[Imc] Security At The IMC

[Mike Lehman]

I originally answered Robert off-list that I believe that there is not a
need for security personnel, but perhaps everyone needs to hear this.
Mr. Bee raises an appropriate question that should be dealt with so that
everyone is on the same page.

I think that this sort of thing can be a dangerous illusion. Having
"security" personnel implies that they can protect us from danger; that
simply isn't the case and leads to the same illusions that the events of
last week were caused by. We are made safe by how we choose to behave
and interact with the world, not because we happen to have some big thug
to beat back danger.

The point in my original e-mail was to make everyone aware of the
situation we find ourselves in and to make us all aware that we all
share responsibility for the IMC being a safe place.

No one should consider a need to do anything that would endanger
themselves or others, except in self-defense (and I'll leave it up to
everyone to define that for themselves.) Call 911 in an emergency as you
feel necessary, but I would recommend against anyone acting on their
own, except note threatening occurences and, if necessary, to notify the
authorities and/or evacuate the building.

The IMC is in no position to cover liability for actions that you decide
to take. We simply can't afford insurance for such things. Please use
your head and be safe, while keeping everyone aware of anything that we
all should be aware of.
Mike Lehman

"Chas. M. Bee" wrote:
> 
> Robert Dunn wrote:
> >
> > here is my 2 cents, from working with PRC and Vietnam Vets Against the
> > War, when there are emotions running high about patriotism or love of
> > the "Chief", sometimes our physical security is threatened. I propose
> > that we ask PRC for security for the IMC. It wouldn't hurt. I have
> > been trained by them, I am willing to volunteer. We could have a
> > training in the back room.
> >
> > All, tell me what you think?
> >
> > Comrade Robert
> 
>    Don't I remember a statute from the Reagan years which states that
> volunteer organizations can't be sued for damages?  Note - I could be
> wrong, but I don't think so.
> 
>    If this is true, then placing unarmed individuals in harm's way
> without professional training would seem to me to be a morally untenable
> position.  I know the PRAC does this - I've seen tiny little women as
> security for marches, and wondered what they and their parents would do
> if their noggin somehow hit the curb, or etc.
> 
>    I should think that if a couple of things went wrong at once,
> someone's life could be ruined.  Isn't the cop shop 4 or so blocks away?