July 7, 2022

The Queens County Citizen

Complete Canadian News World

SQDCs require more security

SQDCs require more security

In the aftermath of the incident that took 10 police officers to subdue a man in crisis, SQDC employees are concerned and want to review security measures.

Also read: The man in the SQDC is suspected of being seriously injured after the attack

“Employees and the union have been saying for days that this could happen one day. We can see that there are aggressive customers, this is not really the first police intervention in SQDC [Société québécoise du cannabis]. It will change security policies, ”lamented David Clement, president of Section 5454 of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE).

For some reason still unknown, a 24-year-old man broke into the SQDC offices on Queen-Mary Road in Montreal on Monday evening and violently assaulted two employees, causing him to lose consciousness. ‘One, two.

Eventually he escaped with the police pain and grief, without concussion on patrolling.

Chili peppers and sticks

According to our information it took a lot of police officers to control the accused, a very strong man, he was very aggressive. The use of peppercorns and telescopic sticks was also inadequate.

According to the Bureau of Independent Investigation, the accused should also shed light on the police intervention as he was seriously injured, he submitted “signs of intoxication”. We no longer fear for our lives.

The two unions representing SQDC’s workers want to increase security measures, but the two agents there did not intervene to control the individual. One of them was also on a break from the show.

“It ended in a more miserable way than that. We ask that there be two active agents at all times. This may help,” Mr Clement said, whose union oversees two dozen SQDC branches.

READ  Law 101 Update | First test in court in a month

CSN shares its imprints, representing 15 other stores. The two central associations in particular proposed the addition of the “panic button”.

“There are improvements that need to be made, people are concerned. Should we review the order of the authorities not to physically intervene in such situations? Is it better to monitor the entry of customers?

On the part of the state-owned company, it was indicated that “post-mortem of the incident will take place and corrective action will be taken if necessary”, but the security officer’s intervention was “adequate”, the customer was not present, and he contacted the police.