What Would You Do? - #3

[VertigoODO]

Where I come from, that vehicle would be impounded and you'd be charged with impersonating a police officer, based on the vehicle's appearance.

And, yes, it would of been "wrong" to do what you did.

That said, its also illegal to walk into a 7-11 with a gun on if you're an armed security officer, because you're not "in performance of duties."

That said, most police departments say, "Use discresion in enforcing this law, as it is part of Florida Administrative Code."

Yes in most states that vehicle would be illegal. However in this vehicle it is not. #2 In the state of california you have the right, while on duty and on lunch, to carry your firearm on you. In fact lets take it to the next level, the law states while in transit to your job or after your shift you are authorized by law to wear that weapon while in transit.

So, here in California its is not illegal to walk into a 7/11 with a gun on your belt. Regardless if your in the performance of your duties or not, as long as your, "on duty" or on the way to your work place. Now a couple of months ago SDSO tried to arrest a security guard for having an unmarked car, it was not only thrown out, but the department settled out of court. The reason is that the vehicle code states under what conditions a vehicle has to be marked. So under Florida law, it is wrong. Under California law it is 100% legal. Thanks for the information about florida though, its nice to know more about there laws.

[VertigoODO]

Here in California if you are on duty you are not required to take off your weapon when you go to eat or get food on duty. As a matter of fact i know people who have gone to the post office and DMV in uniform and not had a problem. Not saying i would. But as far as the food circumstance i work patrol and often stop to get food on my route. It would actually be worse to take your gun off cuz now the suspect sees a holster but no gun and wants to know what you did with it. He isnt going to believe its in the car. So now you pissed him off and have increased your chances of being killed.

LOL, Thanks Arff312 didnt see your post, thanks for explaining.

[N. A. Corbier]

Yes in most states that vehicle would be illegal. However in this vehicle it is not. #2 In the state of california you have the right, while on duty and on lunch, to carry your firearm on you. In fact lets take it to the next level, the law states while in transit to your job or after your shift you are authorized by law to wear that weapon while in transit.

So, here in California its is not illegal to walk into a 7/11 with a gun on your belt. Regardless if your in the performance of your duties or not, as long as your, "on duty" or on the way to your work place. Now a couple of months ago SDSO tried to arrest a security guard for having an unmarked car, it was not only thrown out, but the department settled out of court. The reason is that the vehicle code states under what conditions a vehicle has to be marked. So under Florida law, it is wrong. Under California law it is 100% legal. Thanks for the information about florida though, its nice to know more about there laws.

Fear Florida Laws. Fear them greatly. If you want to do business in Florida, your website has to have a Florida B number on it. Anything you hand out or could be construed as advertising has to have a B number on it.

Security officers may not use force to protect property, nor may they have any rotating/flashing light on their car other than Amber. I'm waiting for someone to make a case for takedown lights or alley lights. Seriously.

There's a bunch more, its quite fun. Hell, under the state laws, your entire website would be evidence of "impersonating official authority," which a security officer may not do. Not "impersonating law enforcement," but "impersonating official authority." Using the words "law enforcement" anywhere on your ad material or anywhere else... felony.

Very strange state.

[WISecurityGuy]

Where I come from, that vehicle would be impounded and you'd be charged with impersonating a police officer, based on the vehicle's appearance.

And, yes, it would of been "wrong" to do what you did.

That said, its also illegal to walk into a 7-11 with a gun on if you're an armed security officer, because you're not "in performance of duties."

That said, most police departments say, "Use discresion in enforcing this law, as it is part of Florida Administrative Code."

Corbier, where exactly are you from? I see Wisconsin, but you talk alot about Florida law as well. There are many security companies in WI that have unmarked squad cars. At least in WI, it is not against the law to have an unmarked squad car. If your lights and siren was on while driving on city streets, then, and I know numerous people who this has happened to, they can be arrested for impersonating.

Also, as stated in another thread, my company does a lot of alarm response as well as transports. We have an in-house at one specific gas station where our guards go to all the time. Being private property, the owner can allow (not necessarily on paper either) that our guards carry their weapons on their property. It is obviously never concealed.

