Tesla: Journalists Trespassed At Gigafactory, Assaulted Employees (teslamotors.com) 328
An anonymous reader writes: Telsa Motors has published a blog post saying that a pair of journalists from the Reno Gazette Journal trespassed on the grounds of the company's new Gigafactory and attacked security workers with their vehicle when confronted. "As the Tesla employee attempted to record the license plate number on the rear bumper, the driver put it in reverse and accelerated into the Tesla employee, knocking him over, causing him to sustain a blow to the left hip, an approximate 2" bleeding laceration to his right forearm, a 3" bleeding laceration to his upper arm, and scrapes on both palms." Officials from the Sheriff's Department arrived shortly after this happened and arrested one of the trespassers for felony assault. The RGJ has a story about the altercation as well, confirming there was an altercation, but also noting, "The newspaper's vehicle was damaged in the altercation. A rock had been used to shatter the driver's-side window and the driver's-side seat belt had been cut in half."
Record License Plate Number? (Score:2, Funny)
I would have thought this place would have had security cameras everywhere. Elon, you need better security staff or did you outsource it?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the newer cameras out there are pretty good at it. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
And you expect to have that recording 24/7? Don't know how much effort the company wants to put into when they don't really expect this kind of incident.
No, almost all security DVRs will drop frames with no motion.
Good ones will OCR the plates and tie it to a single frame of the car, and save that for a long time with very little space consumed.
As for putting in effort, why even put up the camera if you're not going to record stuff like this?
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Informative)
Except when they're speeding cameras. Then they can capture a license plate on Pluto.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Funny)
Pluto? That's a bit much. Maybe a Saturn.
(ba dump bump!)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cameras do not always capture plates well. This was security soon their job.
If you're getting struck by cars, you're not doing your job right. Having actually worked as a security guard before, I would have recorded the plate without endangering myself and not have obstructed the fleeing reporters in any way - though requesting that they stay for the police to question was reasonable. I would attempt to not be confrontational.
Tesla's security strikes me as being in the same boat as I was. They don't have the authority to stop someone from leaving the property. The request to stay for police and to record the car's license plate was as far as they should have gone.
It sounds like multiple parties were at fault. There should have been no occasion to hit two security employees and a company ATV because those should have been nowhere near the reporters' vehicle or path of egress.
Let's go over the Tesla blog entry in more detail:
The two RGJ employees and the Tesla employee were then met at the Jeep by a second safety manager at the Gigafactory. The two Gigafactory safety managers asked the RGJ employees to wait before departing, as security management and the Sheriffâ(TM)s Department were en route to the scene. Disregarding this request, the RGJ employees entered the Jeep. As the Tesla employee attempted to record the license plate number on the rear bumper, the driver put it in reverse and accelerated into the Tesla employee, knocking him over, causing him to sustain a blow to the left hip, an approximate 2â bleeding laceration to his right forearm, a 3â bleeding laceration to his upper arm, and scrapes on both palms.
As the RGJ employees fled the scene, their Jeep struck the ATV that carried the two safety managers. When one of the safety managers dismounted the ATV and approached the Jeep, the driver of the Jeep accelerated into him, striking him in the waist.
So here's what I see right away:
1) the first employee to be hit was standing behind the vehicle as it backed out. That sounds bad to me since the employee shouldn't have been there.
2) the ATV may have been blocking egress by the reporters' vehicle, but we can't tell.
3) One of the managers approached the vehicle after it had already struck at least two things. That was particularly dumb.
4) If the driver had intended to hurt someone, the injuries (the only damage from the vehicle described) would probably have been a lot more severe and likely the Sheriff's Department would have arrested the driver on a charge of assault and battery or even attempted murder rather than just assault. They may still do that, but the blog indicates a lesser charge was selected for some reason.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand, you're not permitted to drive into people even if they shouldn't have been where they were standing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Record License Plate Number? (Score:4, Funny)
In Italy they would, and they would prosecute all physicists as accomplices.
