February 16, 2007
Is Security Failing Retail Shoppers?
The recruiting, quality and training of guards in malls has come under scrutiny after it was alleged that security personnel fled at the first hint of danger in this week’s deadly attack that left five innocent people dead at Trolley Square Mall in Salt Lake City.
Sulejmen Talovic, 18, is said to have entered the mall on Monday with a .38 caliber pistol and a shotgun and began randomly firing. Before he was shot and killed by police, Mr. Talovic had murdered five and wounded four during his rampage.
According to numerous reports, an off-duty police officer, Kenneth Hammon, prevented further bloodshed by exchanging fire with the suspect until a SWAT squad moved in and killed Mr. Talovic.
The event, as a Retail Traffic website article points out, has raised concerns about the performance of the security detail at the Trolley Square Mall. It has also raised the bigger question about security in retail facilities across the country.
A witness to the attack, told KSL TV, “I heard the gun shot, and then I saw the security guards run off, and then I heard a couple more shots.”
Mall security by all accounts seems to have played no role in stopping the shooter. The mall has not commented on the number of guards on duty at the time of the attack.
“Some shopping centers will just hire two guard service people to patrol the property and don’t really give them any direction; they just tell them to wander around the area,” said Chris McGoey, founder of McGoey Security Consulting.
“We would all like to have the best qualified people for the job, but the pay scale that exists does not allow us to hire the best people and there is a limited group of [candidates] who can do this job,” said Jonathan Lusher principal consultant and executive vice president with the security firm IPC International Corp.
There has been concern for a number of years about the vulnerability of so-called soft targets such as malls and retail stores. As the Retail Traffic article points out, the tragic event of this week is not the only case of malls being targeted for violent acts in the last year as three facilities in Florida and Illinois were targeted in December.
Discussion Questions: Does the system for hiring and training security guards at malls need to change? What is required to professionalize security in soft target retail facilities?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Certainly, unarmed security guards cannot be expected to physically confront a man rapid-firing a shotgun in a crowded mall. Mall rent-a-cops are hired to deter shoplifting, vandalism and rowdy behavior, not as a defense against random acts of gun violence. Their only option is to attempt to move patrons out of harm’s way and call the police.
As a shopper, I’d be very uncomfortable at the prospect of armed guards patrolling the mall, especially if the pay scale is low. Police might be better–at least they are highly trained–but is this an efficient use of municipal resources?
Another option that I do not favor would be to place security stations at all mall entrances with screening similar to that at airports and courthouses. I suspect mall operators wouldn’t be comfortable with the message that sends either–they want their properties to be welcoming, not scary. Plus a typical mall has dozens of entrances that would need coverage–at great cost.
A final thought: In these security-minded times, it’s very important that we distinguish between the threat from politically motivated terrorists and the threat of the random sociopath who desires a glorious “suicide-by-cop.” Where imminent terror threat is identified, it is appropriate to put visible security in place. But locking down our public spaces against the rare individual crazy would constitute a permanent reduction in our quality of life. I’m not ready to make that trade-off yet, despite the tragic events this week.
In the 60s, one of my summer jobs was to manage a 7-Eleven store directly across the street from a “rowdy” high school. When summer-school classes were dismissed daily, my store was flooded with shoppers, aka shoplifters. I had to keep a loaded shotgun prominently displayed in an easily-accessed (from the clerk’s side) glass case directly below the cash register. Theft plummeted. When I began guiding the advertising for BI-LO supermarkets in SC in the mid-80s, most of their stores had a life-size fiberglass bull on the roof and a security guard with a shotgun sitting in an elevated chair near the checkstands. (Actually, some stores had two bulls, denoting the size of the store.) By the 90s, these icons were gone. Theft increased. There’s nothing like a show of force at retail as a deterrent.
Despite being a qualified rangemaster, certified sharpshooter, licensed handgun carrier, and sanctioned handgun competitor, I’d scoot if I were an underpaid and under-armed mall security guard hearing shots fired. They simply don’t sign up for that type of action. Shoplifting, crowd/gang control, traffic control, and harassment are their responsibilities. Policemen are supposed to take care of the dicey stuff.
