officer safety

[bigdog]

How do u all feel about the bill filed in the fl house regarding enhanced penalties for battery on s/o, check out house bill 85. which basically says if on duty a battery on a licensed security officer while on duty would be elevated from a misdemeanor 1st to a felony third.

[1stWatch]

Sounds like a wonderful proposal. Texas recently passed an upgraded assault law that made an assault on a security officer the same offense as assaulting a police officer. We have seen fewer instances of this happening since then.

[N. A. Corbier]

how do u all feel about the bill filed in the fl house regardinding enhanced penaties for battery on s/o, check out housebill 85. which basically says if on duty a battery on a licensed security officer while on duty would be elevated
from a midemeanor 1st to a felony third,

Finally. Is FALI backing this legislation again? Its been up for years, but dies in committee - the legislators feel that they're granting security special authority if they pass it.

This is the same redef that security officers who work for junior colleges get, btw. :)

[bigdog]

Florida Association Of Security Companies Is Backing Who Fali

[bigdog]

Only Applies To Security Officers

[bigdog]

Also Fldoacs Is Backing

[N. A. Corbier]

Got a link to FASC? I remember FASO, but I also remember what happened to them.

FALI is the Florida Association of Licensed Investigators. They seem to try to champion the security industry, as PIs are partially governed by the same laws.

I believe this is good news.

[bigdog]

no sorry dont have a link

[Mr. Security]

Seems fair to me. Security often deals with the same dangerous individuals as LE. At any rate, don't forget that you can always file a PI case. Many police officers do this when they suffer injury at the hands of an offender. Of course, if the bad guy doesn't have any assets, it may be an exercise in futility.

[N. A. Corbier]

Seems fair to me. Security often deals with the same dangerous individuals as LE. At any rate, don't forget that you can always file a PI case. Many police officers do this when they suffer injury at the hands of an offender. Of course, if the bad guy doesn't have any assets, it may be an exercise in futility.

I consistantly remember the arguments on why this law usually died in committee:

"But they're private citizens, why should they be different?"
"This will give security guards common-law authority to detain people who hit them." (Common law authority to detain for felony with personal knowledge, can't get more personal than being hit yourself.)
"Only public employees should have this."

They seem to have forgotten that private security officers providing services to the Junior Colleges of the State are already accorded this redefinition, another instance of the state trying to make private police because the JC's can't afford State University Police.

[bigdog]

that be considered a forcible felony. probably also afraid that s/o would shoot someone who hit them. deadly force clause in fss 776

[N. A. Corbier]

that be considered a forcible felony. probably also afraid that s/o would shoot someone who hit them. deadly force clause in fss 776

Damn, your right, it would be a forcible felony. And you know that someone out there is going to forget that you can only use deadly force to terminate a forcible felony if no other reasonable option is available, and you can only use deadly force to terminate the flight of a forcible felon if no other reasonable option is available.

*BG hits Ofc*
*Ofc hits BG*
*BG runs*
*Ofc shoots BG because he's a fleeing forcible felon*

Ouch.

[bigdog]

how does the resist with violence statute apply to security officers?

[UncleDooly]

how do u all feel about the bill filed in the fl house regardinding enhanced penaties for battery on s/o, check out housebill 85. which basically says if on duty a battery on a licensed security officer while on duty would be elevated
from a midemeanor 1st to a felony third,

While lying in the hospital, it will be very satisfying to know that the guy who hit me with a 2x4 is being prosecuted as a felon.

I think it is a reasonable law but, since we're the only ones who will know about it, .... revenge, after the fact is not very comforting....haha.

Of course, every little bit helps but I would prefer they work on deterents.

[UncleDooly]

....snip, snip....
and you can only use deadly force to terminate the flight of a forcible felon if no other reasonable option is available.


I don't believe "flight" is a felony, or constitutes a felony-in-progress (Florida), but you can bet your bottom some idiot would....haha.

[N. A. Corbier]

I don't believe "flight" is a felony, or constitutes a felony-in-progress (Florida), but you can bet your bottom some idiot would....haha.

If someone wants, I'll post 776 again. From what I remember, a person has the right to use deadly force to prevent the flight of a forcible felon if no other option is available to prevent them from escaping, and their remaining at large presents a greater danger to the public than his being allowed to live, basically.

