"That would be an EcUmenical matter."
If no-one else was asked for ID, it stands to reason that a suicide bomber wouldn't be either.But not on their way to do their bombing! AFAIR, the Manchester bomber was allowed to detonate because they were afraid of offending him by stopping and questioning him or something along those lines. Is that the sort of freedom you want?
YES YOU CAN. That’s what security guards are there for.If no-one else was asked for ID, it stands to reason that a suicide bomber wouldn't be either.
You can't stop and ask for ID from all those you think might be suicide bombers, while allowing everyone else to pass unhindered.
I sort of understand the point of your post, but expecting somebody on less than minimum wage to ensure safety and security is where your point falls over. If he had an I d card would that low paid member of staff been allowed to search him?YES YOU CAN. That’s what security guards are there for.
So, an Asian in a puffer jacket on a warm night struggling to carry what looks like a backpack full of bricks at an Ariana Grande concert should not be challenged? How silly of me. Sadly, the person that had the suspicions was frightened to challenge him because of too many people like you championing the right for people like the bomber to move freely amongst us unchallenged and for people who are there to protect us not to be able to use their common sense, suspicion and instinct for fear of being called a racist.
You are part of the problem. Shame on you and your ilk with overuse of the racist card.
Security guard ignored Ariana Grande concert bomber in fear he’d be called a racist
Kyle Lawler, then 18 and paid just $5.50 an hour, had been alerted to a suspicious-looking Salman Abedi sitting near an exit to the Manchester Arena with a big bag and dressed in heavy clothing.nypost.com
"A security guard at the 2017 Ariana Grande show where 22 fans were slaughtered has admitted having a “bad feeling” when he saw the suicide bomber minutes before the attack — but didn’t do anything because he feared being branded racist, he told a public inquiry.
Kyle Lawler, then 18 and paid just $5.50 an hour, had been alerted to a suspicious-looking Salman Abedi sitting near an exit to the Manchester Arena with a big bag and dressed in heavy clothing on a hot May night, he told a public inquiryinto the attack.
As Lawler and a colleague watched the 22-year-old terrorist from 10 feet away, Abedi “became fidgety” and tried to avoid eye contact, Lawler recalled.
“I just had a bad feeling about him … I felt something was wrong,” Lawler told the hearing, saying he felt “conflicted” because even though he “felt that he did not belong there” he “did not know why.”"
+1.lack of police and well paid experienced security staff was the real problem
agree+1.
But steady with the Police.
I imagine shows like this make a fair profit. They shouldn't expect the police to subsidise the event.
Also, how would an ID card help? If the police stopped him, then they could ID him, but they didn't. A security guard would not have access to the national database to check him out. And, if a first time act from an unknown, then there'd be no record. But, most importantly, if he was searched, they would have found the bomb before the ID card ...I sort of understand the point of your post, but expecting somebody on less than minimum wage to ensure safety and security is where your point falls over. If he had an I d card would that low paid member of staff been allowed to search him?
lack of police and well paid experienced security staff was the real problem
As others have said, you can hardly expect an 18 year old on £5.50 an hour to make life-threatening decisions.YES YOU CAN. That’s what security guards are there for.
So, an Asian in a puffer jacket on a warm night struggling to carry what looks like a backpack full of bricks at an Ariana Grande concert should not be challenged? How silly of me. Sadly, the person that had the suspicions was frightened to challenge him because of too many people like you championing the right for people like the bomber to move freely amongst us unchallenged and for people who are there to protect us not to be able to use their common sense, suspicion and instinct for fear of being called a racist.
You are part of the problem. Shame on you and your ilk with overuse of the racist card.
Security guard ignored Ariana Grande concert bomber in fear he’d be called a racist
Kyle Lawler, then 18 and paid just $5.50 an hour, had been alerted to a suspicious-looking Salman Abedi sitting near an exit to the Manchester Arena with a big bag and dressed in heavy clothing.nypost.com
"A security guard at the 2017 Ariana Grande show where 22 fans were slaughtered has admitted having a “bad feeling” when he saw the suicide bomber minutes before the attack — but didn’t do anything because he feared being branded racist, he told a public inquiry.