Considering the stakes, it’s remarkable that malls don’t employ better deterrence. Trolley Square Mall will be dragged through the courts and sales will drop dramatically for a period of time. Certainly an expensive proposition.
And just for the record, “if only all those law abiding citizens were armed, he’d never have been able to do that.”
Security is fine. To assume a mall or any other place is to be responsible for the actions of people intent on doing harm is not reasonable. No shopper is required to shop at a particular store or mall and therefore they have the right to base their decision on whatever they choose. Thus there’s no reason to assume a mall or any other retail location must assume anything beyond a reasonable level of security…which is designed in the first place to prevent theft.
Malls in certain other countries have security procedures similar to US airports (x-ray tunnels, metal sensors). Unless American mall violence escalates considerably, it’s unlikely airport-style procedures will be adopted. Blaming security guards for lack of bravery isn’t appropriate.
The retailers who suffer frequent violence aren’t in malls. They’re late-night convenience and liquor stores, and bars. Those locations suffer greater-than-usual recruitment and retention problems because the frequency of violence is relatively high. Contrast how many people are killed in bars and gas station holdups versus how many people are killed each year in malls.
I’m in agreement with other panelists that it’s no surprise that minimum-wage, poorly trained, mall security personnel, armed with walkie-talkies, ran off in the face of a crazed individual, armed to the teeth, intent on committing mayhem. Smart-thinking on their part! We all know the primary purpose of store/mall security folks is to present the illusion of security, handle the odd shop lifting incident, report any gangs loitering in the mall and as someone suggested, ideally, know CPR in case some senior citizen has a medical emergency. There is no way to protect against random acts of violence like this, unless we resort to fortifying every public place with armed guards. And I don’t think we want to do this. One idea, especially for large shopping malls and concentrated retail areas, might be to locate a police sub-station on the grounds. Local police on foot or on bicycles, patrolling and having presence might be a good way to show the community and shoppers that indeed, there is a trained, armed responder close at hand.
Whats the job description? Mall security is typically charged with keeping skateboarders out and dealing with an occasional shoplifter. They are not trained as counter-terror agents. I don’t think anyone has the right to expect any more protection in a mall than they receive in their neighborhood or on the street. As almost all law enforcement is reactive (because if you act to preempt anything you will be sued). Fact is that when shots are fired the best line of defense is to run. Run and call in the cops. We have boxed ourselves into a horrible situation and many will die before the demand for security will overshadow political correctness. If we really wanted safe malls, we would look like Europe, where armed-to-the-gills police patrol everywhere.
There’s a notice printed at all the entrances of that mall stating “no weapons allowed.” Perhaps the lettering was too small; larger print might have helped. Mall security guards are as ineffective as that, as a deterrent. Hiring licensed, armed law enforcement would be a possibility but unless all locations employed them, the shooter would just pick a different target. The answer? You are your own first responder. Be vigilent.
I’m no expert at security but I must assume that most mall security forces are in place to present an image of safety for the consumers that shop there.
I have no expectations that these folks are there to fight crime…I’d be happy to know that they are trained in CPR and other life-saving techniques!
Given the fact that they carry no weapons, it doesn’t surprise me that in the face of violence they are no different than the customers and are helpless to defend anyone…when I see them patrolling the parking lots in mall security vehicles I again believe this is more cosmetic than preventative.
If people want to see higher levels of protection at the mall, then the mall owners are going to need to contract for full time police protection (beats) at the mall. I’ve seen this at a number of large box stores in urban areas and it provides a greater level of assurance to me as a consumer!
We can’t expect mall security to be ready to shoot it out with heavily armed criminals, citizens run amok, or terrorists. As mentioned previously, they are there to prevent shoplifting and perhaps deter purse snatching and parking lot crimes.
Security guards should be able to call the police directly via their walkie-talkies but we can’t expect them to go much beyond that.
