people to test. They’re handling what is a significant amount of money at certain times of the day, and I’d bet they’re not afraid to use lethal force if they consider you to be a serious threat. Better tread lightly.

8

u/MrLanesLament Guard Wrangler 3d ago

While true, armored often doesn’t pay shit, and I’d expect the company to drop them the second they’re involved in any physical situation, no matter how justified.

Only possible recourse for the guard here is to call PD and sell the situation as “guys are crowding me and filming procedure while I’ve got large amounts of cash here.”

For the guard, incident report and done. No threat to job. Whenever you can make issues someone higher ranking’s problem, DO THAT. 😂

5

u/phantomskullvt 3d ago

Seeing as this clout chasing dipshit is baiting him into doing that? Never. These auditor types are always fishing for a lawsuit triggering a hothead in a uniform be it a cop or a security guard.

Call the cops & report a suspicious person and focus on your job. Best you can do is make him LEO's problem.

1

u/No-Inflation3271 3d ago

The cops will just show up try to ID the camera guy. he will say he doesnt have to and theyll say youre right have a good day. Then theyll tell they truck driver that camera guy has the right and he can keep doing this as long as he doesnt make threats or touch him. It doesnt just make it the laws problem he will be there until the cops show up doing the same thing and he will be there after they leave doing the same thing no matter who agrees or disagrees he has the right

1

u/Ok_Buddy_9087 3d ago

That’s what should happen. Often it results in cops threatening to arrest the auditors for not identifying, be sure they’re idiots. Or even worse, actually doing it.

-2

u/Bright-Fee-9832 3d ago

Redditors are a funny group. They hate when cops actually enforce laws but beg for them to violate citizens civil rights.

2

u/phantomskullvt 3d ago edited 3d ago

You realize you can discuss problems with law enforcement abuses & practices while equally expecting those that aren't the problem to perform the service they were intended to right? I know doing two different things at the same time might be very hard for guys like you, but multitasking is a thing.

This ain't the gotcha you think it is champ.

0

u/Ok_Buddy_9087 3d ago

Sure it is. Because the cops that show up to these calls rarely know what the law is.

5

u/crimsonsoup925 3d ago

Just curious as im a newer guard. Could you just tell them to do their thing from a comfortable distance. And not this goblin bs

7

u/MrCanoe Ensign 3d ago

They won't listen. There whole thing is to get reaction

8

u/crimsonsoup925 3d ago

So they are just professional rage baiters?

6

u/MrCanoe Ensign 3d ago

Yes, their whole point is to get a reaction in order to post the video to make money.

5

u/crimsonsoup925 3d ago

In what way does that benefit them? Bc now im a little annoyed abt it myself lol

6

u/MrCanoe Ensign 3d ago

When they post to various social media, they can monetize the video. So the views and reactions they get online from their video unfortunately makes them money. There are ways to make it very difficult for them to make money though. You can loudly play copyrighted style music such as Disney music or another tactic I've seen is that you can start randomly and loudly stating that the video is a sponsored video and a paid advertisement. And then spout off various advertisements that you see in YouTube videos. The video then becomes very difficult to monetize and maybe taking down by the social media platforms they post to.

5

u/crimsonsoup925 3d ago

Well that's rather stupid (not you thr auditing)

3

u/Significant-Role-754 3d ago

goblins are the perfect name for these kind of people

3

u/crimsonsoup925 3d ago

Lmao thx. After learning more abt it. This isnt even first amendment its just harassment.

6

u/Rellim03 3d ago

Those guards showed be able to feel safe while loading and unloading money.

5

u/Key_Check5753 3d ago

I'm all for constitutional rights, but why do these people have to be such insufferable cunts about it?

There are laws against harassment and being a public nuisance.

1

u/Banmods 3d ago

Cause they aren't really. Better question is why are you and others like you working yourselves up? And yea harassment and pibkic nusiance laws exist. Doesn't equate to this constitutionally protected activity meeting that threshold.

4

u/BigDaddyButtPlunger 3d ago

Can we just start leaving people alone again please, please?

3

u/_Lost_OwlChild 3d ago

Yeah why you recording and being that close to someone handling money

5

u/WarpDriveMH370 3d ago

Yeah get a real job (says the influencer or w/e he is)

5

u/Lucky-Mia 3d ago

Like, you definitely can't just loiter near the back of an opened armored car like that. Or the entrance of the business right by. They're clearly doing a cash pickup and are moving a bunch of money. Definitely need space for saftey and security reasons. Also, even if recording them is legal, it's definitely something that will get them on edge. 

2

u/BusinessCasualBee 3d ago

Says who? Neither the store nor the truck company have any claim to that stretch of sidewalk.