You notice the wording in there. Florida usually has the same use of force authority (deadly force) for sworn police and non-sworn civilians. A police officer can shoot a convicted felon to stop their flight as they're legally "escaping jail." Someone who is not convicted, they have to follow 776 just like the rest of us. If someone just murdered some schoolkids, and is getting away, and you have no phone, you can most likely shoot them in the back.

Flight itself is not the felony, this only works with forcible felonies. You can use deadly force to terminate the forcible felony, or to stop the flight of a forcible felon if no other method exists.

Notice that 'no other method exists.' You better be damned well able to articulate why no other method existed. :)

I do remember a rape case that a friend worked. He discovered a rape in progress, and took protective action against the rapist. While jamming the barrel of his .357 against the bad guy's ear, he cut the bad guy. The bad guy's attorney tried to get damages, and the court found that the security officer was justified in using any force, including lethal, to terminate the rape, as its a forcible felony.

[bigdog]

[QUOTE=UncleDooly]While lying in the hospital, it will be very satisfying to know that the guy who hit me with a 2x4 is being prosecuted as a felon.

I think it is a reasonable law but, since we're the only ones who will know about it, .... revenge, after the fact is not very comforting....haha.

actually bay news 9 will probably do a piece on it if it p***es as a law. i have talked to a reporter about it. he said it would make a good story.

[N. A. Corbier]

[QUOTE=UncleDooly]While lying in the hospital, it will be very satisfying to know that the guy who hit me with a 2x4 is being prosecuted as a felon.

I think it is a reasonable law but, since we're the only ones who will know about it, .... revenge, after the fact is not very comforting....haha.

actually bay news 9 will probably do a piece on it if it p***es as a law. i have talked to a reporter about it. he said it would make a good story.

If it p***es, I'll write a story for Cygnus Media myself on it. (If they publish it, or not, remains to be seen.)

I know in the Tampa Bay area, Bay News 9 will cover it, the Sheriff's Office will probally have something to say on it, KC will definately be on WTVT 13 about it, and the Saint Petersburg Times will have some commentary on it.

Especially after we email their media outlets and inform them of this, when it becomes law. I suggest not doing it before, because if the media outlet has a political agenda, they'll run negative story on it.

[N. A. Corbier]

how does the resist with violence statute apply to security officers?

This is where it becomes funny. Resisting Arrest with Violence does not apply to security officers, as they are not state officers as defined by the statue defining a "state law enforcement officer."

However, obstructing an officer HAS been used on people who obstruct an officer in the performance of their duties, who has a legal duty. It was written to encomp*** utility workers, who have a legal duty to restore and service power as public utility workers.

Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney successfully charged a man with obstructing a security officer because the man repeatedly attacked the security officer who was attempting to remove the man from his property, interfering with the security officer's lawful duty to remove the offender.

The Saint Petersburg Police Department wanted to charge the guy bad, a sergeant thought up the charge.

If can, and has, been argued that since the license is for a state "security officer," that they are a non-sworn state officer, licensed by the state, and has the authority of a non-sworn state officer: ie: None.

While there is no authority from the title, all those "officer" statutes that don't reference 931 (I think, its the state LE designation statute, I'm probally off) can be argued as they apply to the security officer.

Oh, there's an older law that states that resisting a watchman in a declared time of national war is a felony, and a watchman may detain any tresp***er. THe only problem is that a watchman is a night watchman as ***igned by the Sheriff to protect munitions, weapons, and military billets. It was from WWII.

[UncleDooly]

If someone wants, I'll post 776 again. From what I remember, a person has the right to use deadly force to prevent the flight of a forcible felon if no other option is available to prevent them from escaping, and their remaining at large presents a greater danger to the public than his being allowed to live, basically.

You notice the wording in there. Florida usually has the same use of force authority (deadly force) for sworn police and non-sworn civilians. A police officer can shoot a convicted felon to stop their flight as they're legally "escaping jail." Someone who is not convicted, they have to follow 776 just like the rest of us. If someone just murdered some schoolkids, and is getting away, and you have no phone, you can most likely shoot them in the back.

Flight itself is not the felony, this only works with forcible felonies. You can use deadly force to terminate the forcible felony, or to stop the flight of a forcible felon if no other method exists.