Re: (Score:3)
You didn't supply an explanation on how RGJ's car window was broken.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree in part--security people are normally trained to stay out of harm's way and this illustrates exactly why they shouldn't put themselves in harms way for a license plate or to detain someone. But I would also say that:
a) You can't legally just drive over people, even if they're doing something they shouldn't be. It's hard to reconcile the "rock attack" with any part of the stories, other than the collision with the ATV. You can't really hit the driver's window (or cut their seat belt) from behind the car.
b) The fact that they injured multiple people is worrisome. You can say that running over the first guy was an accident, but it's less credible the second time you hit someone and nobody alleges that both injuries were sustained at the same time.
c) We need more facts, especially camera recordings (if any), to see what's going on here, or at least a detailed reconstruction of the scene of the accident. The police should have taken lots of pictures of the state of everything, so it shouldn't be too hard to see where exactly the blood stains, rocks (if any), skid marks, etc. were found.
But just for right now, we have several injured guards and no injured reporters. I don't know about the "rock attack" bit of the story, it doesn't add up yet. So it's certainly possible the guards did something legally wrong, but the two stories disagree and there's no corroborating evidence other than the car itself. We'll know if any evidence is found for the "rock attack" because charges will probably get filed if they can substantiate their claims of being attacked first.
I would tend to reserve judgement until the evidence is presented at trial, but I do see it being problematic that the guards are hurt and the reporters are not and neither side appears to dispute the claim that the reporters caused injury to the guards. If, as they say, they were attacked first, why is it that they are unable to allege any specific bodily injury as a result?
I use the same logic when someone is arrested for "resisting arrest" and the injuries sustained are completely disproportionate (i.e. one party is unhurt and the other party is severely hurt). If you were actually attacked, there should be some evidence of injury. Similarly, when one side tries to flee before the cops arrive--a part of the story that neither side appears to dispute--they become automatically suspect for that very reason.
Re: (Score:3)
a) You can't legally just drive over people, even if they're doing something they shouldn't be.
Thank you, this...
Even if the security ATV was blocking the road and preventing them from leaving, even if that is illegal, that doesn't then give you the right to drive over people or intentionally crash into another vehicle, with perhaps the sole exception of fear for your life...
Does anyone claim that security was pointing guns or shooting at the reporters? If not, then vehicular assault is clearly illegal.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Interesting)
Both the "rock attack" and the cut seatbelt probably occurred when the police arrived. The reporters probably wouldn't exit the vehicle so the cops broke the window and cut the seat belt to pull the driver out. This is a reasonably common police tactic when someone refuses to exit a vehicle.
The reason I doubt it was the security guards is the reporting from the RGJ. They don't report their employee's version - they ask the Sheriff and say he "can't confirm how that damage occurred". So I'd say the police broke the window, probably not with a rock, and then they cut the seatbelt and pulled the driver from the vehicle. At least that is the most plausible version of events.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Insightful)
There should have been no occasion to hit two security employees and a company ATV because the reporters shouldn't have been on the property in the first place. Regardless of how the situation escalated, the incident was ultimately precipitated by the reporters trespassing.
The original infraction was trespassing. The obvious resolution for trespassing is to get the trespasser off the property. Charging them with criminal trespass is secondary. So whether the security guards had authority to stop someone from leaving the property was irrelevant - their primary goal should've been to get the reporters to leave. Which they were apparently trying to do at the time the injuries were sustained, when the guards tried to stop them.
If the security cameras in place were insufficient to grab a license plate and photos of the trespassers' faces, then that should've been something for the security guards to bring up at the next manager's meeting so it could be addressed in the future. We're not talking about thieves making off with the crown jewels, we're talking about a couple guys being where they're not supposed to be (at the time of the incident the security guards probably had no way to know these were reporters - anyone can print out an official-looking ID). There was no need for heroics on the part of the security guards. Chasing the reporters out should have been sufficient this time, with the incident providing ammo for the guards' request for better cameras and (perhaps) a gate at the entrance.
