When Westfield security guard Faraz Tahir attempted to help victims during the Bondi mass stabbing, he was killed by perpetrator Joel Gauchi. The 40 year-old Schizophrenic In the aftermath of the stabbing attack that claimed the lives of six people, I cannot help but wonder: would the outcome have been different had Tahir been armed?
The question raises a larger conversation: should NSW security guards be armed?
Surely the answer is yes. Gauchi was eventually shot dead by NSW Police Inspector Amy Scott. While Westfields and the NSW government may review processes, regulations, and mental health policy, part of the answer lies in arming and training NSW shopping centre security guards. Lives could have been saved if Tahir had been armed with firearms, pepper spray, baton or taser.
Gauchi was already able to kill six people before police officer Amy Scott arrived at the scene and neutralised Gauchi, firing a fatal shot to his chest. If security at the shopping centre were armed, Gauchi could have been neutralised before killing more people.
While Westfield Scentre Group CEO David Rusanow announced it would conduct a security review of its operations, he claimed guards,“undergo significant training as licenced security guards. Enforcement is done in very close conjunction with police.”
He went on to say “law enforcement” arrived at the scene “extremely quickly.”
“The events that occurred in a very short space of time. Unfortunately, that resulted in a number of innocent lives being lost.”
But Tahir’s death may be the smoking gun.
Based on the limited information we have, Tahir, was “trying to protect the community.” But what can an unarmed security guard be able to do to effectively handle a perpetrator carrying a large knife?
Had Tahir been armed and trained with one or more of these devices, he may have apprehended the suspect. In an interview with Channel 7, security guard Richard Theodakris argued, “In a Westfield, we don’t see that heavy-handed security that you would see in, say, a prison.”
“With a riot squad team in this scenario, the end result would be completely different. You know, the offender would likely be apprehended and taken into a court of law.”
While the veil of safety has been lifted, in a country that does not allow citizens to conceal firearms, we still have the right to feel safe in public. Whatever the Minns government does, it ought to empower security to be effective agents in handling armed perpetrators. While it is difficult to admit, the Bondi stabbing demonstrated that shopping centre security are passive figureheads against any real threat of danger.
Interestingly, the Minns government ruled out a review of firearms legislation
What is the point of having shopping centre security guards? I may sound facetious, but we’ve learned that the public is not safe from lone attackers in shopping centres, and we’ve also learned that unarmed security guards are ineffective in apprehending armed perpetrators.
It is a sad indictment on our society when there needs to be a discussion around security officers possessing handguns in shopping centres to protect the public, but that is after the Bondi Westfield stabbings. Nevertheless, after all is said and done, in the aftermath of the Bondi stabbings, Australians have a right to feel safe and security guards, the right to protect.
