This is a discussion on Bodyguards? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; chances are slim that the owner of the place would allow that behavior as any place that a famous person would be at is most ...
November 28th, 2006 10:54 PM
chances are slim that the owner of the place would allow that behavior as any place that a famous person would be at is most likey upscale and not joes chicken and waffles.
Any bodygaurd worth hiring would not approach you unless you threaten the priciple. The body gaurd may approach you to buy your meal if you move for the cry baby in which case I will have the lobster.
November 28th, 2006 10:54 PM
November 28th, 2006 11:16 PM
Because instead of protecting yourself from an easily arguable life-threatening situation, you would be escalating the incident without just cause, thus making YOU into the instigator.
Originally Posted by davyray
Typically with private security, their main job is simply to present a showing of force, without needing to even raise a fist, and cater to their principal's desires, however mundane. Their mere presence (of a 300 lb. muscled guy, etc.) would be enough to make most people comply, and that's the main reason they're hired. Basically, they're paid bullies most of the time. However, they're also trained to act and react appropriately to certain situations as personal security professionals. If they see that their celebrity principal (who is paying them a probably ungodly amount of money) is suffering what appears to be an indignation, they will do what they can to make their principal happy by exhibiting modest (in most cases) veiled threats. In other words, they're just posturing peacocks, so don't let them ruffle your feathers. When it comes to high-profile (especially celebrities and high-power execs) principals, who can make or break the bodyguard's career depending on their word alone, they're rather picky, and have been known to terminate people for not fetching them a glass of water (arbitrary example).
If, however, they were to overreact and start to pummel you, or try to forcibly remove you from your seat, then yes, you would be entitled to defend yourself as non-lethally as necessary, until they either ceased to attack or escalated the situation. Witnesses would help immensely, as I'm sure a rather popular Hollywood or otherwise crowded restaurant would provide.
Depending on what transpires, you've at least earned yourself a free meal (complain to the manager, etc.), or a multi-million dollar settlement (assaulted without provocation).
My bottom line? You have every right to be there, and if the security detail decides to unnecessarily escalate, fight back within the limits of the current level of threat, take your money, and BUY THE RESTAURANT!
By the way, does this have anything to do with the "Brangelina" bodyguard incident last week? (For the uninformed, apparently their bodyguard choked someone without apparent provocation in India.)
November 28th, 2006 11:44 PM
If the celebrity started bad mouthing me over a seat I'd tell them that their last movie/album/pornflick (Paris hilton) really sucked, wink and then go back to my eating. If the bodyguard threatens me I'd tell him to piss off. If he attacks me I'd make dang sure my dinner partner(s) are good witnesses and then smile as I waltz into the courtroom. Celebrities are quick to pay civilsuits such as these ;)
November 29th, 2006 12:54 AM
Would this happen to be Rosie O'Donnell and her bodyguards?
Last edited by rocky; November 29th, 2006 at 09:12 PM.
Reason: suggestion of illegal activity
November 29th, 2006 10:23 AM
Great comments by all.
Nate, I really appreciate yours in particular. Your (and others') description of how the bodyguard would probably react is just how I imagined it would be, though I have no real life experience in this realm. Although I don't necessarily agree that by defending myself from an attack, if one does indeed occur, transforms me into the instigator.
You do, however, touch on one of the key ponderings of my scenario. IF it went down perfectly that you did everything right, and the bodyguard did everything wrong, making it in every way possible a "good shoot", would you have any chance of defending yourself in court over this incident? Obviously, that perfect of a scenario would be unlikely, but as I said in the original question, the point is not to nit-pick the scenario itself, but to discuss the theme.
It seems by the overwhelming number of people who are willing to take a beating, the consensus is "NO" you would not be able to defend this, even if you were right. I guess if you are going to court, you might as well make the other person the defendant!
BTW, no reference to any real incidents other than it seems that some bodyguards seem to revert to this hired muscle role and occasionally make the news, making it a possibility. Fortunately, I do not have the time to follow celebrity "news" closely enough to have any specific event in mind!
Thanks to all for your input!
November 29th, 2006 10:27 AM
Lots of ways to go with this one....it's a great discussion thread!
From what (admittedly very little) I know about celebs and bodyguards, the bodyguards are hired to keep their clients SAFE, not to be sycophantic valets or behave as if their clients are mafia kingpins.
Thus, I'm thinking at the first sign of trouble, they'd try (as unnoticeably as possible) to hustle their client outta there....IF the celeb had even entered the building - - they'd probably get the table/spot, etc. cleared before the client even got out of the limo.
If I'm thinking clearly, I politely but firmly stand my ground. If physical stuff starts, then it might get ugly. ANYONE who lays a hand on me who is not CLEARLY a LEO or clearly trying to help me somehow (beautiful women excepted, of course) is going to have a problem.
I might not win (no illusions there), but I am NOT going to make it easy. I'm not justified shooting anyone for walking toward me, but when the fists (and feet) start to fly, that might be different. Fisticuffs (unless your opponent is considerably smaller) probably justify at least the use of a knife- maybe more.
If I am thinking VERY clearly, and understand the situation fully, I take a whuppin' for many $$$- offering no resistance to having force used against me.
If the situation is handled by way of the bodyguard (or some other kind of handler/support person) offering to buy my meal in exchange for me relinquishing the table, then all is well.
I move, get some free chow and maybe even an autograph......
As a side note, I did eat in a restaurant at the same time as Garth Brooks once. I could not even IMAGINE he or his people creating the scene described in this hypothetical. They didn't ask for a table in a particular location, but they obviously needed one that could seat what looked to be a pretty large party.