I've managed a 50 acre resort and have had to deal with trespassers (mostly high school kids from the neighborhood sneaking into the pool). The vast majority of them leave when asked. There is no reason to escalate the situation unless they refuse to leave or start destroying property. Unless they are causing or have caused physical damage, I really don't understand why you would want to stop them from leaving. Even if they cuss at you and flip you off, there's no reason to escalate things - being a jerk is not a crime.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've managed a 50 acre resort and have had to deal with trespassers (mostly high school kids from the neighborhood sneaking into the pool). The vast majority of them leave when asked. There is no reason to escalate the situation unless they refuse to leave or start destroying property.
Your 50 acre resort probably didn't have trade secrets to protect and didn't have to be concerned about competition and other people sneaking in to discover ways to harm your business.
Tesla has that concern, so they need better security.
Re: (Score:3)
It does not sound that way to me.
1. The journalists should not have been there. They where trespassing which is breaking the law.
"1) the first employee to be hit was standing behind the vehicle as it backed out. That sounds bad to me since the employee shouldn't have been there."
Wrong. It is illegal to hit someone with your car when backing out of a location.
"2) the ATV may have been blocking egress by the reporters' vehicle, but we can't tell."
So what if it was? You are not allowed to just hit things with
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you have especially bad eyesight, you can copy down a license plate from a good 20m away.
The car was in reverse, so it was of course not travelling especially fast. Cars don't go very fast in reverse.
You may claim now that it is irrelevant as to whether there is something in front of the car, but you didn't claim that earlier. You described a scenario in which the driver reversed the car, having no ability to drive it forward, and innocently collided with the guard. Now you are saying that this is no
Re: (Score:2)
Cheap Cameras do not always capture plates well.
FTFY. Anyone who is actually interested in capturing number plates can get a suitable camera for the task, just ask your local LE.
Re: (Score:3)
They just started building the place. It may not even have an electric grid hookup yet.
Re: (Score:3)
Fist thing that usually goes in is power, even if it's temporary. This location isn't that remote. I used to live about 20 minutes from where that industrial park is located.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Funny)
It may not even have an electric grid hookup yet.
Do you even understand who is building this.
Re: (Score:2)
They could have just hooked up a couple of batteries.
Cameras aren't magic (Score:2)
Even with HD cameras, making out a license plate at any distance can be difficult. Try it sometime. Put your phone up at an angle a security camera might be, and see how readable things are at a distance. To do a good job of reading license plates you either need something mounted specifically for that (at a gate or something) or you need really high rez cameras, like the still cameras used at red light cameras.
General security cameras aren't much use for license plates.
Re: (Score:2)
not that hard nowadays [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I got a guy who can do it. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I think what you guys are missing is that most security cameras have an elevated vantage point so that they can see what people are doing. Often times when cars are around in such a situation, the license plate isn't within proper view of the camera.
This is in contrast to traffic cameras which are positioned to best photograph license plates. They can do that better in those situations because it's a roadway and you can generally predict where a vehicle is going to be, and thus the proper placement to get a
Re: (Score:2)
But mostly, and above all else, if I were a security guard, I wouldn't just assume that one of the cameras will capture it; I would do my best to see it for myself and write it down. Doing otherwise is flat out moronic.
Agreed. It's also supporting evidence that you were there and aware. "See judge, I copied the license plate down while speaking with the driver."
Re: (Score:2)
I think what you guys are missing is that most security cameras have an elevated vantage point so that they can see what people are doing. Often times when cars are around in such a situation, the license plate isn't within proper view of the camera.
We're not talking mom and pop corner store here.
You are missing the point that anyone who cares about security at this level will have number plate recognition cameras all the way up the street to ensure security is maintained.
I worked for a large financial services firm a decade ago. At our purpose-built data centre we had anti tank guards, electric fences, remotely deployed spikes on the roads, and pressure sensors in the footpath to track movement. Do you think a simple number plate capture is a challe
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think a simple number plate capture is a challenge for security operations at this level?
I'm going to break debate etiquette and answer that with a question: Would you just assume that your technology is going to be foolproof and work 100% of the time, and not bother to write down the plate number when the car is right in front of you?
Another question: If you read the blog, you can notice that both employees had RGJ press ID badges, and their car also had RGJ decals prominently displayed on it. For what reason are they to assume that press people are going to take hostile action against them?