Notice that 'no other method exists.' You better be damned well able to articulate why no other method existed. :)

I do remember a rape case that a friend worked. He discovered a rape in progress, and took protective action against the rapist. While jamming the barrel of his .357 against the bad guy's ear, he cut the bad guy. The bad guy's attorney tried to get damages, and the court found that the security officer was justified in using any force, including lethal, to terminate the rape, as its a forcible felony.

I (just my opinion) consider 776 to be superceded by the Florida Security Officer Handbook. After shooting someone, who I determine has committed a felony and who is fleeing the scene of what I determined to be a felony, I would hate to be in court with some lawyer asking me to find justification for my actions in the Fl. SO handbook - or, asking who, specifically, I considered to be in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm at the time of my action and, I'm sure, a dozen other legal points to muddy the issue.

I prefer to act (again, just my opinion) strictly within the parameters described in the handbook. The handbook suggests that officers read Chapter 493 for increased understanding of the law. Unfortunately, lawyers exist to convince courts that, although you've read the law, you don't understand it or have misinterpreted what it says.

I have to stand by my statement: Shooting anyone who is running away from you, and who is not, immediately, threatening anyone, will, in all probability, land you in a world of trouble. Why take the chance?

[N. A. Corbier]

I (just my opinion) consider 776 to be superceded by the Florida Security Officer Handbook. After shooting someone, who I determine has committed a felony and who is fleeing the scene of what I determined to be a felony, I would hate to be in court with some lawyer asking me to find justification for my actions in the Fl. SO handbook - or, asking who, specifically, I considered to be in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm at the time of my action and, I'm sure, a dozen other legal points to muddy the issue.

I prefer to act (again, just my opinion) strictly within the parameters described in the handbook. The handbook suggests that officers read Chapter 493 for increased understanding of the law. Unfortunately, lawyers exist to convince courts that, although you've read the law, you don't understand it or have misinterpreted what it says.

I have to stand by my statement: Shooting anyone who is running away from you, and who is not, immediately, threatening anyone, will, in all probability, land you in a world of trouble. Why take the chance?

The Florida Security Officer's Handbook is an interesting book, at that. To be honest, I would check the latest edition for what they changed, then grab a copy of Florida Statutes, and anything that was amiss in the Handbook, we'd run through corporate counsel.

The reasons I distrust the handbook in some cases (776 isn't really one of them, though) is because the Division consistantly states that the job of security is not to protect anything or anyone, but merely to report requested activities to their employer (Not law enforcement or the client.)

The Division maintains that the job of crime prevention (Protecting property from criminal interference) is the job of law enforcement (Crime Prevention Bureaus), and that the job of protecting people is the purve of law enforcement, and private investigators.

Due to the industry refusing to lobby the state on just about anything that would protect them from liability, perfering to use the standard "If something bad happens, we just fire the guard and blame him" approach, the state still believes these things, and actively informs the law enforcement agencies that these are the jobs of security, spending your (and mine) tax dollars, to the tune of several hundred thousand on flyers and etc.

A perfect example was Varnador or whatever his spelling was, stating in a conference that "The 9mm semi-automatic is the thinking man's gun, security guards could never handle it." The handbook is written the same way.

[UncleDooly]

....snip, snip...
"If something bad happens, we just fire the guard and blame him"
...snip...

Haha..... exactly!

I pretty much agree with your entire post but the above is tattooed on my forehead so I don't forget it. I always glance at the mirror before making decisions.

I worked for a company, here in the Tampa Bay area, which, at the time, was CIS's only competition on this coast. I really enjoyed the proactive, no-nonsense approach to the job (and, I admit, the action) but the "swat team" mentality of most of the officers was, frankly, at least to me, often comical. I only stayed about a year. (I understand the company has done some housekeeping since then. I hope so. There were some great guys there)

I prefer residential or corporate posts, many of which pay better than armed posts. My opinions are only valid (when they are valid at all....haha) for the average, but professional, officer on the average, but serious, contract post. I tend to err on the side of "conservative but efficient."

(but, sometimes, I'd just like to shoot em all....hehe)

[N. A. Corbier]

Haha..... exactly!

I pretty much agree with your entire post but the above is tattooed on my forehead so I don't forget it. I always glance at the mirror before making decisions.