Meanwhile, these fairly regular outbursts of extreme violence point out a larger societal problem that can’t be dealt with by malls or retailers, except we can all try to do a better job of getting to the underlying problems that lead to these incidents.
Mall security is in place to protect property, not people. So, if little Jimmy or Suzy is lifting shirts from Holister–and they run right into a security guard–and they drop the stolen goods, that guard may be an effective deterrent.
Now, let’s look at what happened in Utah. A couple of (I assume) unarmed guards, making (again I assume) minimum wage or close to minimum wage find themselves in the middle of a fire fight. Is anybody surprised they cut and ran? What should they have done, charged the gunman and thrown their bodies in front of them?
Malls, as they are designed and run today, are unguardable against this kind of random, psychotic attack–or a planned terrorist attack for that matter. You simple can’t secure a totally open space. As long as you let people walk in unsearched, the potential exists that one of them will bring something with them that poses a danger to the rest of the shoppers.
Sure, you could hire ex-Special Forces, arm them with heavy weapons and make every person entering the mall pass through a series of metal and bomb detectors but I bet it would have a negative impact on customer count.
The problem isn’t a security guard that chose to stay alive, it’s the fact that somehow an individual can plan an attack like this without anyone else knowing, or caring, about it.
Most security guards are just figurines with no real authority. They are often underemployed, underpaid, and have no skills. I’ve had some clients in the past who had some security problems. What they did from time to time was stage some incidents in their store. They would hire an actor to come in, cause some trouble and then the security guards would beat him up followed by a staged old fashion ride out to the country. Through word of mouth customers learned the store itself would be judge, jury and executioner regarding any incidents in the store. It seems to work well in Arkansas and Mississippi but I’m not sure about the rest of the country.
In reading about this tragedy I saw that the first responder was an off duty police officer from another jurisdiction, wearing civilian attire, who had been eating dinner with his pregnant wife and heard the shots. He is being hailed, justifiably, as a hero. He later said that his greatest concern was not fear of engaging the teenage gunman, but rather that other police coming to the scene and not recognizing him as one of their own, might shoot at him. Thank goodness he was there, but next time there may not be an off duty officer available to risk his life.
My own subsequent trips to the movies, sports stadium, train station, and grocery store have found me looking around to see where I might dive to hide if shooting ever started. I HATE myself for that, but I think it is human nature to be hyper-aware after an “event.” The paranoia will fade in time…until the next time a random shooting occurs. But it made me think that many more people may come to view online banking, internet shopping with UPS deliveries, and 47 inch TV screen viewing of sporting events as adding safety to their lives. Food for thought on so many levels for merchants, marketers and advertisers.
I think we will also begin to see more stores within malls taking steps to secure their employees and customers by individually hiring, or maybe sharing with their next door neighbor store, a professional armed security officer (like jewelry stores already often do).
I’m mildly surprised – but pleased – to see that no one has offered up “if only all those law abiding citizens were armed, he’d never have been able to do that;” and, of course, more mall visitors are probably killed each year in slip-and-fall accidents while visiting the restroom than are killed by psychotic/terrorist attacks….on the other hand, all of the UK had something like 50 handgun deaths last year, and they are “concerned,” so I guess we can fret if we wish.
Police officers do not get paid enough for the risks they take especially in this world where every politician is ready to second guess their tough decisions. The local security guards are rarely armed and poorly trained while working close to minimum wage. This needs to be addressed as the number of sudden incidents seems to be increasing.
Mall owners have turned to armed police officers to help secure their facilities. When gangs were causing major problems in a Cleveland mall years ago, the landlord posted armed police at all mall entrances. When the youth involved realized they would have to pass by the officers entering and exiting the mall, they took their vandalism and shoplifting elsewhere. And contrary to Mr. Ryan Mathews’ comment, shoppers felt safe and secure in returning to the mall once they understood real security was in place.
The onus is in the hands of the mall developers and mall merchant associations to provide meaningful security for their tenants. Any additional payment made in CAM charges by retailers will be quickly recovered from improved inventory shrinkage. Few if any young shoplifters today feel threatened by the unarmed “Deputy Feif” roaming the malls.