Ke
Re: (Score:3)
It says in TFA they climbed a fence marked "private property" in order to take the pictures. It's hard to climb a fence while carrying a Jeep. Ergo the Jeep was most likely parked outside the grounds of the factory.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:5, Insightful)
It says in TFA they climbed a fence marked "private property" in order to take the pictures. It's hard to climb a fence while carrying a Jeep. Ergo the Jeep was most likely parked outside the grounds of the factory.
Or the grounds of the factory extend beyond the fenced in area and they were confronted after they left the fenced-in area but while their jeep was still parked on factory property.
Re:Record License Plate Number? (Score:4, Insightful)
From Tesla:
The two RGJ employees and the Tesla employee were then met at the Jeep by a second safety manager at the Gigafactory. The two Gigafactory safety managers asked the RGJ employees to wait before departing, as security management and the Sheriff’s Department were en route to the scene. Disregarding this request, the RGJ employees entered the Jeep. As the Tesla employee attempted to record the license plate number on the rear bumper, the driver put it in reverse and accelerated into the Tesla employee
So second safety manager pulls up and then when the RGJ folks try and get away somebody gets a license plate? No camera rolling? Sounds like an episode of Mayberry RFD or the Wacky Racers. Barney Fife would be proud. At least a real cop (Sheriff) arrested one of them. As I previously stated, Elon needs better security if he's concerned about trade secrets getting out or a better PR department onsite so that RGJ doesn't somehow think that they need to trespass.
Re: (Score:2)
In this particular case, even if a hired security guard overstepped and actually committed unjustified assault, that does not mean that the trespassers were right. The act of trespassing is a discrete act from assault, and if anything, the legal repercussions of
Serves them right (Score:5, Informative)
Judgement before facts (Score:4, Insightful)
Your vehicle was damaged in the course of committing criminal trespass and vehicular assault? Count your blessings that you aren't being charged with attempted murder.
I dunno, depends on circumstance. If the employee broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt, then a reasonable driver might fear for his life.
I'm going to wait a day or two and see if more facts come to light, before I make any judgements.
(Of course, *you* are welcome to make judgements any time.)
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno, depends on circumstance. If the employee broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt, then a reasonable driver might fear for his life.
My thought exactly. Trespassing is usually an infraction in California, not a misdemeanor, and I suspect it's the same in Nevada. That makes it pretty iffy as to whether or not the private security had any legal right to detail them at all. If they can't make a case for a misdemeanor - and used the magic words "You're under arrest" - then the security guards could be looking at unlawful imprisonment charges.
In theory.
As you say, we don't know shit at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think these were security guards - I think the "safety managers" may have been just that: construction personnel who oversee safety on the construction site. If you enter any modern construction site without proper safety equipment, someone on staff will certainly confront you, probably in a way that seems aggressive, as shouting is the norm on a site.
If they "breaking the window and cutting the safety belt" happened before the vehicular assault, that's clearly them in the wrong, but if they just we
Re:Judgement before facts (Score:5, Informative)
Trespassing is usually an infraction in California, not a misdemeanor, and I suspect it's the same in Nevada.
Not sure about California, but in Nevada trespassing is a misdemeanor, per NRS207.200 [state.nv.us]: "Unless a greater penalty is provided pursuant to NRS 200.603, any person who, under circumstances not amounting to a burglary, (b) willfully goes or remains upon any land or in any building after having been warned by the owner or occupant thereof not to trespass, is guilty of a misdemeanor" and "A sufficient warning against trespassing, within the meaning of this section, is given by any of the following methods (c) fencing the area" (FYI, NRS 200.603 deals with spying into homes)
Also note the part about burglary. It can be argued that deliberately entering to take pictures of proprietary items constitutes burglary so this could be treated as a felony.
Re: (Score:2)
Trespass in Nevada is a misdemeanor under "NRS207.200Unlawful trespass upon land; warning against trespassing."
Not only tresspassing (Score:2)
Re:Judgement before facts (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll just assume you didn't read either article, then. And even if you are correct and the security agents "broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt", the law is pretty damn clear with regard to liability for injury and property damage during the commission of a felony.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm basing my assessment on the information available
That's your problem. Accurate information is almost never available in news stories.
