Pest Control 101 wrote on Sep 21, 2008 7:20 PM:Pardee has no one to blame but himself. Nuff said.

Get it right wrote on Sep 21, 2008 8:52 PM:$100 bucks says this guy was high on drugs and I can't wait for the drug test report to be filed. The security guard got it right....he's alive and the irrational wacked-out man is dead. Darwin's got it right on this case.

COURT wrote on Sep 21, 2008 9:36 PM:People it's better to be tried by twelve rather than carried by six! Good job guard I'm glad you are ok!

Lady Justice wrote on Sep 21, 2008 11:38 PM:To Pest Control, Get it right and COURT: Not one of you was a witness to how this man's life was ended. How do you speak with such confidence that the guard had no choice but to shoot to kill? Is it possible he's saying only what is in his best interest (through his lawyer)? The only other eye witness disputes that there was provocation before the guard drew his gun. I've read claims the victim was disabled and walked with a cane.Why do you say one of the two had to die? There was no mention or Pardee carrying a weapon! Why didn't the guard run for help and call for police before drawing his gun?

The only thing scarier than employees of a strip mall carrying lethal firearms is people with sketchy information are so willing to conclude that the victim "had it coming." Even if he was on drugs, that's not a crime punishable by death. We still don't live in a police state where a guard with a uniform and a gun can dispense justice. That's not how we do things in America.

Vista Granny wrote on Sep 22, 2008 7:09 AM:Lady Justice said it all. Down with those who believe anyone who might be annoying should be shot to death.How do they know they won't be the next victim?

I know wrote on Sep 22, 2008 8:01 AM:I know I wont be the next victim because I dont go after people at night that have guns, I have common sense.

what wrote on Sep 22, 2008 8:25 AM:ever happened to pepper spray ?

Ya know... wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:16 AM:The next time I go to a strip mall I'm pretty sure I won't be doing anything to warrant getting shot in the first place. "Little provocation" shows that there was some provocation to begin with. These people getting shot by cops and security guards are less than innocent.

To what wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:34 AM:Whatever happened to reading the entire article?

To What wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:39 AM:Read the entire article before piping up with comments. The article clearly states that Collazo attempted to deploy his "mace", however it got hung up in his belt.

I will refrain from making my judgement on this until ALL of the facts are published.

Too bad wrote on Sep 22, 2008 10:17 AM:the guard wasn't a cop then all would be OK. The DA would have dismissed charges already and those who think it's OK for a cop to shoot and unarmed woman and kid would be here blogging their approval

To I know wrote on Sep 22, 2008 10:18 AM:What about the guard's common sense? The victim had no weapon. He was with his girlfriend eating pizza. Why didn't the guard run for help, like he was trained to do? Think about the logic: You are in essence placing NO IMPORTANCE on the judgement, sanity, temper, morality, or intelligence of the person who is walking around with a loaded, lethal weapon. Only that HE decided this UNARMED MAN was a threat and he shot him.

You're at a strip mall eating pizza and get in an argument with your girlfriend. Didn't see the gun? Too bad you didn't have better vision—BANG, YOU'RE DEAD! Didn't notice the guard was getting upset with you? Too bad, BANG, YOU'RE DEAD!

Speaking of common sense, why did the security guard think a pair of sunglasses looked like a gun? If he can't judge that, why is he carrying a gun?

If lack of common sense gives a gunman license to kill you, then EVERYONE OF US is in danger, or have you never made a mistake, or failed to use common sense? Human beings are flawed and guns kill quickly, easily and accidentally. Not a formula for a free, fair and just society.

Armed guards are NOT police officers. They need to follow the guidelines from the article, set out by William Hodges from C.A.L.S.A.G.A. "The role is mostly to observe and report ---- it's not to engage in bringing people to justice. . . That is Security Officer 101."

I know wrote on Sep 22, 2008 2:24 PM:in response to 1018AM

What about not 2nd guessing someone in fear for their life? He did go away, he was backing away as even said by the girlfriend.

What happened to people in society not attacking someone else?

You dumb down the incident to a very arguemnet that someone decided to shoot without looking at the circumstances. You place no blame on a guy who goes after someone WITH A GUN!!! What about that guys common sense?

READ THE ARTICLE before you comment, and read the past articles. It was dark the guy didn't know what he had in his hand.

Try getting outside and living a little more, you will see that the world is not some rose colored place where people are nice to each other.

Bill wrote on Sep 22, 2008 3:24 PM:If a person can shoot another, just because they are afraid of their own shadow, we are in deep doodoo!

You dont know wrote on Sep 22, 2008 3:29 PM:I see you can spell common sense, but I'm quite sure that's all you really have to do with it!

Would it be okay for someone to shoot you and then say they didn't know what you had in your hand and they were askeered?

