My patient was alert and oriented--but he did lose consciousness during the incident. Right now he's doing very well, he is articulate and a good historian.

But as far as the weapon goes--my job was to examine him, not "cross examine him" (ha ha).

Anyway, YES--you're right. The irony was about having someone hired to protect safety end up causing life-threatening wounds. This was allegedly with a weapon that was originally designed to find weapons. So that part is perfectly accurate.

That wasn't a "set up" to make anyone angry or defensive--it was just a commentary on a sad situation.

And my comment wasn't directed against you. You merely shared what you observed and what you were told. Others, however, quickly jumped on a bandwagon whether you intended to have one there or not and immediately took this in a direction that you may not intended for it to travel. That's my point.

If I waited, I'm sure someone would have tried to make a wrongful death post as the basis for disbanding TSA even though you made it clear that TSA wasn't involved.

Oh Bart, I told my patient to sue the TSA anyway--even though they had nothing to do with it. They have to be involved somehow!

What happened to the security guard. Those are massive injuries. Jail, penalty, what?

And herein lies the source of the disagreement. Your hair-trigger reaction that anyone saying anything negative MUST be about to bash TSA. After following many of the posts in this forum for quite some time, I can kind of sympathize. You guys frequently take a beating, often unwarrented. Believe it or not, I am more often than not on your side of most issues. I just don't post often.

My observations on the use - or misuse - of secondary weapons by law enforcement or security personnel are based on 30 years as a law enforcement officer and manager and academy instructor (now retired.) The observation that untrained or undertrained personnel can cause serious, even life threatening injuries through improper use of such weapons is based on that experience. I've been there, seen it, had to file charges against otherwise responsible individuals who thought they were only doing their job. The characterization of the "perpetrator" as "private security" is from the OP. Neither your agency nor any law enforcement agency is "private."

There is no "quantum leap" to build a case against TSA here. I think we are all pretty much on the same page. No need for acrimony in this thread. There is more than enough under other titles.

JR

I expected more out of you. How disappointing.