Re: (Score:3)
That's your problem. Accurate information is almost never available in news stories.
and making stuff up is better than reported information?
Re: (Score:2)
and making stuff up is better than reported information?
No
Re: Judgement before facts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have a better source available?
No.
Every time I've known the true story behind a news article, the news article has been wrong.
Re: Judgement before facts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, when there is a dispute and you have reports from both sides, that's about as close to the full story as you're going to get. When reports from both sides agree about what happened, especially when one side reports negatively about their own involvement, the stories are much less suspect. Do you have a better source available?
Slashdot. Everything on it is factual and unbiased...
Re: (Score:2)
I'll just assume you didn't read either article, then.
On Slashdot, that's a given. Hell, it's a given with one article, how much more two of them?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm basing my assessment on the information available (e.g. what is reported here), which is that they backed into the security guard who was behind them.
There may have been more than one security guard involved.
the law is pretty damn clear with regard to liability for injury and property damage during the commission of a felony.
I don't buy that here since even with the facts we know, the event could have happened in numerous ways. There seems to be a reasonable case that the reporters were committing trespassing, but that is not a felony.
We'll just have to see what happened. It could have been a straight forward case of assault and battery by the driver with the broken window and cut seat belt either not happening or done by the reporters afterward. Or it could be that a
Re: Judgement before facts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You'd think if that weren't the case, RGJ would try to defend them, to avoid liability at the very least.
And maybe they are. I don't see that mentioned in the currently linked stories.
Re: Judgement before facts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that the second story was published by RGJ, that constitutes RGJ's comment on the incident. If they're defending the reporters, they're doing a piss-poor job of it.
It's routine legal practice to avoid discussing particulars of a potential or ongoing lawsuit. Tesla could say more because they sound like they're on considerably stronger legal grounds (their guards sound like they committed some errors, but aside from being in the way, not to an extent to materially affect the actions of the driver who was hitting things).
Re: (Score:2)
Your vehicle was damaged in the course of committing criminal trespass and vehicular assault? Count your blessings that you aren't being charged with attempted murder.
I dunno, depends on circumstance. If the employee broke the driver side window and tried to wrestle the driver out by cutting the seat belt, then a reasonable driver might fear for his life.
I'm going to wait a day or two and see if more facts come to light, before I make any judgements.
(Of course, *you* are welcome to make judgements any time.)
Is this one of those states where if you are in a place where you are lawfully entitled to be and you fear for your life you can use deadly force and get away with it with no questions asked? Like in Florida.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A "reasonable driver" would not be trespassing at a secure facility taking photos. That is the "circumstance" on which all is based, and anything that happened to them was fully justified based on that fact alone.
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is that regardless of whether or not they were attacked by the security staff they were in the act of trespassing. If they are trespassing and refuse to be detained by the security staff then the security staff should do what they are hired to do and remove the trespassers. You can't claim that you were assaulted by an angry homeowner wielding a baseball bat if you were in the process of robbing him.
Further more I believe that any harm caused in the commission of a crime is automatically elevate
Re:Serves them right (Score:5, Insightful)
It's very likely that if they had driven their vehicle at a police officer rather than Tesla security they would have been shot, and if they survived they would have been charged with attempted murder.
They were lucky that the Tesla security people either were not armed or chose not to shoot at them.
Re: (Score:3)
If a rent-a-cop shoots someone, they go to jail for a long time. Hell, they're probably going to get in trouble for their attempts to detain the reporter.
It's too bad you're completely ignorant of the law, but it's not a big surprise since you're posting as AC and most AC comments are completely ignorant. That's why the posters don't log in. They know they're big fucking idiots.
First, if someone deliberately tries to run you over with a car, that's vehicular homicide. You have a right to self-defense, and that includes shooting them right in the fucking face. Second, Nevada permits citizen's arrest, so long as you do not employ deadly force. The usual bar is
That pretty much sums up the media's approach (Score:3, Funny)
A Harley biker is riding by the zoo in Louisiana when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage.
Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents.