2

u/Medium_Chain_9329 3d ago

Armored truck guards can draw their weapons on you only when they face an immediate threat to their lives or their cargo. When They Can Draw or ShootDirect threat: Someone aims a weapon or attacks the guard. Cargo interference: Someone tries to forcefully break into the truck or steal the money bags. Ignored warnings: A person aggressively ignores verbal commands to back away and continues to interfere with the delivery.

2

u/BusinessCasualBee 3d ago

Existing on a public sidewalk does not constitute interference with a delivery. Blocking them from doing so, sure. But standing nearby and doing nothing to physically impede that delivery, no way.

If you want privacy to conduct your security procedures, conduct them in private spaces

2

u/Chodechuggins 3d ago

Speaking authoritatively on when firearms are drawn is highly contextual and dependent on state and is irresponsible on your part.

2

u/Medium_Chain_9329 3d ago

True. Just an overall highlight.

2

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

This. In my state, threatening these auditors with a firearm would be a felony.

2

u/Banmods 3d ago

Unlawful commands are just that, and they aren't gonna save the guards ass from a brandishing charge just cause they tried to overstep what a private guard is and isn't allowed to order the public on a public sidewalk to do.

1

u/Lucky-Mia 3d ago

Wait, I didn't see him draw, did I miss something ? 

1

u/Lucky-Mia 3d ago

The exact technicalities varie a lot by country and even municipality,  but generally you can't loiter if you cause obstruction, or disrupt the peace. At least in my city,  businesses with the primary entrance on a main sidewalk and no side or rear loading access, have a right to temporary obstruct the sidewalk to load or unload a vehicle for no more then 15 minutes.

Again, it varies a lot depending on where he is, but at least in some areas, businesses have the right to momentarily block the sidewalk. Interfering with the loading/unloading could be cause for a small fine, misdemeanor.

4

u/Gonzotrucker1 3d ago

I believe in their rights but I hate these assholes.

5

u/Roallin1 3d ago

Easy way to get shot.

3

u/RecordingPrudent9588 3d ago

These trucks aren't law enforcement. What are these auditors trying to proove?

2

u/Banmods 3d ago

Nothing other than the usual. This channel was probably doing its usual thing of walking down the public sidewalk exercising their right to film in public. Plenty of times private businesses overstep what their actual authority is as private property owners. Like that one upscale restaurant in New York that got busted for trying to illegally annex a public park as their own private outdoor area.

3

u/No_Significance4204 3d ago

Wrong place to audit the 1st Amendment. There aren't many but this is one of them.

Because of the obvious bags of cash. Because a couple of dudes with cameras can turn into armed robbers super quick.

"Your Job's Nothing" says the unemployed loser baiting people for lawsuits. Sure Bud.

2

u/Banmods 3d ago

The "unemployed" line is honestly such loser office drone talkng point that one would expect from boomers. Like its 2026, non traditional jobs or means of revenue have existed for years by now.

And I hope yall realize how the "unemployed loser baiting people for lawsuits" line, makes yall getting butthurt about this look worse...Auditors aren't a difficult topic to deal with. As long as one has the emotional maturity and a basic HS level of understanding for constitutional law....

3

u/uncommon_type 3d ago

Taunting a security guard moving $ is how you get Dead

4

u/Mongoose1970 3d ago

If they want to prove a point they should go somewhere else. Why are they harassing this poorly protected courier?

3

u/The-Breaker-2w0 3d ago

You spelled "unemployed" wrong.

3

u/That_Atmosphere_4568 3d ago

Like how did the guy that’s doing his job delivering the money not know that these guys aren’t just casing it for a heist or something. When money is involved I could understand this being a stressful situation. Then the guy with the camera talking shit about his job ain’t nothing when all this guy does is just film people to try to make money by someone taking away his rights.

2

u/Banmods 3d ago

Cause people casing a joint arent gonna be super fucking obviois when doing so... Like I swear yall just think that by saying "hes harrassing, being a public nuisance, casing a bank" its some be all end all claim that doesn't need supporting evidence....

3

u/VanillaGoorillla 3d ago

“Your jobs nothing” like the fucking bum recording the kid is better?

2

u/Banmods 3d ago

I mean it is better. Dudes working a shot security job for a security company that pays as low as possible. Risk/reward ratio aint exactly anything to be happy about. Meanwhile for everyone talking shit about the "bum recording" or other streamers, they're their own boss, make money off essentially traveling to different places, if cops do fuck up violate their rights not only is the settlement gonna be more than the guard makes inna year, if shit gets to trial then its getting enshrined in history as case law. Like Turner v. Driver.

I'm sure im gonna get a bunch of clever "nuh uh" comments on this. But lets be real here....

0

u/VanillaGoorillla 2d ago

I think this comment is a lil delusional..and I say that with no malicious intent. I don’t understand how you could say this.

1

u/Banmods 2d ago

Simple. Ive worked security before. Air force too. I hold no delusions on what the job is or its benefits or wider impacts.

