Justified response level

[Andy Taylor Member Find all posts View Profile Close Andy Taylor]

( A little off topic... I know... )

Is it true that a California issued CCW is only good in the county in which it is issued?

A CA CCW is good throughout the state. It is however discretionary issue. If a person meets the minimum requirments the sheriff in the county MAY issue a permit. Some sheriff's issue freely, others don't issue at all, others issue to friends and the politically connected. A very unfair and corupt system, in my opinion.

[N. A. Corbier Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close N. A. Corbier]

I have heard that in some states if a property owner forbids firearms on the property they must provide secure storage for said firearms. From a security standpoint I feel less threatened by a firearm on the hip of a uniformed security officer than I do of an unattended firearm in a car in the parking lot. Particularly when people have seen an openly armed individual deposit the firearm in the car, then go into the mall to shop.
That being said, in CA, if the officer's duties did not take him to the mall, it would not have been legal for him to take the gun to the mall. We can go directly to and from the job site armed, unless the officer also has a CCW, in which case the gun must be concealed.
I am curious, if only LE is allowed guns, what about armoured car services? I'm sure they do not disarm to service clients in the mall.

Florida law addresses things like that, funnily enough. A Class G license works anywhere your duties take you. If your duties take you to a private property that is not under your control, you are legally authorized to carry your firearm on that property. No permission of the owner is required. Now, they can ask you to leave, but its not illegal for you to be on that property armed, as you are lawfully armed.

Now, the thing is, if I had a contract for armored services, and the client's security force prevented my people from coming onto the property, I'd probably ask the client to take care of the problem. If it happened again, I'd sue the client for material breach of contract - they were asked to prevent their security force from interfering with contractual duties, and it happened again.

[Andy Taylor Member Find all posts View Profile Close Andy Taylor]

The thing is in a mall environment your client would, most likely be the tennant of the mall. Your client's landlord, not your client, would be the one interfereing with your duties.

[Mall Director Member Find all posts View Profile Close Mall Director]

Very good question..

You hit one area I did not cover, and that being armored car or ATM personnel. Those are the exceptions to the whole policy. As for any other form of security, or CCW issues, its still a no-go. Our mall(s) do not provide lockup for any weapons open to the public. Thats a call way above my head. For security personnel or other autorized firearms carreirs, such as CCW's, they have to keep them in their car, regardless. Its private property, so it can be enforced without suit. Just as you an individual, may not want red shoes in your house, you can regulate it. LOL...

I did have an issue a few years back at another mall I was assigned to. A jewelry store had hired an outside security agency to have an armed officer go to the store, and walk the owner out to his car, and drive him home.. Why? I havent a clue! But anyways, as my staff partolled the faclility, they observed this individual in the store with a side arm. He was asked to remove the weapon from the facility. Now, he cliamed contractual issues, but was overstepped on it, as all merhcants in the mall have contracts they signed going in, and it does clearly state the weapons policy. So if a store wishes to hire their own secuirty, its absolutely fine, but if any contract they set up violate their own lease contract, then its a violation and is enforced. The officer did take his weapon to his car.

Now, do I agree with all of this.. Not necessarily. Alot like everyone else here, there are some retarded rules we have to enforce, and we may not like it, and not have the ability to change it, but such is life. Cant win them all. I agree that I prefer sidearms, over the concealed violators. But it gos into the whole "you enforce it with one person, you have to enforce it with the rest".

[kingsman Member Find all posts View Profile Close kingsman]

I think that was the point I was trying to make, that he had no room to retreat if they had got into the security booth. It would have been hand to hand at that point and two against one.

we are concerned that it might be a prank leading up to Devils night (night bfore halloween) and more might be in the offing. The supervisor is trying to talk management of the complex to put on extra guards for the next couple of nights. Not much hope.

One of the officer working tonight carries a sidearm and shotgun on site, so he has a little more firepower than the guy the other night had.

I am concerned since the booth is open from all sides, and these guys can see the officer inside at all times. They can see he is armed, and they made the decision to lick the door anyway. And the officer inside had no room to retreat.

The new law does appear to say he would have been justified to shoot at first glance. Need to read it a little better.

[HotelSecurity Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close HotelSecurity]

we are concerned that it might be a prank leading up to Devils night (night bfore halloween) and more might be in the offing.

We call it Mat Night in my borough of Montreal. The kids do minor vandalism. (Stealing door mats was a big thing, hence the name). However as in other places where Devils's Night is "celebrated" it can get serious, especially with arson.

[kingsman Member Find all posts View Profile Close kingsman]

arson is a big problem here in detroit. Maybe this was an attempt to pull me out of the back and then someone could set a fire in back. A number of the buildings are empty and an easy target for arson.

[EH126 Member Find all posts View Profile Close EH126]

Maybe it was no prank. Could it be that they were after one of you guys. Trying to get some street cred on their path OGdom?

[Mall Director Member Find all posts View Profile Close Mall Director]

Eh126...

You know.. that holds more truth than fiction! I am not familiar with his or your area of operation, but in mine, certain "youth groups" seek out bonus points with their peers, by taking aciton against authoritive figures.

