Concerns have been raised after a man was shot dead on October 27 in Dongguan, Guangdong Province by a guard escorting an armored van carrying cash. The victim reportedly pounded on the van with a brick and was killed after the guard gave several oral warnings.
Local police has launched an investigation into the case. Netizens questioned why the guard had immediately escalated to lethal force after oral warnings, and claims that the shooting was the result of road rage spread online. But the Yangtze Evening, a Jiangsu newspaper, said that these weren't confirmed by witnesses or surveillance video.
One experienced bank guard told The Paper, a Shanghai news site, that escorts should shoot only when seriously threatened, and that oral warnings and warning shots should be used first.
Wang Jin, a Jiangsu-based lawyer, told Yangtze Evening that even though the victim did behave aggressively, he wasn't causing substantial damage and shooting was not the only solution. He added that the "Firearms Regulations for Escorts" state that avoiding or reducing casualties is laudable and that force should be used to stop losses or harm. However, analysts argued the condition for shooting as the last resort of defending from a violent attack is not sufficiently defined by the law.
Adding to the chorus of voices pointing out the obvious, Lin Cunbao, a Guangdong lawyer, also pointed out that if the case was a traffic dispute, it was illegal for the guard to fire blindly. Popular news site Netease News noted that the case shows that security firms need to train guards to deal with emergencies.
Old Version