The biker jumps off his Harley, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch.
Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly.
A reporter has watched the whole event. The reporter addressing the Harley rider says, 'Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I've seen a man do in my whole life.'
The Harley rider replies, 'Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger and acted as I felt right.'
The reporter says, 'Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, and tomorrow's paper will have this story on the front page.
So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?'
The biker replies, 'I'm a U.S. Marine and a Republican.'
The journalist leaves.
The following morning the biker buys the paper to see news of his actions, and reads, on the front page:
U.S. MARINE ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That Harley biker's name? Albert Einstein.
Re:That pretty much sums up the media's approach (Score:4, Funny)
Forwards from racist grandpa.
But we all really know (Score:2)
RGJ seems to be very low key op (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's what happened. (Score:2, Insightful)
Regardless of whether they were trespassing or not (it certainly sounds as though they were), the journalists clearly assumed they were being detained illegally and were thus allowed to drive in the manner they did. However, the Tesla employees were clearly up to the chase, to the point of being willing to literally block the journalists' vehicle with their fucking bodies (WTF?!) and then there's the automobile vs ATV vehicle warfare... As to whether t
Re: (Score:3)
Being detained illegally is not grounds to use lethal force (and running someone over with a car counts). The law was on its way, so the proper thing to do is to wait quietly, talk to the officers, and perhaps take legal revenge later.
The only excuse for running over someone is that someone is currently in danger of being killed, and I can't think of any likely credible threat. Breaking a window isn't a death threat.
A couple of thoughts (Score:4, Interesting)
Having read Tesla's, the RLG, and the LVS's accounts (which basically was the sam as the other 2), it seems to me the situation escalated to the point it got out of hand. If the guard was writing down the plate I would find it hard to justify hitting the guard with the Jeep.Given the photographer was told the sheriff was on the way it seems to me the reasonable thing to do was to wait and let the sheriff sort out what happened. I doubt the sheriff's response time would be anything but quick given Tesla's clout.
What I don't understand is why the photographer felt it necessary to climb a fence to get a picture. I've shot photos through a fence and wonder what required getting closer? A 200mm tele give you good reach even at a distance. More to the point, most companies will give journalists tours and access to a site, even though you'll get a PR dog and pony show in most cases. But, as a journalist, you need to develop sources if you think something bad is going on. Someone will generally be willing to talk, if off the record, without you needing to trespass and then try to get away. I've cold called companies to get information and it is surprising what people will tell you. You just need to start putting the pieces together, ask more questions, and build a story.
It will be interesting to see what happened as more details come out.
Re:Rol..!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the incident with the vehicle occurred on private property, then they were trespassing, and those entrusted with the defense of the private property have at least something of a degree of latitude in protecting that property.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
smashed window and cut seatbelt sounds like security dragging these people from the vehicle to detain them
Yes.
(well within their right to do so)
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooope.
Re: (Score:2)
So in your world only the police should be able to do anything about crime?
They saw them committing a crime, it's reasonable for them to believe they committed/were committing a crime, they instructed them that they believe they had committed a crime and that the police had been summoned. It seems very reasonable that they detain them.
If somebody snatches some grandma's purse I have a moral obligation to stop that person if I can reasonably do so. If the law fails to allow for that it is broken and needs
Re: (Score:2)
NOBODY should be permitted to assault another except under attack.
actually i disagree, i support EXISTING USA law that says you can shoot and kill without warning anyone that tries to enter your property (tresspass)
I would actually sue this security guards for every cent they own, because they did not kill criminal tresspassers on spot.
You think the guards own the Tesla factory? Do try and keep up.
And get a spelling checker while your at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems a little severe for an infraction that cannot carry a jail sentence, to me.
Of course, if they tried to run down security, at that point, yes, they should have been shot.
Re: (Score:2)
6 Months in Nevada for regular trespass, NRS207.200
As we're still dealing with "reporters" around sandy hook I much prefer texas if you dont think they are kids shoot them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no reason to kill them. There is plenty of reason to stop them. Stopping someone from committing a crime, and punishing someone for committing a crime, are *completely* separate concepts.