We cannot stop planned attacks and violence. Security in malls is there just for crowd control, shoplifting and to provide assistance to the customers. They are unarmed, with limited authority. We cannot provide arms to them; it won’t create customer friendly environment.
Mall security needs to be trained well enough to spot potential incidents before they happen, they don’t need to become police. Business cannot be done under heavy armed forces. The environment should be fearless.
Violence, like lightening, is very unlikely to hit any individual; while taken on the whole, it strikes many times a day. Thanks to multi media and PR we get to hear whatever makes an example. In this case, it sounds like someone is selling some training program (and/or weaponry) for guards. Rather than fool around debating guard efficiency, I think the issue should be how guns (including the off duty policeman) were in the mall (anywhere in public) in the first place. Maybe stronger gun laws? This is not a private issue.
More Discussions
Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?Should IKEA Be Flattening Management?
Should IKEA be trimming down its management headcount?Is Legislation the Answer on Visa, Mastercard Swipe Fees as ~$200 Billion Record Is Set?
Is lawmaking the way forward on swipe fees?
Certainly, unarmed security guards cannot be expected to physically confront a man rapid-firing a shotgun in a crowded mall. Mall rent-a-cops are hired to deter shoplifting, vandalism and rowdy behavior, not as a defense against random acts of gun violence. Their only option is to attempt to move patrons out of harm’s way and call the police.
As a shopper, I’d be very uncomfortable at the prospect of armed guards patrolling the mall, especially if the pay scale is low. Police might be better–at least they are highly trained–but is this an efficient use of municipal resources?
Another option that I do not favor would be to place security stations at all mall entrances with screening similar to that at airports and courthouses. I suspect mall operators wouldn’t be comfortable with the message that sends either–they want their properties to be welcoming, not scary. Plus a typical mall has dozens of entrances that would need coverage–at great cost.
A final thought: In these security-minded times, it’s very important that we distinguish between the threat from politically motivated terrorists and the threat of the random sociopath who desires a glorious “suicide-by-cop.” Where imminent terror threat is identified, it is appropriate to put visible security in place. But locking down our public spaces against the rare individual crazy would constitute a permanent reduction in our quality of life. I’m not ready to make that trade-off yet, despite the tragic events this week.
In the 60s, one of my summer jobs was to manage a 7-Eleven store directly across the street from a “rowdy” high school. When summer-school classes were dismissed daily, my store was flooded with shoppers, aka shoplifters. I had to keep a loaded shotgun prominently displayed in an easily-accessed (from the clerk’s side) glass case directly below the cash register. Theft plummeted. When I began guiding the advertising for BI-LO supermarkets in SC in the mid-80s, most of their stores had a life-size fiberglass bull on the roof and a security guard with a shotgun sitting in an elevated chair near the checkstands. (Actually, some stores had two bulls, denoting the size of the store.) By the 90s, these icons were gone. Theft increased. There’s nothing like a show of force at retail as a deterrent.
Despite being a qualified rangemaster, certified sharpshooter, licensed handgun carrier, and sanctioned handgun competitor, I’d scoot if I were an underpaid and under-armed mall security guard hearing shots fired. They simply don’t sign up for that type of action. Shoplifting, crowd/gang control, traffic control, and harassment are their responsibilities. Policemen are supposed to take care of the dicey stuff.
Considering the stakes, it’s remarkable that malls don’t employ better deterrence. Trolley Square Mall will be dragged through the courts and sales will drop dramatically for a period of time. Certainly an expensive proposition.
And just for the record, “if only all those law abiding citizens were armed, he’d never have been able to do that.”
Security is fine. To assume a mall or any other place is to be responsible for the actions of people intent on doing harm is not reasonable. No shopper is required to shop at a particular store or mall and therefore they have the right to base their decision on whatever they choose. Thus there’s no reason to assume a mall or any other retail location must assume anything beyond a reasonable level of security…which is designed in the first place to prevent theft.