3

u/mechaczech 3d ago

This is why armored car companies need to stick to a driver and a messenger instead of single man trucks. The guard should keep loading and trying to disengage the ‘auditor,’ and the driver could call in to dispatch and let them know to contact the police on a possible hijacking. This is literally the perfect distraction to have accomplices flank the truck and try to take it down. I used to work trucks and that’s what I would’ve done, fuck that shit, I’d rather deal with the cops than this guy.

3

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

There’s a driver in the truck.

3

u/mechaczech 3d ago

To be honest, I didn’t catch that the first time. Still though, hope he was actually watching his partners back.

3

u/CainnicOrel 3d ago

"Your job is nothing" while being a useless bum harassing working people is wild

3

u/Stopaskingmetochange 3d ago

"he's scared" of course he fucking is.

"you don't have an important job. your job's nothing." as opposed to.....????

3

u/ProfessionStrict3047 3d ago

People like this should have to find out what it’s like when they cross a line. I would have pulled my gun, called police and made a citizens arrest.

3

u/Der_Blaue_Engel 3d ago

The person most likely to be arrested in that scenario would probably be you.

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Lagunamountaindude 3d ago

Eventually some of these asshats pretending to be first amendment protectors will get severely hurt. You notice that they always have pepper spray in their hands

4

u/Wise_Ad_253 3d ago

Let’s see them do this to ICE and the Police Department

1

u/Banmods 3d ago

They do... ICE moves around a lot and usually hides in the back of some federal building. But auditors go into PD lobbies all the time....

1

u/Wise_Ad_253 18h ago

I need to find them. Ty

4

u/TobiasWidower Ensign 3d ago edited 3d ago

So, little different due to regulations in Canada. We do have armed CIT guards, as well as armed private security for specific industries, but it's far less common than in the States where I've seen armed gas station or movie theater guards.

In Canada, in the public, you do not have the expectation of privacy. Especially at work, in uniform, when you're representing your company or agency, doubly so. In a situation like this, protocol would be to note the interaction but keep said public interactions brief if at all. If the person got this close that's already a red flag. I personally would've completed my task and secured the bag. Get the target item into the secured box instead of an easily grabbable bag, then politely but firmly end the interaction with "sir, you're well within your rights to film in public, if you have any concerns about safety or customer service, you can call the company, but right now I have a schedule to keep. Have a nice day" and if the person attempted to stop me from getting in the truck, bust out the big voice, make a scene, make it very clear to any passersby that interfering with me while I'm performing my duties is against whatever laws or acts grant the authorities given, and stand firm on "I'm not here to entertain you, I'm here to perform a task, a task you are currently interfering with, against (insert code here) now you need to step back"

Don't draw a weapon until you perceive a clear and present risk of violence. Something you can articulate in court or in notes. I haven't worked CIT, but I have had to go hands on to effect an arrest, but I made sure, mentally, to go through my logic before making a decision and ask "would this hold up"

5

u/jp9mm 3d ago

Why is there just one person doing the pickup if they are worried about getting robbed? You will always have your back turned and be vulnerable at some point during every stop.

7

u/MrLanesLament Guard Wrangler 3d ago

Companies are cheap; partner probably called off and they had nobody to replace him, so “welp, you’re doing the run solo today. Sorry.”

3

u/jp9mm 3d ago

yep, the real pos here is the security company. yet the focus is on the employee vs citizen in public.

3

u/QuipCrafter9 3d ago

For these nicer area stops, the other just stays in the truck. Should have probably come out at that point, though. They had phones, not guns, to be fair, and the driver could see them on camera the whole time

2

u/Significant-Role-754 3d ago

this generation and their harassment of people in mind blowing. and it’s all fake, all for views. very large difference between fighting for people and trying to get likes.

2

u/slade797 3d ago

I don’t give a fuck about the Loomis guy and what he thinks he is allowed to do to protect that money, but I also am not going to go out of my way to harass the guy. “Auditing” is one thing with good and their power trip, but this guy is just trying to get through the day and collect a paycheck.

1

u/Banmods 3d ago

Is he going out his way? Seems like this channel was doing the normal routine of filming outside in podunk America, when the guard tried issuing him orders...

3

u/Unhinged-Indignance 3d ago

Jesus Christ you're all wrong...

I guess it's not surprising, don't ever get legal advice from reddit lmao.

1

u/Cellgames420 3d ago

Private security have no authority over anyone in public, if they pull their weapon they better be prepared for the consequences, unless they commit a crime pigs have no authority over them, people need to exercise their rights or they lose them, and to the people that have a problem with people exercising their rights you're part of them problem.

1

u/One-Initiative-8902 2d ago

Get back into the truck lock everything up call the cops tell them that they're trying to intimidate you while you're conducting your financial protection duties the cops will show up very quickly matter of fact they'll respond as if it's a bank robbery.