Kyle Lawler, then 18 and paid just $5.50 an hour, had been alerted to a suspicious-looking Salman Abedi sitting near an exit to the Manchester Arena with a big bag and dressed in heavy clothing on a hot May night, he told a public inquiryinto the attack.
As Lawler and a colleague watched the 22-year-old terrorist from 10 feet away, Abedi “became fidgety” and tried to avoid eye contact, Lawler recalled.
“I just had a bad feeling about him … I felt something was wrong,” Lawler told the hearing, saying he felt “conflicted” because even though he “felt that he did not belong there” he “did not know why.”"
A suicide bomber roaming the streets unchallenged though, that’s a different matter.
I believe ID cards are thought to help afterwards, when investigating, or maybe before hand when they are keeping an eye on persons of interest.Also, how would an ID card help? If the police stopped him, then they could ID him, but they didn't. A security guard would not have access to the national database to check him out. And, if a first time act from an unknown, then there'd be no record. But, most importantly, if he was searched, they would have found the bomb before the ID card ...
And you are talking out of your arse, yet again, as per usual. When I served my time there were no NVQs. None. Zero. I was awarded City & Guilds qualifications in my subkject areas. In order subsequently to obtain my CSCS card, required if you work on a construction site operated by one of the major contractors group, I had to hold NVQs. City & Guilds qualifications were not accepted. So as a C&G qualification holder who qualified before NVQs existed I was required to do an on-site assessment (and training) referred to as an OSAT in order to be awarded an "appropriate" NVQ. I know a number of others who also went through this process. This complete ****** of a system has been running for 20+ years. Yes, people doing C&Gs these days are more or less automatically awarded NVQ, but that wasn't always the case. As it happens a lot of people being awarded NVQs in construction these days haven't followed a C&G syllabus, but instead have undertaken an abbreviated training course. Which is why an NVQ is not the same as a C&G qualification. You aren't the only one who has had apprentices, you knowYou don’t know what you are talking about. An NVQ is a qualification. A National Vocational Qualification. City and Guilds (The City & Guilds of London Institute to give them their full name) are an awarding body that offer qualifications. Their qualifications are branded as City & Guilds. City & Guilds offer NVQ's as well as Vocational and technical qualifications.
I have 12 year old students that get their 'City & Guilds' as you term it!
You have a City & Guilds technical qualification as do I. I have a distinction that I got around 1978. It was a theory based qualification. My vocational proof was in the form of my apprentice log-book and my skills testing certificate which gave me my national craftsmen certificate. I'm not familiar with the CSCS but the fact that you couldn’t get a CSCS card with your 'City & Guilds' and needed an NVQ should demonstrate to you the worth of your technical qualification verses a vocational one in the real world. I won’t waste my breath arguing with you but in case you are not aware, I am the owner of a training company. Before that I was a manager of City and Guilds training centre for 15 years. My company is an accredited the City & Guilds training centre and has been since 2010. I think I know what I am talking about. What do you do for a living that makes you feel qualified to argue about City & Guilds qualifications structure?And you are talking out of your arse, yet again, as per usual. When I served my time there were no NVQs. None. Zero. I was awarded City & Guilds qualifications in my subkject areas. In order subsequently to obtain my CSCS card, required if you work on a construction site operated by one of the major contractors group, I had to hold NVQs. City & Guilds qualifications were not accepted. So as a C&G qualification holder who qualified before NVQs existed I was required to do an on-site assessment (and training) referred to as an OSAT in order to be awarded an "appropriate" NVQ. I know a number of others who also went through this process. This complete ****** of a system has been running for 20+ years. Yes, people doing C&Gs these days are more or less automatically awarded NVQ, but that wasn't always the case. As it happens a lot of people being awarded NVQs in construction these days haven't followed a C&G syllabus, but instead have undertaken an abbreviated training course. Which is why an NVQ is not the same as a C&G qualification. You aren't the only one who has had apprentices, you know