Malls in certain other countries have security procedures similar to US airports (x-ray tunnels, metal sensors). Unless American mall violence escalates considerably, it’s unlikely airport-style procedures will be adopted. Blaming security guards for lack of bravery isn’t appropriate.
The retailers who suffer frequent violence aren’t in malls. They’re late-night convenience and liquor stores, and bars. Those locations suffer greater-than-usual recruitment and retention problems because the frequency of violence is relatively high. Contrast how many people are killed in bars and gas station holdups versus how many people are killed each year in malls.
I’m in agreement with other panelists that it’s no surprise that minimum-wage, poorly trained, mall security personnel, armed with walkie-talkies, ran off in the face of a crazed individual, armed to the teeth, intent on committing mayhem. Smart-thinking on their part! We all know the primary purpose of store/mall security folks is to present the illusion of security, handle the odd shop lifting incident, report any gangs loitering in the mall and as someone suggested, ideally, know CPR in case some senior citizen has a medical emergency. There is no way to protect against random acts of violence like this, unless we resort to fortifying every public place with armed guards. And I don’t think we want to do this. One idea, especially for large shopping malls and concentrated retail areas, might be to locate a police sub-station on the grounds. Local police on foot or on bicycles, patrolling and having presence might be a good way to show the community and shoppers that indeed, there is a trained, armed responder close at hand.
Whats the job description? Mall security is typically charged with keeping skateboarders out and dealing with an occasional shoplifter. They are not trained as counter-terror agents. I don’t think anyone has the right to expect any more protection in a mall than they receive in their neighborhood or on the street. As almost all law enforcement is reactive (because if you act to preempt anything you will be sued). Fact is that when shots are fired the best line of defense is to run. Run and call in the cops. We have boxed ourselves into a horrible situation and many will die before the demand for security will overshadow political correctness. If we really wanted safe malls, we would look like Europe, where armed-to-the-gills police patrol everywhere.
There’s a notice printed at all the entrances of that mall stating “no weapons allowed.” Perhaps the lettering was too small; larger print might have helped. Mall security guards are as ineffective as that, as a deterrent. Hiring licensed, armed law enforcement would be a possibility but unless all locations employed them, the shooter would just pick a different target. The answer? You are your own first responder. Be vigilent.
I’m no expert at security but I must assume that most mall security forces are in place to present an image of safety for the consumers that shop there.
I have no expectations that these folks are there to fight crime…I’d be happy to know that they are trained in CPR and other life-saving techniques!
Given the fact that they carry no weapons, it doesn’t surprise me that in the face of violence they are no different than the customers and are helpless to defend anyone…when I see them patrolling the parking lots in mall security vehicles I again believe this is more cosmetic than preventative.
If people want to see higher levels of protection at the mall, then the mall owners are going to need to contract for full time police protection (beats) at the mall. I’ve seen this at a number of large box stores in urban areas and it provides a greater level of assurance to me as a consumer!
We can’t expect mall security to be ready to shoot it out with heavily armed criminals, citizens run amok, or terrorists. As mentioned previously, they are there to prevent shoplifting and perhaps deter purse snatching and parking lot crimes.
Security guards should be able to call the police directly via their walkie-talkies but we can’t expect them to go much beyond that.
Meanwhile, these fairly regular outbursts of extreme violence point out a larger societal problem that can’t be dealt with by malls or retailers, except we can all try to do a better job of getting to the underlying problems that lead to these incidents.
Mall security is in place to protect property, not people. So, if little Jimmy or Suzy is lifting shirts from Holister–and they run right into a security guard–and they drop the stolen goods, that guard may be an effective deterrent.
Now, let’s look at what happened in Utah. A couple of (I assume) unarmed guards, making (again I assume) minimum wage or close to minimum wage find themselves in the middle of a fire fight. Is anybody surprised they cut and ran? What should they have done, charged the gunman and thrown their bodies in front of them?
Malls, as they are designed and run today, are unguardable against this kind of random, psychotic attack–or a planned terrorist attack for that matter. You simple can’t secure a totally open space. As long as you let people walk in unsearched, the potential exists that one of them will bring something with them that poses a danger to the rest of the shoppers.