People who are afraid shouldn't be armed guards. But hey! it pays more, doesn't it?

Bad Habit wrote on Sep 22, 2008 4:14 PM:To "bill" and "I know" - Come on life must be pretty cut and dry inside your fish tank. Does anyone not see that this attacker was either on drugs or off his rocker. It seems as though people nowadays have no fear of people in uniforms with guns. The Security officer pulled a gun out. The normal sane reaction would be to suddenly change your approach and backdown not continue to approach. The security officer probably freaked after pulling his gun and this man continied to come after him. The next time your in fear for your life I hope someone is there to document just how you reacted.

ShawnP wrote on Sep 22, 2008 4:30 PM:As a former unarmed & armed security guard in a shopping center, I can sympathize with both sides of this issue. I had people spit on me, run shopping carts into me, bump me with their cars, and throw objects at me, just because I was in a uniform. A security guard has little authority, so many decide to become armed just to even the playing field a little. I never had to draw my firearm, but drew my pepper spray a few times; and, the local police don't help, they don't back up the security guards at all (they are "on more important calls").
The guy that got shot, while he & his girlfriend were "just minding their own business" were sitting behind the businesses --- this in itself is a suspicious act, as it is usually prohibited from parking behind the businesses; if it is permissible to park behind the businesses, then it is prohibited from being in the vehicle or waiting in the vehicle. This is for the safety of the business employees as well as the security guard. Since the guard must cover the whole shopping center on foot, he couldn't just ignore them and leave them, he had to maintain surveillance; if he had walked to another area of the center, and these two had got hurt or had been doing something inappropriate and/or illegal, then you would have been calling for him being fired. On the other hand, if the guard was walking backward, he still should have had time to get out the mace/pepper spray. I'm sure he identified himself to the advancing man, and warned him that he was armed with spray and a gun (this is standard operating procedure and the mantra of security guards); if the guy still kept advancing, and had an object in his hand, then he deserved to be stopped.
The man didn't deserve to die, but I would have definitely pepper-sprayed him, or shot him to disable.
Once all the pertinent details come out, hopefully all will be satisfied with them.

Funny.... wrote on Sep 22, 2008 6:23 PM:It's the same ole comments as usual. Cops on here with the us vs. them mentality. hahaha

Larry wrote on Sep 22, 2008 7:43 PM:He was probably just upset he couldn't use plastic bags in Encinitas anymore.

Marshall wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:12 PM:If the guard says it was too dark to see that a pair of sunglasses on the victim's collar wasn't actually a gun (according to earlier article), by the same token, couldn't it be too dark for the victim to see the guard had a gun?

I know wrote on Sep 23, 2008 10:58 AM:I think it is you lacking in common sense. What society do you live in where you think it is ok for someone to attack another?

Get over yourself you are not that important

Guns dont wrote on Sep 23, 2008 11:01 AM:Kill people. People kill people. I have yet to see a gun pick itself up and fire itself at someone. The same goes with a knife, bat, car, etc...Jail the person, not the object...I like to post off-topic blogs btw.

esteban wrote on Sep 23, 2008 11:02 AM:Maybe the guard was wrong and over reacted...and maybe he was right. Who knows? We weren't there. But I love how all these righteous types knew exactly what should have been done without actually being there.

to esteban wrote on Sep 23, 2008 4:16 PM:Maybe you are right or maybe you are wrong...who knows?

esteban, we all know! You are wrong...ALWAYS wrong!!

to Bad Habit wrote on Sep 23, 2008 4:22 PM:I've never been in fear of my life, so I really doubt there can be a next time. And btw, it's next time "you're" in fear.

If shooting people who were on drugs or off their rockers was an acceptable thing to do, the cops in this state would be busy, all day long, every day!!

And from reading your post, you'd probably be in fear of your life...good buddy!

citizen wrote on Sep 24, 2008 10:01 PM:This security guard acted in haste obviously. A loved one is dead. The only person the guard was protecting was himself a real hero. Throw him in jail or who is he going to kill next? It was dark? No it wasn't. His story has changed at least 5 times since he hired his attorney.

Is this ok editor wrote on Sep 25, 2008 4:38 PM:Some people think they can bully whoever they want without consequence, and sometimes they find out the hard way, it ain't always so.

No, I wasn't there and neither were any of you other bloggers here. What surprises me is how quick many are to side with the decedent. Although this newspaper reported that his mother considered him to be an angel, or something to that effect, his alleged police record (as reported in this same newspaper) may suggest otherwise. I am not as eager to side with someone who has an alleged documented history of criminal activity, violence and intimidation. What also doesn't make sense to me is why the girlfriend of some random angel would allegedly file a temporary restraining order against the angelic boyfriend in which she allegedly makes note of his daily intimidation and death threat against her (again, no reference to anyone here). So, was he really an angel like mom says? Of course he was. But why do I smell something burning? (No reference to hell intended)

My sympathies are with the guard (who probably has no criminal history) just doing his job and found himself in the unfortunate circumstance of taking another's life...allegedly.

