The Silent Witness: Why Retail Security Guards Are Standing By During Supermarket Robberies

In recent months, videos have flooded social media showing brazen thieves walking out of supermarkets with baskets full of goods, while uniformed security guards stand just a few feet away, doing nothing.

To the public, it’s shocking. However, to those inside the private security industry, it’s not surprising. This situation is the result of a growing storm of legal constraints, corporate policies, and shifting social attitudes that have left many guards feeling powerless.

This trend is now impossible to ignore. Retail theft is on the rise, stores are losing millions, and frontline security professionals are caught between their duty to protect and their employers’ fear of liability.

The question is: how did we get here, and what can be done?

The Rise in Retail Theft: A Perfect Storm

Supermarkets across the UK, and indeed across much of Europe, are facing unprecedented levels of theft. According to the British Retail Consortium, shoplifting rose by over 25% in 2024, with supermarkets among the hardest hit. In some city centres, thefts have doubled.

Organised criminal groups have become bolder, targeting high-value items like meat, alcohol, and toiletries. Opportunists exploit self-checkouts and overworked staff.

At the same time, the cost-of-living crisis has driven a rise in petty theft. People are stealing food, baby formula, or essentials. Regardless of motive, the result is the same: higher losses, rising insurance costs, and growing frustration among retail teams and the public.

The Guard’s Dilemma: Why They Don’t Intervene

From the outside, it looks like apathy.

But in reality, many guards are following strict instructions. Here’s why they’re standing by:

1. Corporate “Non-Engagement” Policies

Most large retail chains now have “non-confrontation” or “non-intervention” policies. Guards are told not to physically stop or detain thieves, even if they witness the crime.

Their role is to observe, record, and report.

Why? Because confrontation brings risk:

• Injury to staff or the public

• Legal claims against the store

• Negative publicity if the footage goes viral

  
  

In a world where a single video clip can trigger outrage, many supermarkets prefer to take the financial hit rather than risk a lawsuit.

2. Legal Limitations

Under Section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, a member of the public (including a guard) can make a “citizen’s arrest” for indictable offences, like theft.

However, this power must be used reasonably and proportionately. If a guard uses force or makes an unlawful arrest, they and their employer could face legal consequences.

With little training in the use of force and unclear guidance from employers, most guards choose the safer option: non-intervention.

3. Lack of Training and Support

Many retail security roles are minimum-wage positions with limited training beyond basic SIA licensing. Few receive scenario-based training in de-escalation, risk assessment, or lawful detention.

Without confidence, backup, or clarity, even experienced guards hesitate.

4. Police Response Challenges

Even when thefts are reported, police response times can be slow or non-existent for “low-level” thefts. Some forces have publicly stated they won’t attend minor shoplifting incidents unless violence is involved.

This leaves guards in a no-win situation: powerless to act, unsupported by law enforcement, and criticised by the public.

The Public Perception Problem

Videos showing guards standing idle go viral for a reason: people feel justice is not being done. The public expects security officers to act, to prevent crime, not just watch it happen.

But perception and reality are drifting apart. Many don’t understand the constraints guards face, or the fact that most are following orders.

This growing disconnect is damaging the credibility of the private security industry. Guards are mocked online, labelled “useless,” while their morale sinks. In truth, most want to help, but they just aren’t allowed to.

The Impact on the Industry

This trend poses a serious reputational risk for the security sector. If the public and clients start to believe security is just a “presence,” not a protective force, the value of the profession erodes.

It also undermines recruitment and retention. Why would someone risk their safety or reputation for low pay and no authority?

Without change, we risk turning guards into spectators, not protectors.

What Needs to Change

To restore trust and effectiveness, the private security industry and its clients must rethink how retail security is delivered. Here are some key steps:

1. Clarify and Communicate Policy

Retailers must clearly define when and how guards can intervene. Blanket “do nothing” rules create confusion and resentment.

A better approach is a graduated response model:

• Observe and report for low-risk incidents

• Verbal engagement and deterrence when safe

• Lawful detention in serious or repeated offences, with backup

  
  

Empower guards with clear, lawful parameters, not just prohibitions.

2. Enhance Training and Confidence

Basic SIA training is not enough for modern retail challenges. Guards need:

• Conflict management and de-escalation skills

• Use of force awareness and legal refresher

• Scenario-based training to build decision-making confidence

• Regular supervision and support

  
  

With the right tools, guards can make safer, more decisive choices.

3. Stronger Collaboration with Police

Retailers, police, and security companies must improve cooperation.

Some forces now have dedicated retail crime units or ShopWatch schemes, but coverage is inconsistent.

A national framework for responding to repeat offenders, along with better data sharing, could make intervention safer and more effective.

4. Public Awareness

Industry leaders should engage in public education campaigns explaining the realities of the job.

When the public understands why guards can’t always intervene, they’re more likely to support systemic solutions, not just blame the frontline.

5. Professional Recognition

It’s time to treat security officers as trained professionals, not disposable labour.

Higher wages, ongoing training, and career development are essential if we want guards who are capable and confident in the face of rising crime.

Looking Ahead: The Need for Reform

The current “watch but don’t touch” model is unsustainable. Retailers are losing billions. Guards are losing morale. The public is losing faith.

We need a new vision for retail security, one that balances safety, legality, and deterrence.

That means:

• Rethinking risk vs. reward in intervention

• Investing in training and professional standards

• Building stronger partnerships with law enforcement

• Giving guards the authority and support they need to act

  
  

Because standing by while crime happens, however understandable, cannot be the future of private security.

Conclusion: From Witnesses to Protectors

Security guards are not to blame for this crisis; they are symptoms of a broken system. They are told not to intervene, not trained to act, and not backed when they do.

If we want to see guards stepping in again, we must give them the training, authority, and respect the job deserves.

The role of a security officer is, and always has been, to protect people, property, and reputation. But that only works when the system empowers them to do so.

It’s time to stop making them silent witnesses and start making them trusted protectors once more.