[1stWatch Member Find all posts View Profile Close 1stWatch]

A jewelry store had hired an outside security agency to have an armed officer go to the store, and walk the owner out to his car, and drive him home.. Why? I havent a clue! But anyways, as my staff partolled the faclility, they observed this individual in the store with a side arm. He was asked to remove the weapon from the facility. Now, he cliamed contractual issues, but was overstepped on it, as all merhcants in the mall have contracts they signed going in, and it does clearly state the weapons policy. So if a store wishes to hire their own secuirty, its absolutely fine, but if any contract they set up violate their own lease contract, then its a violation and is enforced. The officer did take his weapon to his car.

This is one of the few areas I have had friction with mall security over. A couple of years ago a company I worked for provided armed security for several jewelry stores in the mall. Such clauses in a lease for places in a jewelry store that security must be unarmed is just unheard of here. Even if it was that way, the only people here who can legally make an armed security officer remove his weapon are law enforcement officers and commission investigators. I walked in the mall with the weapon on and was confronted by mall security. This happened more than once. One security guard even tried to order me to come along to the security office. Yeah, like I would ever let that happen. It got really ugly and I had to get the police involved on one occassion. These guys were trying to exert authority they didn't have to begin with. Just because your corporate policy says no weapons doesn't mean it's necessarily going to be so.

[HotelSecurity Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close HotelSecurity]

This is one of the few areas I have had friction with mall security over. A couple of years ago a company I worked for provided armed security for several jewelry stores in the mall. Such clauses in a lease for places in a jewelry store that security must be unarmed is just unheard of here. Even if it was that way, the only people here who can legally make an armed security officer remove his weapon are law enforcement officers and commission investigators. I walked in the mall with the weapon on and was confronted by mall security. This happened more than once. One security guard even tried to order me to come along to the security office. Yeah, like I would ever let that happen. It got really ugly and I had to get the police involved on one occassion. These guys were trying to exert authority they didn't have to begin with. Just because your corporate policy says no weapons doesn't mean it's necessarily going to be so.

Agreed they can't legally make you remove your weapon but we are talking about a private place (open to the public but still private). They can refuse you entry.

[1stWatch Member Find all posts View Profile Close 1stWatch]

Agreed they can't legally make you remove your weapon but we are talking about a private place (open to the public but still private). They can refuse you entry.

No they may not. If a security contract is in place then the criminal trespass law from a representative of the landlord does not apply.

[N. A. Corbier Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close N. A. Corbier]

Actually, 1st Watch, this will depend on a few things.

1. Contractual Law in your jurisdiction. Your company has a contract from a tenant, not the landlord.
2. Common Elements and prevailing case law. Again, your company has a contract with the tenant. There is no contract, nor does the tenant have any control over the areas belonging to, the mall itself.

Example:

A tenant store contracts for an armed officer. The officer arrives in the mall parking lot. The mall parking lot is not under the control of the tenant store, it is under the control of the mall owner/management company.

You are confronted at the mall entrance, and told to disarm, etc. This, of course, is silly. The only thing the mall security force should order you to do is leave, and failure to leave constitutes criminal trespass on the mall property.

Once you step onto the property of the tenant, they have lost authority over you, as you are an agent of that tenant. This is why, as I've said before, many mall security forces will not intervene without a specific request in a tenant store: Its not under their employer's control.

In Florida, you have to watch out about this, because if you are an "armed trespasser," a LEO is not required to take you into custody for the purpose of arrest. (The only type of trespasser that anyone can take into custody, generally, anywhere in the state is an armed one.)

If the tenant can assert authority over the landlord's property via contractual law, it may be different, but criminally... The landlord's agent has decreed you are not welcome. The tenant has no say in the matter, usually.

We used to use this "relationship" to deal with problem people in residential housing. "I'm visiting a resident" would result in a trespass warning regardless, with the provision that the visiting resident must escort the person to and from the end of the tenant's property to the property line. If the visitor was found without escort, they were criminally trespassing and any law enforcement officer could arrest them. (A security officer cannot detain for trespass after warning in Florida, only a LEO may, as it is not a breach of the peace.)

[Mall Director Member Find all posts View Profile Close Mall Director]

And in lay terms.. A partial barrment. N.A. is correct. This is where most people have the issue, understanding what property the store lies upon. It can get quite tricky when things come down to it... Sadly, as each of you may agree..

Its not me, or you, or us that make these rules and expect them to be enforced. Believe me, there are a few rules I would change if I had any power to do so, and this being one of them.

The big thing we have to understand when we are confronted with these issues, is that its a number game. You and I are just numbers in a larger picture, but its how we conduct ourselves that can helkp determine the outcome. As I said before, I really had no interest in the matter, it was a push by the management, and even when offered to releive the officer of his weapon, I still would rather not. Ideally, I would rather not have to deal with any of it, as i have bigger fishes to catch. Now, I cant say that for your last encounter with that individual, as I was not present to observe his/her behavior, but I can say on my own defense, that our department has a great working relationship with almost all of our tenants, and when things get deep, they know who they can turn to for resolution. Thats the key there!