To Is this OK wrote on Sep 25, 2008 11:22 PM:You say, "What surprises me is how quick many are to side with the decedent." Yet, you then quickly side with the guard.

I don't think people who defend the POSSIBILITY that the dead victim may not have deserved to die, are "siding" with him. Only providing counter-arguments to all those who jump to the conclusion that the use of a gun was in order.

The real point is that we don't know what actually happened behind Smart & Final that day, and it is folly to make uninformed assertions as to who is to blame. What we should be asking ourselves is why did this young, inexperienced security guard carry a gun? Had he not tried to engage with this man, but rather kept watch over the situation from a distance, the man would most certainly still be alive.

Guns kill too quickly and easily in any situation where panic or uncontrolled emotions get into the mix. Security guards are not police officers, and they should not carry lethal weapons. Pepper spray or mace for emergencies, and observe and report any crimes but never try to be a cop.

Joe wrote on Sep 26, 2008 1:41 AM:I think I will go to Beacon's with a six pak and remember my friend. It is sad the way he went; the senseless nature of his death. The guard should be charged just as that seventeen year old in old town. Why using a baseball bat or a knife is a felony and a gun is only a misdemeanor escapes me. Those that knew him will miss him.

Changed Mind wrote on Sep 26, 2008 2:27 PM:At first I though he had a strong case but after reviewing the "changes" that have been made I have to say I changed my opinion. To say that he accidentally pulled the trigger and that he didnt remember pulling the trigger... There are two fundamental problems with his statements - 1. You cannot accidentally pull a trigger on a gun, your finger has to be on the trigger to do so, and every one knows you dont put your finger on the trigger unless you intend to shoot. 2. Why did he have his gun out in the first place, RULE 2 in use of firearms with security ( I ve been in the industry for a while) you do not have your gun out unless you INTEND to use it. You have to write a report every time your firearm breaks leather (unholstered) to BSIS informing them of your drawn incident. Not remembering or being cognicent of him firing his gun shows a severe form of negligence on his part... It sounds like it was an OVERALL case of negligence on the guards part, improperly drawing his weapon, no one heard any warnings by the guard for the man to cease (If someone is coming at me im yelling GET BACK GET BACK GET DOWN STOP STOP STOP LET ME SEE YOUR HANDS) Im not just backing into a corner and hoping he stops coming at me, and he had his finger on the trigger... Which by all training standards you always have your finger above the trigger guard... If the DA is on it and his attorney wants to go for the I DONT REMEMBER DEFENSE, its simple charge him with involuntary manslaughter and negligence discharge of a firearm in a public place (felony btw)

Is this OK wrote on Sep 26, 2008 10:31 PM:Let me clarify my position. Given no hard evidence to prove otherwise, I will always give the benefit of doubt to the working, law abiding citizen over the [person] with a criminal and violent history.

Lady Justice wrote on Sep 27, 2008 10:11 AM:To Is this OK:

In America we don't indict a person based on their employment status. We don't indict a person based on past history. The founders of our country saw great danger in a system where anything other that the actual facts of the case can be used against someone. It is one of the fundamental tenants of the American judicial system. The security guard's actions should be judged on the facts of this case, and this case alone, and only evidence that exists that pertains to the case will be weighed, but that evidence does NOT include your opinion of the character of the victim, nor your opinion of the character of the guard, which, incidentally, is also not on trial.

Is this ok wrote on Sep 27, 2008 11:44 AM:You are blind, Lady Justice. The credibility of witnesses DOES have an influence in our judicial system, as it should. I'm not saying that character trumps the facts, however.

justiceforall wrote on Sep 27, 2008 2:57 PM:Is this ok-
Lady Justice has it right. And besides that the security guard didn't even know who the victim was until after the shooting. The only witness unfortunately is the defendant so should we just listen to him? The guard was NOT touched. The victim medically could barely walk.
Oh, the victim has a record how convenient he must have deserved to die. Is this ok ? I sure hope not.

Lady Justice wrote on Sep 27, 2008 3:01 PM:Who said anything about credibility of witnesses?

But one point you ARE on subject is that, yes, I AM blind. THAT is the point. I don't see what color your skin is, how much money you make, what your religion is or even if you are what some people think are "better" than others. I only see the facts that pertain to the case, and this case is about a fatal shooting and whether or not it was justified.

Until you grasp that a dirty rotten scoundrel can be innocent of a given crime, and a seemingly and hitherto upstanding citizen can be 100 percent guilty, you do not understand how justice must work in a free and fair society.