Sure, you could hire ex-Special Forces, arm them with heavy weapons and make every person entering the mall pass through a series of metal and bomb detectors but I bet it would have a negative impact on customer count.
The problem isn’t a security guard that chose to stay alive, it’s the fact that somehow an individual can plan an attack like this without anyone else knowing, or caring, about it.
Most security guards are just figurines with no real authority. They are often underemployed, underpaid, and have no skills. I’ve had some clients in the past who had some security problems. What they did from time to time was stage some incidents in their store. They would hire an actor to come in, cause some trouble and then the security guards would beat him up followed by a staged old fashion ride out to the country. Through word of mouth customers learned the store itself would be judge, jury and executioner regarding any incidents in the store. It seems to work well in Arkansas and Mississippi but I’m not sure about the rest of the country.
In reading about this tragedy I saw that the first responder was an off duty police officer from another jurisdiction, wearing civilian attire, who had been eating dinner with his pregnant wife and heard the shots. He is being hailed, justifiably, as a hero. He later said that his greatest concern was not fear of engaging the teenage gunman, but rather that other police coming to the scene and not recognizing him as one of their own, might shoot at him. Thank goodness he was there, but next time there may not be an off duty officer available to risk his life.
My own subsequent trips to the movies, sports stadium, train station, and grocery store have found me looking around to see where I might dive to hide if shooting ever started. I HATE myself for that, but I think it is human nature to be hyper-aware after an “event.” The paranoia will fade in time…until the next time a random shooting occurs. But it made me think that many more people may come to view online banking, internet shopping with UPS deliveries, and 47 inch TV screen viewing of sporting events as adding safety to their lives. Food for thought on so many levels for merchants, marketers and advertisers.
I think we will also begin to see more stores within malls taking steps to secure their employees and customers by individually hiring, or maybe sharing with their next door neighbor store, a professional armed security officer (like jewelry stores already often do).
I’m mildly surprised – but pleased – to see that no one has offered up “if only all those law abiding citizens were armed, he’d never have been able to do that;” and, of course, more mall visitors are probably killed each year in slip-and-fall accidents while visiting the restroom than are killed by psychotic/terrorist attacks….on the other hand, all of the UK had something like 50 handgun deaths last year, and they are “concerned,” so I guess we can fret if we wish.
Police officers do not get paid enough for the risks they take especially in this world where every politician is ready to second guess their tough decisions. The local security guards are rarely armed and poorly trained while working close to minimum wage. This needs to be addressed as the number of sudden incidents seems to be increasing.
Mall owners have turned to armed police officers to help secure their facilities. When gangs were causing major problems in a Cleveland mall years ago, the landlord posted armed police at all mall entrances. When the youth involved realized they would have to pass by the officers entering and exiting the mall, they took their vandalism and shoplifting elsewhere. And contrary to Mr. Ryan Mathews’ comment, shoppers felt safe and secure in returning to the mall once they understood real security was in place.
The onus is in the hands of the mall developers and mall merchant associations to provide meaningful security for their tenants. Any additional payment made in CAM charges by retailers will be quickly recovered from improved inventory shrinkage. Few if any young shoplifters today feel threatened by the unarmed “Deputy Feif” roaming the malls.
We cannot stop planned attacks and violence. Security in malls is there just for crowd control, shoplifting and to provide assistance to the customers. They are unarmed, with limited authority. We cannot provide arms to them; it won’t create customer friendly environment.
Mall security needs to be trained well enough to spot potential incidents before they happen, they don’t need to become police. Business cannot be done under heavy armed forces. The environment should be fearless.
Violence, like lightening, is very unlikely to hit any individual; while taken on the whole, it strikes many times a day. Thanks to multi media and PR we get to hear whatever makes an example. In this case, it sounds like someone is selling some training program (and/or weaponry) for guards. Rather than fool around debating guard efficiency, I think the issue should be how guns (including the off duty policeman) were in the mall (anywhere in public) in the first place. Maybe stronger gun laws? This is not a private issue.