Bi State Metrolink: Fight crime by disarming Security Guards and smiling –

That man needs to be fired. Stupidest thing I have ever heard!!!!

Back in the eighties I lost a wonderful attorney (Those are words that you would NEVER expect to come out of my mouth!) due to a surprise criminal gangster wannabe shooting him dead just for asking what he thought was doing on the Oak Park train line. In this particular time in history, this is not a good time to rely on just talking to the hoards of zombified miscreants that are out and about in public. Mr. Steidl is absolutely right on the money in his treatise above.

Who’s committing the acts of random violence? The security force?

So ah, does Mr. Roach have any data about his security force abusing firearms, threatening riders, robbing passengers, doing drugs at work when armed, and/or harassing or bullying others with their weapons? If so, lets discuss that. If not, just tell us how many passengers have been protected on a daily basis and that have enjoyed the benefits of a well armed security force.

The law abiding citizens carrying concealed, law abiding officers and the law abiding security personnel with open carry, are not the problem. It’s not the guns randomly firing and killing innocent people. Guns are safe, they don’t accidently go off. Someone pulls the trigger.

It’s the criminals. Those illegally carrying and using guns to further their criminal acts. Better judges, stronger sentences and real punishment for those violating the law. No more plea bargains. Just do your job.

Hopefully all the thugs in the Bi State don’t hear about this security improvement plan!

I just read a separate article where Mr. Roach addresses Metro Link security concerns. In that article, he states his recognition that the Metro Link security force is not trained to the level of sworn, full-time LEOs. That is a reasonable observation – and fact. In the interview link shared on Watchdogs, he should have stated that, stated why he did not think proper training could be accomplished (whether it be logistical, fiscal, etc.) attempted to rationally explain his reasoning for disarming the security force, and how he believed supplementing sworn LEOs at the level he proposes would accomplish making the Metro Link safer for EVERYONE. In other words, he should have gone out of his way to support his decision with facts, not blathering PR soundbite language. HUGE mistake.

If this individual believes disarming security guards is going to “improve safety and engage the customer with more respect” then he has failed to effectively screen, hire, and TRAIN the right people for security positions. Supplementing the security force with sworn police officers is a great idea but having only 20% of the original armed security force replaced with armed LEOs is not going to cut it. If he believes that the predators who prowl that transportation system and victimize people are going to reciprocate that “kindness and engagement” and de-escalate…then he is foolish. In fact, I watched two minutes of his interview and came to the same conclusion – he is foolish. He repeated keywords and phrases tied to community policing concepts. His interview was nothing more than a prolonged public relations soundbite. It’s fine – and it’s expected – that officers/security guards treat people/transit customers with respect and dignity and interact with them and engage people in a community oriented policing fashion, I policed with respect for years, until those people act like animals. At the point, it becomes necessary to engage them in direct, authoritarian, and dynamic fashion so as to gain control over the situation and, as Mr. Roach states, to de-escalate but more importantly…to render the situation safe for everyone. And yes, that sometimes involves using a firearm to threaten or inflict deadly force against said bad guy. It’s obvious that Mr. Roach has no confidence in his security force. He should screen, hire and properly train new ones and do the process correctly – while supplementing with sworn LEOs. PS – I’m sorry to say that any person who would work an urban setting public transportation system as an unarmed security guard – is also foolish. I know that there are probably some who feel the need to do it to support themselves and their families monetarily with a paycheck. However, there are other, safer ways to provide for one’s family than to risk their life in that job. Contrary to what Mr. Roach is saying, I sadly predict an escalation of violent incidents and, unfortunately, injury and death to innocents arising from this ill-conceived policy. RCS