• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Doctor stabbed by patient at 50 Staniford St., LTC holder saves the day

Were they talking about the stabber? If so, that could indeed be a "cause"... If he should have been rotting somewhere instead of out and a bout - that would definitely increase the likely-hood of him committing future crime...

If so, that doesn't seem like such a crazy thing to say...
If so, yes - but there was no indication in the story that the guy was a criminal. (Well, other than the obvious "stabbing" thing.)

The other comments are equally or more ridiculous, but that one jumped out at me since it's the opposite of what I'd expect from the rest of the nutty posters - a comment regarding how badly MA sentencing works - but completely out of place in the absence of anything indicating the guy was a known, convicted criminal.

Bottom line is a [strike]bad[/strike] sick guy got what was coming.
Corrected, maybe, but only to differentiate sick versus bad. I'm not AT ALL saying the guy shouldn't have been shot - you shoot a rabid dog when it's threatening someone, and you shoot someone who's attacked someone else unprovoked like this.

Security guard or not, glad the guy was there.
 
Last edited:
This sucks. They are focusing on the fact that he was a security guard. Like this makes it all OK. The spokesperson is praising him. If this guy wasn't a mall/rent-a-cop, what would the reaction have been? [angry]

There would probably have been a lot of bleating if the guy wasn't a security guard. See, they've had intensive training and are more fit to carry firearms then just ordinary citizens. God forbid that a sheepdog doesn't have the proper dogtag on when he saves some sheep. That would not be acceptable to the sheep, who would much rather see their entrails laying on the floor.

I agree that his roll as a security guard will at least skew public and potentially prosecutorial interpretations. It is a lot more palatable for anti-s to hear about a security guard's protection of the public vs. Joe 6-Pack. That is what I meant about the civilian dichotomy. If they press charges, he has no official capacity to claim. Either way... he is a hero, maybe even has a NES handle, and we should get behind him in lock step to show citizens of the Commonwealth that life threatening events occur too quickly for police intervention and self-protection is not mutual exclusive with public security.

Well said. Couldn't agree with you more.

That's called a militia.

I'd be okay with a militia. I'd even be okay with posse comitatus, or as Archie Bunker once described it "Pussy Communists." [wink]
 
Last edited:
Bottom line is a bad guy got what was coming.

Absolutely!!

I agree that his roll as a security guard will at least skew public and potentially prosecutorial interpretations. It is a lot more palatable for anti-s to hear about a security guard's protection of the public vs. Joe 6-Pack. That is what I meant about the civilian dichotomy. If they press charges, he has no official capacity to claim. Either way... he is a hero, maybe even has a NES handle, and we should get behind him in lock step to show citizens of the Commonwealth that life threatening events occur too quickly for police intervention and self-protection is not mutual exclusive with public security.

I was thinking the same thing.

I'm a security guard.......I'm protecting my life and the lives of my loved ones.
That could have happened to any one of us.

Yup.
 
Another sh*tbag bites the dust. Good riddance. Thank God the man with a gun/security guard/off duty cop was there & was able to stop him before he hurt someone else.
 
We don't know the individual that was shot. He may have been severely mentally ill. If so, this was a tragic but necessary event. Whatever the circumstances, a bad decision was made and the situation was dealt with honorably.
 
Agreed.

But they, by focusing on his day (or night) job are ascribing to him professional duties which, as you also assume, likely have no bearing on the facts at hand. As a result, they are making him more equal and escaping having to deal with the fact that it was civilian CCW, in the face of numerous policies and laws standing in the way, that made this possible.

That was awesome.
 
I watched the news several times this evening and heard the Commish refer to the security guard as a "security officer". Most people probably wouldn't think twice about that reference except people that are familiar with the laws, 2A and the state of the law abiding protecting themselves. I do not want to convey any lack of respect for what security personnel do in their jobs by this comment. HOWEVER

There is no doubt in my mind that the officials speaking to the media about this situation want people that don't know any better to assume that this man had some sort of official training and association with a recognized police force of some kind. Thus the word "Officer".

He did the right thing, the heroic thing and what I think most of us would have done in the same situation and it's a shame that once again they will try to rob the CCW holder from being in the right place at the right time to save lives. The fact is that in many cities and towns the guy probably wouldn't have been able to carry in this great state of MA and if he or she could it would only be while working and that's the real shame of it.

I hope this story ends up in the next issue of American Rifleman in the section of people saved with their guns! He was there when it counted and no doubt many more may have been at risk had he not been.[grin]

I pray he remains the hero he should be when all is said and done rather than another victim of the legal system that puts victims last in judicial rights!
 
Whether it was an off duty security guard, off duty officer, or Concealed Carry civilian, this story couldn't get enough press as far as I'm concerned, especially in the state of MA. People of the commonwealth need to see that something great came from a responsible citizen being armed.
 