I worked for a company, here in the Tampa Bay area, which, at the time, was CIS's only competition on this coast. I really enjoyed the proactive, no-nonsense approach to the job (and, I admit, the action) but the "swat team" mentality of most of the officers was, frankly, at least to me, often comical. I only stayed about a year. (I understand the company has done some housekeeping since then. I hope so. There were some great guys there)

I prefer residential or corporate posts, many of which pay better than armed posts. My opinions are only valid (when they are valid at all....haha) for the average, but professional, officer on the average, but serious, contract post. I tend to err on the side of "conservative but efficient."

(but, sometimes, I'd just like to shoot em all....hehe)

Did you work during the Dixon/Alba era, or the Furtick era?

Things got better after Furtick was made Ops Manager. I kinda figured you worked for who I thought you did, at some time. Everybody makes their rounds of all the companies, and depending on the time period, moved on or moved out of the industry.

[bigdog]

so what do u think the chances are this bill will p***? also have u checked out change493.org

[UncleDooly]

Did you work during the Dixon/Alba era, or the Furtick era?

Things got better after Furtick was made Ops Manager. I kinda figured you worked for who I thought you did, at some time. Everybody makes their rounds of all the companies, and depending on the time period, moved on or moved out of the industry.


hahahaha........ Dixon (whom I loved dearly as a person, well, not loved, exactly, but didn't get along with at work)

[N. A. Corbier]

hahahaha........ Dixon (whom I loved dearly as a person, well, not loved, exactly, but didn't get along with at work)

Joe was insane, but a good guy. I remember doing Station 2 and Joe would show up, and he'd be like, "Kill anyone who follows me." I mean, what do you say to that? :)

I also remember a wonderful and touching story about Alba and his OC canister. Moral of the story, imparted to us all: Be VERY carefuly with Freeze +P canisters when you carry them upside down, or you will feel the burn in places you wish you never did.

[bigdog]

how much force can u use to detain someone? also do they have the right to resist since we r not sworn?

[N. A. Corbier]

u mean mike furtick

Without the Major present, I tend not to involve his full name. Furtick is just a surname, one that can't be identified by someone casually. However, I will note that if anyone has any ill words about him, I'll be happy to take that person up in debate here. :)

[N. A. Corbier]

how much force can u use to detain someone? also do they have the right to resist since we r not sworn?

That entirely depends on what your doing. Why are you detaining them, first? Is it because they committed battery upon you, and continued to attack you after you pushed them back? If so, then whatever force is required to stop their attack and place them into custody for your safety and theirs.

If you are operating as an agent of a retail establishment (retail theft), then you can use reasonable force to secure the person after informing them that they are being detained for suspicion of retail theft for the purposes of turning them over to law enforcement.

Florida Statutes don't give statutory authority for use of force in a common law detention. However, it is generally accepted that if you are detaining for a felony, you can use what force is reasonable to effect the detainment, because your initial force was verbal. You then blocked their way, and they struck you, then your stopping their attack.

[bigdog]

major furtick is a great guy. have u ever worked in our company

[bigdog]

when i detain i walk up and cuff um. i dont block em or any thing . i tell the put ur hands behind ur back if they dont i make them

[N. A. Corbier]

major furtick is a great guy. have u ever worked in our company

Just about every post except Orlando.

[bigdog]

so u know gunnery sergeant larson?

[N. A. Corbier]

when i detain i walk up and cuff um. i dont block em or any thing . i tell the put ur hands behind ur back if they dont i make them

The question is, why are you detaining them? How much authority you have depends on what your detaining for. Talk to Training in the office on this.

[bigdog]

ok a felony ofense. we r told detain if possibble

[N. A. Corbier]

so u know gunnery sergeant larson?

You name someone who has been there before 1994, I know them or of them, yes.

[bigdog]

sorry stupid question huh?

[N. A. Corbier]

sorry stupid question huh?
Not really. Since this is a conversation, perhaps AIM would be more useful. We're spamming the forum. :)

[UncleDooly]

You name someone who has been there before 1994, I know them or of them, yes.

Were you familiar with Maximo/Leverocks during the great multiple robbery ere? We had excitement almost every night there.

