Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

750k Stun Baton = G or D?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 750k Stun Baton = G or D?

    One of the guards I supervise in my district has a 750,000 volt stun baton that he uses. However, he has no specialized training in it, and only holds a D license. I told him not to wear it, but am not 100% sure on the laws concerning this weapon. Any advice?

  • #2
    The G license is only required for a firearm. IIRC as long as his employer allows him to carry it, and it's legal for him to carry it as a citizen then it is ok.

    Nathan?

    Comment


    • #3
      My supervisor always gives the same reply "I don't know about the laws regarding that weapon, so it's better that he doesn't use it." I figured I would find out myself.

      Comment


      • #4
        Electric weapons are covered under 790. Its legal to wear, a felony to conceal (that means putting a raincoat over it, just like your ASP), and 493 does not cover it. The D license is ONLY for providing security services, and the G license is ONLY for carrying a firearm exposed or concealed while providing security services.

        Anything else you carry is as a citizen, there are no laws against carrying the other equipment. Concealing a weapon except a firearm is illegal, however, because the G only authorizes a firearm, and the CCW specifically does not work on PI or security personnel. So, a concealed ASP is a crime.

        I watched a guy get a ration of hell for putting his rain coat over his ASP from a Tampa Police Officer. Police can conceal their weapons, security can't unless its a firearm, but only under specific temporary circumstances.

        DOACS has noted that if you are not trained with a weapon, and misuse it, you and your company are going to part with a lot of money.

        This is the same way that security companies may carry Tasers in Florida. Its not illegal to openly wear one, and DOACS has made no Admin rule or 493 statute against it. (Well, the legislature hasn't made a 493 statute against it.)

        HOWEVER, if you order an employee not to carry it, and they persist, they may be terminated for disobeying a direct order. 493 has a provision that says if you are not required by the site needs to carry a weapon, you may not. This language may specifically state firearm, however, I don't have 493 in front of me nor do I really want to go look it up.

        This is the "no armed guards on unarmed sites" rule.
        Some Kind of Commando Leader

        "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

        Comment


        • #5
          I just wanted to correct one of nathn's statements. In florida carrying a concealed weapon besides a firearm is a misdemeanor of the first degree.

          790.01 Carrying concealed weapons.--

          A person who carries a concealed firearm on or about his or her person commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084

          Except as provided in subsection (4), a person who carries a concealed weapon or electric weapon or device on or about his or her person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
          "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

          Comment


          • #6
            Hell, I thought that electric weapons upgraded it to a third degree felony. Granted, anyone using one on me would not of been hooked up for a felony (that didn't exist), they'd of been hooked up cause they attacked me.
            Some Kind of Commando Leader

            "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

            Comment


            • #7
              No he isn't wearing it anymore.

              Here we go:

              "(3) No employee shall carry or be furnished a weapon or firearm unless the carrying of a weapon or firearm is required by her or his duties, nor shall an employee carry a weapon or firearm except in connection with those duties. When carried pursuant to this subsection, the weapon or firearm shall be encased in view at all times except as provided in subsection (4)."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by FlacoFI
                No he isn't wearing it anymore.

                Here we go:

                "(3) No employee shall carry or be furnished a weapon or firearm unless the carrying of a weapon or firearm is required by her or his duties, nor shall an employee carry a weapon or firearm except in connection with those duties. When carried pursuant to this subsection, the weapon or firearm shall be encased in view at all times except as provided in subsection (4)."
                There it is. While its trivial to require everything (including a gun) in a person's duties, its up to the company to specify if its required. People who bring unauthorized weapons to work usually end up going home that same shift.

                Everything in 493 is actionable by the state. A company can forward offenses of 493 with documentation to their regional DOACS investigator, and get themselves off the hook (failure to report) and put the person on (493.6118(a) - [whatever] violations.)

                Considering 493.6118(j) makes it a criminal and actionable offense to use force against another except in defense of person, people who bring unauthorized weapons to work or aren't trained on 493 and their weapon are in a world of pain of DOACS come knocking.
                Some Kind of Commando Leader

                "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                Comment


                • #9
                  That's good to know, thank you. I definitely have some reading to do in order to do my job correctly.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I worked in Florida for 10+ years without ever knowing that if you touch someone unless in defense from physical harm, you are committing a crime (Misdemeanor.)

                    I've also found out, amusingly, that there are a lot of places we have statutory detention authority. From members of this forum, in fact. Such as apartment complexes (licensed establishment, Griff will be along with the statute number supporting this), hotels, motels, anywhere that has an specific license... Common law arrest authority for breaches of the peace... Quite a few places in statute.

                    Also, if you have a logo or patch on your uniform that says your company name and the words "Licensed Security Officer," you are covered under the "battery on a security officer" statute, making it an arrestable (detanable?) felony of the third or second degree to commit battery on you. I swear, I'm gonna start selling those things once I get the die fee, a nice version from Symbolarts or something that isn't so huge. It isn't the cost per item that's the problem, its the 150-300 dollar die fee.
                    Some Kind of Commando Leader

                    "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So, this is what I would have Symbolarts make.

                      The top part is silver because it takes engraving. Because of the die fee, putting the company name in the die fee would require a new die fee each time. Hence, engraving.

                      This meets actually meets the requirements of Chapter 493 for a 'uniform,' meaning that if one wears this, they're in uniform as long as they have a "distinctive dress which sets them apart from the public." Some may argue that this IS the distinctive dress. I wouldn't.