Is this ok wrote on Sep 28, 2008 3:06 AM:Fine. I get your point. But I still say shoot them all and let God sort them out.

Lady Justice wrote on Sep 28, 2008 10:39 AM:Remember . . . ."Vengence is mine, sayeth the Lord."

If God didn't want us to sort things out ourselves, why did He give us a heart AND a brain? Did He not say, love thy neighbor as thyself? And judge not, lest ye be judged? And let he who is without sin cast the first stone?

As God sorts them all, He most certainly will then turn his displeasure to those amongst us who hated, took vengence and judged unfairly.

Is this ok wrote on Sep 28, 2008 1:10 PM:You know how to take all the fun out of blogging, don't you?

Lady Justice wrote on Sep 28, 2008 9:07 PM:Sorry to be such a party pooper!

justiceforall wrote on Sep 29, 2008 1:41 AM:I sure hope they charge the security guard with something. It's scary to think life just goes on after such a careless act. Pulling a gun as a first and only line of action and calling it "self defense" and now an "accident" just doesn't make any sense. If the store owners could hear a scream they could have heard a guy being threatening or better yet a guard demanding a person to stop if in fact that truly was the case. It just doesn't make sense. An accidental shot doesn't usually go straight to the aeorta and in 1 shot? I think it's a cover up. I'm glad to see that people like Changed Mind are blogging some thoughtful and factual information on this subject and specifically pertaining to the laws and requirements of security guards. It's pretty scary to think the public would not protest taking a human life so fast.

cover up wrote on Oct 1, 2008 5:41 PM:So let me understand your theory. You think it most plausible that the guard lured the unsuspecting gentlemen 250 ft away from his dinner of pizza so that he could shoot him, right? LOL!!!!

justiceforall wrote on Oct 1, 2008 10:48 PM:cover up- as you describe it ...Of course that is not my theory. If anyone shoots someone dead without known facts of was it necessary answered , they would be sitting in jail waiting their day in court or having to post a very large bond and fight this like the rest of us. I don't think is was necessary and obviously since the guard didn't try anything but a fatal blast it's going to be hard to prove. How do you not know the victim wasnt trying to get away from the guard. You don't. The girl friend went to go find a "real cop" for help. That should tell you something. The cover up is obvious at this point; I just hope the truth comes out and justice prevails. The man who died mattered and his life was taken within a minute. Is that what you want to be legal in our state? How "plausible" is it that the victim eating pizza one minute just charged the security guard with a gun pointed at him the next and in the same theory ...very quietly so know one heard anything ..except the gun shot. A secret agent suicide. Please. Oh ya and 100 ft. to 150 ft. now were up to 250 ft. come on. The guard is full of it or did the cops not have their tape measure out the night the victim lay for hours as they investigated and secured the crime scene.
If you read the laws of what a security guards job is you will see that he was way out of line to say the least. Yes I think for now the cops are covering for him but I know an investigation is on going and I hope and pray for all of us the truth is found out.

cover up wrote on Oct 2, 2008 4:13 PM:"How do you not know the victim wasnt trying to get away from the guard."

For openers, a gunshot to the chest, not the back. Are you suggesting that the guard chased Pardee around the back alley? So you really do believe the theory I described above, don't you?

"The girl friend went to go find a "real cop" for help."

Girlfriend had a temporary restraining order against Pardee for his behavior. Public record, check it out. Maybe she knew he would escalate things to the point where he would get himself shot.

"How "plausible" is it that the victim eating pizza one minute just charged the security guard with a gun pointed at him the next..."

From Pardee's known past performance, it seems quite likely; much more likely than your conspiracy theory anyway.

"...very quietly so know one heard anything ..except the gun shot."

You are really fixated on this point. (1) The mall is adjacent to a freeway and is noisy in general, (2) Stores usually close their doors to conserve energy (air conditioning), (3) Gunshots are considerably louder and more distinct than someone yelling.

"Oh ya and 100 ft. to 150 ft. now were up to 250 ft."

Ask ten people to estimate 200 ft and you will get ten different answers, especially in the dark.

"If you read the laws of what a security guards job is you will see that he was way out of line to say the least."

I don't think it is too out of line for a security guard to walk past a car in the back alley and inquire what is going on. I've had security guards talk to me in the past. I understand they are doing their job, so I tell them what I am doing. No big deal. If I chose to threaten them and advance on them, I suppose I might have bought myself some trouble.

lookingforthetruth wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:58 AM:Hey cover up...You are obviously an idiot. Good thing your not in charge of this investigation. I just wonder if the guard is so innocent why the sheriffs took his gun away..hum? He is also now unemployeed...hum. His prior job was terminated for a similar situation...hum? Open your eyes. Your blogging about a persons loved one that is dead. What if that was your family member? Still running your mouth? Probably not.