Typical nightly conversation:

Me: "Which one do you want to chase?"
Other guard: "I'll take the one that ran into the marina."
Me: "Ok, I'll take the one that ran across the street (still on post)."
Other guard: If I don't catch mine, I'll grab that guy hanging out in the parking lot."
Me: "Ok, while you're out there, check to see if the lock on the back gate is broken yet, tonight."
Other guard: "Oh, christ, here comes Joe."
Me: "Let's act like nothing's wrong so he won't start shooting at stuff."

[N. A. Corbier]

Were you familiar with Maximo/Leverocks during the great multiple robbery ere? We had excitement almost every night there.

I remember Maximo. I was ***igned there with Cory Schmitt. Before the maintenance staff broke our golf cart, the one that SPPD clocked at 42 MPH. Good times.

[UncleDooly]

I remember Maximo. I was ***igned there with Cory Schmitt. Before the maintenance staff broke our golf cart, the one that SPPD clocked at 42 MPH. Good times.


You mean the gas cart.
We had an electric cart and they broke that one... I didn't like the gas cart... couldn't sneak around on it.

I don't remember names well..... mine is Johnnie McCoy. We might have met.

...picture on my website (I didn't have the beard then)
http://www.awfullyfunny.com

[N. A. Corbier]

This is going to backfire. I would like everyone to take a look at change493.org's newsletter.

This will be seen as a direct attack on sworn law enforcement officers (more realistically, their unions), and direct competition. If the FOP, PBA, and other police unions get ahold of this, they will craft a response.

Especially based on "the future," under the newsletter. These proposed changes grant authority to private citizens that private citizens do not have. They require to be sworn as peace officers, however, once someone is a peace officer under Florida law, they are required to work for the state.

This is the first step towards private law enforcement, sworn private law enforcement, and the taking of jobs away from law enforcement officers. There will be LEOs who are rabid over this.

[bigdog]

i spoke with mr.lamarche they want us to be able to detain for misdemeanors write tresp***es an tickets under a licwense not necessarily as peace officers

[bigdog]

special officers dont have to work for the state thats why they probably wont use the term peace officer

[N. A. Corbier]

i spopke with mr.lamarche they want us to be able to detain for misdemeanors write tresp***es an tickets under a licwense not necessarily as peace officers

Ok, first, you realize that this is political action by Critical Intervention Services, correct? That's either good, bad, or dosen't matter by who you talk to. However, what CIS is asking for are authorities that citizens in Florida don't have.

You may not detain for a misdomeanor. Why they're asking for detainment, and not arrest, I don't know, because there's no real law saying you can detain someone for ANY reason. Its English Common Law, and since they didn't p*** a legislation prohibiting it, you get to do it as an American Citizen.

You have this authority not because of your uniform or license, but because you are a private person subject to English Common Law. As the state says, you have no authority other than that of a private citizen.

What they're after is the granting of limited powers for licensed security officers, trained in specific powers and responsiblities to state requirements. Granted, I have no problem with this, as up here in Wisconsin, we can do all those things. We can write parking tickets, we can write tresp*** forms without LE intervention, we can make felony and misdomeanor arrests (not detainments), and can operate emergency vehicles on private property (Where state traffic code dosen't apply anyway.) Why can we do this? Because any private citizen can.

If this fails, learn from the mistakes that were made this time and seek to change the law yourself. Hopefully, though, CIS has a few politicans that they can count on, and some political clout again.

[N. A. Corbier]

I don't remember names well..... mine is Johnnie McCoy. We might have met.

...picture on my website (I didn't have the beard then)
http://www.awfullyfunny.com

I know you, but damn it, I can't remember WHY I know you. We've met. I mean, we met at work.

In other news... Folks who are not in Florida, read change493.org, and post your thoughts on it? If you notice in the links, they all point to CIS, (a security company in St. Petersburg), and the plaque's awarded to the senators have CIS Protection Officer badges affixed to them.

[bigdog]

exactly what we r saying is that by virtue of our position we should get more authority than an average citizen

[N. A. Corbier]

exactly what we r saying is that by virtue of our position we should get more authority than an average citizen

Right. This is a hard, hard, road to climb, as your not acting on behalf of the government, who bestows these powers. Hopefully, the opposition will not be that stiff against it from law enforcement and citizen's activist groups.

The Homeland Security angle is good, and hopefully it can be argued successfully.

[UncleDooly]

[QUOTE=UncleDooly]You mean the gas cart.
We had an electric cart and they broke that one... I didn't like the gas cart... couldn't sneak around on it.