Not for nothing, but perhaps his being a security guard isn't such a bad thing. There are good ones out there that have good skills and senses for lack of a better term, that gave him an edge today. Not saying that you or I don't have them, but placed in a similar situation I would be ID'ing myself as an off duty firefighter. It doesn't help the overall 2nd A issue we are suffering under in this state, but I'm trying to look at it from this guys shoes. Yes he was acting as a civilian and if it was reported as an armed civilian I hate to think that we would have it reported as much different. Just my 2cents and I hope it has positive ramafications in the longrun for all of us.
 
I meant to let people know earlier that Howie Carr talked about this guy being a hero. Nice to see he is not mincing words on the heroics of the shooter. He said he was glad that the guy was a good shot because a civil suit is tougher for the estate to win versus the "victim" showing up in a wheelchair. Agreed.

I can't wait to hear what Mennino will try to say on the news.[shocked]
 
50 Staniford Street location is a satellite site, the building host other businesses there, I don't believe MGH owns this building, just maybe lease some floors

Google: All businesses at 50 Staniford Street

My fiancée works for Bristol Myers selling Abilify. She had just met with this particular doctor on Friday. Glad she wasn't there today.
 
If you don't want your head to explode do NOT read the comments.

I think its interesting to read the comments from publications outside of Massachusetts, take the Houston Chronicle for example:

I think he needed to be shot. Absolutely.

A permanent cure, I guess.

Yeah GUN !!! Oorah

At least he was not Tased.

But the anti gun crowd would rather there not have been an armed man present, regardless of who else might have been hacked up.

CRAZY IS AS CRAZY DOES...............
 
This guy was nothing more than a "carrying civilian" just as any of us would be. Whether they will try to press the issue where this is a teaching hospital and thus "school grounds" is up for anyone to guess at this point, but I was under the assumption (as many posts on this board have pointed out) that a no firearms policy only had any teeth against employees of an establishment, or those who were asked to leave by staff at said establishment (i.e. trespassing).

IMO, after an incident like this, it will only hurt MGH to press charges against anyone legally carrying a firearm in the building. If nothing else they'll publicly be stating that they value one person's life over another based on the job that person holds.

ETA: I still wouldn't want to be the test case for fighting their policies.

IANAL, but just because a hospital is affiliated with a medical college doesn't make it a "school" under MGL . . . every square inch of MGH's offices certainly aren't a "school" IMNSHO.

Company policies only apply to employees (and students for schools) and have no legal impact on a "visitor"! They can ask you to leave and charge you with trespassing ONLY after they asked and you refused! But that can be done for any reason.

So IMNSHO there is NOTHING to charge this alleged security guard with. He did nothing wrong wrt MGLs.

Amazing - The 2nd commenter is saying that this is the result of lax MA sentencing. I sometimes wonder if people even read the articles they're commenting on before spewing completely unrelated garbage.

Why should anyone read something before commenting? Folks here on NES oftentimes do the exact same thing. [thinking]

He will likely be fine legally through this, as he should be, but not for the right reasons. I think we all agree on this point, I just want to make sure we all see it for what it was so there is no illusion that now somehow MGH buildings are safe for CCW, etc. This will change nothing.

There is nothing to charge him with, he's fine legally. You are correct, policies won't change . . . unless they add more security and metal detectors for visitors.

Not in Boston, all security guards are sworn as BPD "special" officers or something IIRC

Not true. Few (numerically) security guards are sworn in with any special police powers. I worked at a college in Boston and believe me you would NOT have wanted any of their officers having police powers (they were a contracted company).
 
We don't know the individual that was shot. He may have been severely mentally ill. If so, this was a tragic but necessary event. Whatever the circumstances, a bad decision was made and the situation was dealt with honorably.

+1 It seems the attacker was mentally ill. It's sad and tragic but I think we're all grateful that the doctor is ok.
 
Reports are that the security guard, and the killed victim are both from Reading, MA, and lives close to each other .

small world.
 
I just sent WBZ a nice little email. I resent the fact they are calling this guy a "security officer". Give me a friggin' break.
 
Money Money Money Mo-ney.... MO-NEY!

What's the over/under of the LTC-holder getting their license revoked and sued by the "victim's" family?

Hey, this is MA. I'd bet they will sue the hospital. Deeper pockets. Maybe even the security guard's employer, lets say ohhh, for improper training or whatever. Again, going where the money is.
 
Last edited:
What level of LTC is allowed in Reading? It's listed here as a "red" town. Davis emphasized (loudly) the guy's trained security guard status. Does anyone know if he was restricted to work only?
 
http://bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1207708
The bostonherald actually put this poll in their webpages (Herald Pulse)

Which is more terrifying: A psych patient with a knife or an armed off-duty security guard?
1>The psych patient with a knife, you can’t know his motivation
2>The off-duty guard. Does he have the right training?
3>Neither, the doctor is lucky the guard didn’t hesitate
4>The real question is how many others are packing?


(results of the voting are not visible)
 
Back
Top Bottom