Don't want to get stopped from doing the wrong thing in a potentially deadly fashion, don't do the wrong thing. Seems simple enough.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't shoot people for trespassing unless it's in your own house**. You don't need heavily armed guards. In fact, you don't want heavily armed guards because it is rather easy to make a fatal mistake. Bad juju, that.
But don't worry, I rather doubt Elon will hire you on for the security detail.
** And you live the following US states [yahoo.com]: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas,Tennessee or Washington.
Re: (Score:3)
I dont see anything about the security guards attempting to use lethal force. The reporters did.
My comment was about "reporters" the sort that hop fences and go running at 6-10 year olds playing in their backyards to interview them about a mass shooting they were involved with. Mind you this is after being told no they can't several times.
Re: (Score:3)
By the provided accounts, they were being detained by the security guards, which in many cases can legally do so if someone is caught on the property they're supposed to protect. Hostage-taking is when there's no legal reason to prevent someone from leaving in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
If the journalists were caught trespassing, being journalists does not give them any kind of extra protected class against such a charge. If it's true that the guards were only attempting to prevent their departure after informing them that police had been summoned, they
Re: (Score:3)
That depends on whether trespassing is a misdemeanor or an infraction. Which can be very, very fuzzy in some states. In California, you don't make a citizen's arrest on trespassing, which is a traffic ticket. Holding them against their will becomes unlawful imprisonment, a misdemeanor in its own right. Holding them and moving them elsewhere becomes kidnapping, a felony, which justifies the use of deadly force in self defense.
And Tesla's own account says their security guards tried to detain the trespassers,
Re: (Score:2)
"Trespassing is trespassing."
In the words of Sergeant Hulka: "Lighten up, Francis."
Re: (Score:2)
"I'm going to either assume you're paranoid euros who are afraid of firearms or don't know how to properly aim."
*snerk* Wrong on both counts.
And, obviously you've never been trained in combat marksmanship. You always aim center of mass.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't shoot to incapacitate. You can wind up incapacitating but not killing someone you shoot, but it's not going to be reliable. If you need to incapacitate but not kill, you use something less lethal like a Taser.
Re:Safety manager (Score:4, Informative)
On many construction sites there are "safety managers". Most of their job is walking around the site making sure everyone is following safety rules. The other part of their job is documenting safety violations. They are managers because they need the authority to tell any worker on site what they need to do to follow safety rules. What would you call someone like that if not "safety manager"?
Re: (Score:3)
What would you call someone like that if not "safety manager"?
The jerk?
Re: (Score:2)
I believe these were construction site workers, not security guards. Safety (including ensuring everyone on site has checked in, and is wearing safety equipment at all times) is a big deal on modern construction sites. Not waring a bright orange safety vest makes you stand out like a sore thumb, and somebody will confront you about it when the see you. The "security managers" were different people than the "safety managers" who stopped the tresspassers. If their job was "mange the safety of the construc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not taking sides until more info comes in. But interesting is the blog's use of the word "safety manager" for the guys who temporarily detained the journalists. So know everybody's a manager: sanitation manager (janitor), information manager (reporter), image acquisition manager (photographer) ...
Title inflation. It's often easier to give someone a more impressive title and pay them less than the title warrants had they really been doing work to justify the title. That's not to say the security managers weren't managers, but I've been at enough companies that had VP's, managers, and engineers where the jobs they do aren't really what the title implies.; and have had managers (real ones) say they give employees title promotions because it is cheaper than a real promotion.
Re: (Score:2)
But if you are planning to run away with police hot on your tail, it is better to be on a fully fueled Jeep. It sucks if you have to plan your escape hopping super charger to super charger station.
Elon Musk is not going to taking it lying down. Next soft update will allow you to easily access "being chased by police, plot best route using super charger" mode. Time is the essence in those situation, you don't want this buried three levels deep in menu. You want a hot one-click icon prominently in the opening screen.
You'll never out-last the police in a sustained chase, you need to out-accelerate and out-maneuver them before they have a chance to identify you and/or call in more chase vehicles or air support.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, then the security guards would have shot the armed trespassers.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why they say "rest in peace"