                      It also meets the Batt. LSO definition of a "patch or logo with the company name identifying the victim as a licensed security officer."
                      Attached Files
                      Some Kind of Commando Leader

                      "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                        I worked in Florida for 10+ years without ever knowing that if you touch someone unless in defense from physical harm, you are committing a crime (Misdemeanor.)

                        I've also found out, amusingly, that there are a lot of places we have statutory detention authority. From members of this forum, in fact. Such as apartment complexes (licensed establishment, Griff will be along with the statute number supporting this), hotels, motels, anywhere that has an specific license... Common law arrest authority for breaches of the peace... Quite a few places in statute.

                        Also, if you have a logo or patch on your uniform that says your company name and the words "Licensed Security Officer," you are covered under the "battery on a security officer" statute, making it an arrestable (detainable?) felony of the third or second degree to commit battery on you. I swear, I'm gonna start selling those things once I get the die fee, a nice version from Symbolarts or something that isn't so huge. It isn't the cost per item that's the problem, its the 150-300 dollar die fee.
                        heres the staute that nathan is reffering to

                        Note: the establishment MUST be licensed as a public lodging establishment or food service establishment under chapter 509.

                        509.143 Disorderly conduct on the premises of an establishment; detention; arrest; immunity from liability.
                        --


                        (1) An operator may take a person into custody and detain that person in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time if the operator has probable cause to believe that the person was engaging in disorderly conduct in violation of s. 877.03 on the premises of the licensed establishment and that such conduct was creating a threat to the life or safety of the person or others. The operator shall call a law enforcement officer to the scene immediately after detaining a person under this subsection.

                        (2) A law enforcement officer may arrest, either on or off the premises of the licensed establishment and without a warrant, any person the officer has probable cause to believe violated s. 877.03 on the premises of a licensed establishment and, in the course of such violation, created a threat to the life or safety of the person or others.

                        (3) An operator or a law enforcement officer who detains a person under subsection (1) or makes an arrest under subsection (2) is not civilly or criminally liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, or unlawful detention on the basis of any action taken in compliance with subsection (1) or subsection (2).

                        (4) A person who resists the reasonable efforts of an operator or a law enforcement officer to detain or arrest that person in accordance with this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, unless the person did not know or did not have reason to know that the person seeking to make such detention or arrest was the operator of the establishment or a law enforcement officer.
                        Last edited by bigdog; 04-28-2007, 07:36 AM.
                        "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Bet you won't learn THAT in a D class. (Yet...)
                          Some Kind of Commando Leader

                          "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by N. A. Corbier
                            Electric weapons are covered under 790. Its legal to wear, a felony to conceal (that means putting a raincoat over it, just like your ASP), and 493 does not cover it. The D license is ONLY for providing security services, and the G license is ONLY for carrying a firearm exposed or concealed while providing security services.

                            Anything else you carry is as a citizen, there are no laws against carrying the other equipment. Concealing a weapon except a firearm is illegal, however, because the G only authorizes a firearm, and the CCW specifically does not work on PI or security personnel. So, a concealed ASP is a crime.

                            I watched a guy get a ration of hell for putting his rain coat over his ASP from a Tampa Police Officer. Police can conceal their weapons, security can't unless its a firearm, but only under specific temporary circumstances.

                            DOACS has noted that if you are not trained with a weapon, and misuse it, you and your company are going to part with a lot of money.

                            This is the same way that security companies may carry Tasers in Florida. Its not illegal to openly wear one, and DOACS has made no Admin rule or 493 statute against it. (Well, the legislature hasn't made a 493 statute against it.)

                            HOWEVER, if you order an employee not to carry it, and they persist, they may be terminated for disobeying a direct order. 493 has a provision that says if you are not required by the site needs to carry a weapon, you may not. This language may specifically state firearm, however, I don't have 493 in front of me nor do I really want to go look it up.

                            This is the "no armed guards on unarmed sites" rule.
                            Interesting. I just talked with a contact on the Gainesville PD who said the Tampa PD officer was incorrect regarding the raincoat and the ASP. Wonder who's right?
                            "Every betrayal begins with trust." - Brian Jacques

                            "I can't predict the future, but I know that it'll be very weird." - Anonymous

                            "There is nothing new under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9

                            "History, with all its volumes vast, hath but one page." - Lord Byron

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              FSS 790 makes it clear what a "concealed weapon" is, including a "billie" or "baton."

                              FSS 790.001(3)(a) "Concealed weapon" means any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon carried on or about a person in such a manner as to conceal the weapon from the ordinary sight of another person.

                              FSS 790.01(1) Except as provided in subsection (4), a person who carries a concealed weapon or electric weapon or device on or about his or her person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

                              FSS 790.01(4) It is not a violation of this section for a person to carry for purposes of lawful self-defense, in a concealed manner:

                              (a) A self-defense chemical spray.

                              (b) A nonlethal stun gun or dart-firing stun gun or other nonlethal electric weapon or device that is designed solely for defensive purposes.

                              Any sworn officer of the state may arrest on sight any person carrying a concealed weapon.

                              A sworn LEO is exempt from all provisions of 790 (Weapons) when in performance of duties.

                              790.051 Exemption from licensing requirements; law enforcement officers.--Law enforcement officers are exempt from the licensing and penal provisions of this chapter when acting at any time within the scope or course of their official duties or when acting at any time in the line of or performance of duty.
                              Some Kind of Commando Leader

                              "Every time I see another crazy Florida post, I'm glad I don't work there." ~ Minneapolis Security on Florida Security Law

                              Comment

                              Leaderboard

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X