Whether you are the outsider coming in, or the insider working around the outsiders, communication, mutual respect, and cooperation is key.. You would be amazed to see the quality worksmanship and relationships in action.

Reminds me of a Dillards issue I had a long time ago. Dillards, for those that may not know, for the most part, has hired Securitas to work within their stores. We had this one Securitas Officer (and I claim officer, as he deserves great respect), that had it all going on. Even though he was forced to operate under that whole Observe and Report policy of their agency, we had a chance to get to know him, as he had an interest in us. I cant remember how it all worked out, but it did. Anyways, the guy was as sharp as a tac, and we got along very well. We established new directives in operating with each other, and made great results. He had electronic locks on his doors, and any time he observed us entering into the store, behind a subject, the doors would lock down amazingly enough.. allowing us to catch up to our individual from an outside incident. In return, if he had issues that travelled their way out of his area of operation, amazingly, they would end back into his area with our assistance. When it came to shoplifters, he loved to go persue charges, unlike so many of his others, and in return we would impliment healthy extended barrments, with detail sharing. I miss that guy! He moved onto more money eslewhere, and we havent found another Securitas employee who was so dedicated to their job as he was.. But were waiting..LOL!

My point is, that if we always approach an issue with a bias or determined set of how things are gonna go, and thats it, we may encounter difficulty, so instead, going on the level and communicating with respect can win some great benefits!

[1stWatch Member Find all posts View Profile Close 1stWatch]

1. Contractual Law in your jurisdiction. Your company has a contract from a tenant, not the landlord.
2. Common Elements and prevailing case law. Again, your company has a contract with the tenant. There is no contract, nor does the tenant have any control over the areas belonging to, the mall itself.

Example:

A tenant store contracts for an armed officer. The officer arrives in the mall parking lot. The mall parking lot is not under the control of the tenant store, it is under the control of the mall owner/management company.

You are confronted at the mall entrance, and told to disarm, etc. This, of course, is silly. The only thing the mall security force should order you to do is leave, and failure to leave constitutes criminal trespass on the mall property.

Once you step onto the property of the tenant, they have lost authority over you, as you are an agent of that tenant. This is why, as I've said before, many mall security forces will not intervene without a specific request in a tenant store: Its not under their employer's control.

In Florida, you have to watch out about this, because if you are an "armed trespasser," a LEO is not required to take you into custody for the purpose of arrest. (The only type of trespasser that anyone can take into custody, generally, anywhere in the state is an armed one.)

If the tenant can assert authority over the landlord's property via contractual law, it may be different, but criminally... The landlord's agent has decreed you are not welcome. The tenant has no say in the matter, usually.

We used to use this "relationship" to deal with problem people in residential housing. "I'm visiting a resident" would result in a trespass warning regardless, with the provision that the visiting resident must escort the person to and from the end of the tenant's property to the property line. If the visitor was found without escort, they were criminally trespassing and any law enforcement officer could arrest them. (A security officer cannot detain for trespass after warning in Florida, only a LEO may, as it is not a breach of the peace.)

This issue varies from state to state. I have been through this issue several times in my state. I get the major impression the idea of a partial trespass warning, we don't use the term "barrment" here, is subject to the dictates of each local court. I remember working at a mall in Mesquite, TX back in 1998 and we did end up writing those to several people who worked in the mall who violated certain written aspects of the common area agreement or broke laws.

In Dallas, however, I have yet to see a "partial trespass warning" issued. They simply won't do them and in fact the police on many occasions will refuse to write out a trespass warning for your property if they feel it is being done in a way that violates the person's civil rights or in some cases if they just don't feel like doing it. The officers here feel it is a tool for use by the law enforcement officer and they can refuse you the authority to issue a warning to depart property. It is for this reason I rarely call them to request such a thing. They will only enforce the city's trespass warning form and it is only valid for 60 days (or less if the police officer desires to set it at a lower amount of time) or up to 180 days with a photograph taken.

Enforcement of a trespass warning is hard to do. Criminal trespass is not a felony or a breach of the peace, so we may not detain a person simply on the basis of trespassing. We have to back away, and I mean don't even stand near the suspect, and call for the police and wait however long it takes for them to show up. Unless we have an off duty officer working security with us, we could wait for a couple of hours for that issue. The suspect has to still be on the property, not be detained when the police arrive, and they may not file at large charges if the suspect leaves before they arrive.

Now, back to the weapon laws. Texas has made it where a person may not apply a warning to leave to be on the basis of carrying a weapon. This state is serious when it comes to the right of a person to carry a weapon.
Criminal trespass code:
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes...0.htm#30.05.00
Nonapplicability of weapons prohibitions:
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes...0.htm#46.15.00

There are clauses there that protect a licensed person's right to carry. The order to disarm while travelling to a place of assignment is unlawful unless issued by a peace officer while the peace officer is arresting the security officer. Try to take my weapon and you're committing robbery. That will get you in trouble and probably severely hurt. Not to mentioned ridiculed in my book for eternity for trying to accomplish such a foolish thing.