I don't remember names well..... We might have met.

[N. A. Corbier]

[QUOTE=UncleDooly]You mean the gas cart.
We had an electric cart and they broke that one... I didn't like the gas cart... couldn't sneak around on it.

I don't remember names well..... We might have met.

Was the electric the one brought from Skyway? I remember Cory Schmitt rolling up in that thing at about 40. Then they gave it to me, and Cory was afraid for his life after I stepped on the gas. :)

[bigdog]

state of florida fraternal order of police posted on their website that they are supporting the battery on security officer bill under their bill supported section.

[N. A. Corbier]

state of florida fraternal order of police posted on their website that they are supporting the battery on security officer bill under their bill supported section.

That's a mixed message, at best. :) FoP routinely campaigns against private intrusion on law enforcement activities, stating that security are not LEOs and should have no additional protections... But the state chapter endorces such a protection?

Glad to see the FL FOP (Who dosen't have the huge collective bargining power that their northern brothers do) is supporting it.

[bigdog]

I thought it was odd too but u have to remember alot of cops were former security officers themselves. the are oposing the stun gun restriction rto the public bill too

[EMTGuard]

Personally support any law that provides more protection to Security Officers who are assaulted while performing their duties. It is very similar to the problems we encountered when i worked as a State Correctional Officer. Inmates regularly assaulted COs and threw urine and feces at us. When we would go to the legislature asking for harsher penalities for the people that assulted us we always had someone saying "They are just prison guards. Why should we give them any privilages?"
As for detaining anyone, when I was hired and went through the required training we were told that we never detain anyone. We can trick someone into remaining on site by 'implying' that they are not allowed to leave. We can do that by phrasing the way we say things such as, "Sir, would you mind coming with me to the security office?", or "Maam, would you please wait right here for a minute?" in an authoritive manner while we summoned local law enforcement. At no time were we to block someone from leaving by standing in their way or grabing them. By asking them instead of making it an order we can always say that they were never unlawfully detained and if they wanted to leave then they could have at anytime.

[Mr. Security]

........
As for detaining anyone, when I was hired and went through the required training we were told that we never detain anyone. We can trick someone into remaining on site by 'implying' that they are not allowed to leave. We can do that by phrasing the way we say things such as, "Sir, would you mind coming with me to the security office?", or "Maam, would you please wait right here for a minute?" in an authoritive manner while we summoned local law enforcement. At no time were we to block someone from leaving by standing in their way or grabing them. By asking them instead of making it an order we can always say that they were never unlawfully detained and if they wanted to leave then they could have at anytime.

Sounds all too familiar. :(

[Serpico]

We were only to use force if the non complaint subject had stolen over $50 worth of merchandise. Makes an interesting situation when they've got their pockets filled with wrenches and screwdrivers :mad:

[Mr. Security]

We were only to use force if the non complaint subject had stolen over $50 worth of merchandise. Makes an interesting situation when they've got their pockets filled with wrenches and screwdrivers :mad:

Yea, and don't forget about the framing hammer! :eek:

[Tennsix]

Man Gets 30 Years For Shooting Mall Guard

INDIANAPOLIS -- A man was sentenced to 30 years in prison Tuesday for shooting and wounding a security guard and a bystander at Circle Centre Mall in 1999.

Ahmad Edwards had been convicted of attempted murder in the July 1999 incident. Authorities said Edwards fired a gun while running from the mall's Parisian store, where he allegedly had stolen a pair of shoes.

One of the bullets grazed an unarmed security guard, and another bullet injured a bystander, authorities said

[Mr. Security]

Man Gets 30 Years For Shooting Mall Guard

INDIANAPOLIS -- A man was sentenced to 30 years in prison Tuesday for shooting and wounding a security guard and a bystander at Circle Centre Mall in 1999.

Ahmad Edwards had been convicted of attempted murder in the July 1999 incident. Authorities said Edwards fired a gun while running from the mall's Parisian store, where he allegedly had stolen a pair of shoes.

One of the bullets grazed an unarmed security guard, and another bullet injured a bystander, authorities said

I hope this guard wasn't chasing him :(

[Tennsix]

I hope this guard wasn't chasing him :(
yeah ne was chasing the suspect. however, the officer did not realize the suspect was armed.