People were staring at him the whole time and a couple of folks asked for an autograph when he was sitting there, trying to be left alone to eat a meal in peace with his family. I felt a little sorry for him, and a little uncomfortable on behalf of the autograph seekers.
November 29th, 2006 10:58 AM
Please show me where the law (in non leftie states :-)) requires me to "take a beating"?
Originally Posted by davyray
Seems to me that "taking a beating" poses a risk to my life and limb. Furthermore, if I am carrying a weapon, standing there "taking a beating" runs the risk that my weapon will be discovered, immediately turning the "beating" into an even more life-threatening situation, unless I respond.
If a big guy comes up to me and says, with a wicked smile on his face: "Hi, I don't like the color of your shoes. I'm going to beat you silly now, but I'm not going to break any bones or kill you" - do I have to stand there and take a drubbing?
November 29th, 2006 11:57 AM
Bae, that is indeed a very troubling scenario, specifically because it leaves us wondering how far we must let him take his threat before we do draw our gun in response. In the scenario you bring up, if we take out the gun right then in order to prevent having to get beaten up, it will look premature in the eyes of the law, right? But if we let him swing on us, even one punch can render us unable to be in control of our gun, let alone use it effectively!
November 29th, 2006 11:57 AM
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of the ultimate CC gun!
November 29th, 2006 01:32 PM
Defend yourself in court, defend yourself physically after the initial onset of aggression from the bodyguard, or defend yourself in court after the results of the confrontation?
Originally Posted by davyray
1) If he just up and smacked/etc. you, with no retaliation on your part, say hello to some big money. It'd be an easy case, too, I imagine.
2) To defend yourself physically? Absolutely - you have every right to. Just keep it in line with the current level of threat and don't escalate.
Aside from the obvious reasons, there's a blurry line between instigation and escalation with witnesses. In many cases, just in the way human nature works (and the subsequent reporting of facts), the guy who first draws will end up as the person who started the ordeal, even if the CCW-holder was responding to catching a fist in the face. It's simply more sensational and memorable than an "ordinary" disagreement/brawl, and thereafter justifies almost anything the true instigator does after that point.
Not to mention, at the onset of the confrontation, the CCW-holder was responding to a possible life-endangering threat, but the moment that gun is drawn, the bodyguard will, from that point on, be defending himself from a 100%, no doubts about it, "I-have-a-gun-pointed-at-me" threat.
3) Depending on how you handled #2, #3 would be a fairly easy win for you as well, although not quite as easy as #1.
Disclaimer: IANAL, and YMMV.
November 29th, 2006 01:47 PM
I couldnt resist the temptation to come outta my cage. Having worked in dignitary protection for a chunck of my life, both for the govt and in the private sector (to earn christmas money) just a couple of points.
Most of the post have been right on. One thing is clear, if you present a weapon it is very likely that you will be shot. Most dignitary protection folks will work to remove their "boss" outta the way to prevent him the embarassment. A good detail would have already had the table and it would be a non-issue. More than likely the matradie would have already moved you and comped your meal.
If you are dealing with someone off the shelf, simply raise your hands into the surrender position and clearly state your not looking for trouble and that you'll let the managner handle it. If assaulted, do file a police report, if you dont, you will hurt your civil case.
Its not likely you'll have issues with a professional team, but is possible with some of the "entertainment" industry's finest, who due to their gansta immage employ street thugs as their "bodyguards". There you'll have a problem, but again, its the same. Dont become the agressor until its a life or death situation.
Sucks but its the life.
Hope it helped and I'll head back to my cage.
"Respect all ... Fear none!!!
November 29th, 2006 01:51 PM
Exactly. This is the fundamental rule of ANY threat situation! If you honestly believe yourself to be in imminent threat of lethal injury then you have every justification to draw and use your weapon.
Originally Posted by nate
Perhaps I misunderstood, but the way the question was originally worded it sounded to me like it was asking, can I draw my gun because I think MAYBE the bodyguard might POSSIBLY hit me? Can I draw my gun, in other words, not to protect myself from an imminent attack, but to forestall the POSSIBILITY of an attack? The answer to that question (in most states, and, as always, you need to know your state law) is no.
In most states, if you are not justified in actually shooting the guy right then and there, then you are not justified in drawing your weapon. If you draw your weapon BEFORE you are justified in using it, then you are now the one who has escalated the confrontation to the lethal level, and you are now the one who may very well end up in jail as a result.
November 29th, 2006 07:18 PM
Yes, denverdOn, you are right on. I apologize if I implied that a weapon should be drawn to prevent a possible attack. I don't think that is appropriate. I agree that in most, but not all cases, if a weapon is produced it should be used and better be the right level of force.
fed wif... thanks for coming out of your cage!!! I appreciate the real world perspective. I also appreciate that you acknowledge that not all bodyguards are professionals. Just like every other line of work I suppose. Come out more often!
November 29th, 2006 10:05 PM
November 30th, 2006 01:22 AM
Within the law or not, if you decide to engage with a professional security detail, you will lose. You will be out numbered and out trained. I don't care how John Wayne you are. If they are the thugs from the currently popular scene, you just opened the gates for all out chaos.
I think this is the time when working smarter is going to pay better than working harder.
By jarhead79 in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
Last Post: November 14th, 2010, 07:46 PM
By Daniella in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: March 4th, 2008, 06:55 PM
Search tags for this page
nation of islam body guards for hire
Click on a term to search for related topics.