The laws have all gone down hill here because of the alarm response policy. Our guards dont necessarily need permission anymore either to carry our weapons on private property because of this new ordinance. All of our guards that respond to burglar alarms are armed. We walk up to peoples houses, business and properties all day without necessarily having their approval/permission.

[Lawson]

Fortunately in Washington, we are technically an "open carry" state. So ideally anyone can carry openly, however, the way the laws interpret this, it is basically given that you may not open carry if a reasonable person would be caused fear or intimidation.

Basically, any security guard can pack around a gun just like a cop can. If you are in a full security uniform and everything looks good to go, you'll be fine for the most part. However; you do have to be careful as something as simple as resting your forearm on your weapon can be considered intimidating.

[bigshotceo]

(In Florida)
Security officers may not use force to protect property.

Wow. Seems kind of against basic property right to me. Does that mean that if I were a citizen of Florida if someone tries to known down my mailbox I couldn't stop him? Or is someone tries to walk off with my TV I can't physically try to get the TV back?

[N. A. Corbier]

If you are licensed under Florida Statute 493 as a "licensed security officer," then no, you can't. Generally, it only applies while "in performance of duties," however... Someone made a case that "my husband hit me, which is in violation of that statute, take his licenses away." The guy wasn't on duty, wasn't even employed in the field at the time. He still lost every license.

As to "where I'm from," I moved up here from Florida. I am conversant in Florida Law, and deal with a lot of Florida Law issues as a VP of NAPSOA Incorporated.

[WISecurityGuy]

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=530397

This is an interesting case right in your neck of the woods Corbier. This man, although not a security guard, used deadly force trying to protect his property, although his defense was that he was protecting his life and that he felt threatened when the man raised a tire iron over his head in an attempt to hit him.

Now, correct me if I am wrong, but a tire iron could be considered a deadly weapon if close enough to make contact. If this same incident was with a security guard, I believe the guard would never have been found guilty if they could prove that the man could have hit him with the tire iron. However, this guy had no reason have a gun in the first place. He was, from what they found, protecting his property and not his life. Now he faces life in prison!

This is the kind of thing that really should change in our society. I do not know about Mr. Whites prior record or what kind of person he is, however, I do know that he was at home with his family that night. Not causing harm or a problem to anyone, minding his own business. Its a shame that his life is as over as the guy he killed that night.

[N. A. Corbier]

Sounds typical. Mr. White in this instance was the aggressor. Instead of calling 911 and remaining in his home, he went outside (with a gun) and confronted three juveniles commiting "a property crime."

That the person with a tire iron raised it and offered deadly force is immaterial, as Mr. White was the aggressor. Instead of calling 911 like a "good citizen," he dared confront them.

I sincerely doubt a security "person" would of fared any better, as they are not a law enforcement officer empowered with the authority to confront criminal offenses, since they are merely a private citizen.

Racine is a screwed up place, and this trial proves that the armed citizen is a very dangerous thing indeed according to our local and state government.

[WISecurityGuy]

Sounds typical. Mr. White in this instance was the aggressor. Instead of calling 911 and remaining in his home, he went outside (with a gun) and confronted three juveniles commiting "a property crime."

That the person with a tire iron raised it and offered deadly force is immaterial, as Mr. White was the aggressor. Instead of calling 911 like a "good citizen," he dared confront them.

I sincerely doubt a security "person" would of fared any better, as they are not a law enforcement officer empowered with the authority to confront criminal offenses, since they are merely a private citizen.

Racine is a screwed up place, and this trial proves that the armed citizen is a very dangerous thing indeed according to our local and state government.

I agree with you that he definately shouldnt have gone out there with a gun, however I do tend to disagree with you that a security officer/guard/person, would not have fared any better. Obviously the circumstances have to change a little, but if a armed SO was patrolling a parking lot and happens to stumble on a couple of guys breaking into a car and calls his/her commands out for that person to stop, and that person uses tire iron as a deadly weapon, in my view that officer has every reason to defend himself. As taught in almost any firearms / daat course, the officer must use as much force to stop the threat.

[N. A. Corbier]

The issue stems from, "is this person empowered by statute or custom to actively engage violators," or are they supposed to "call 911 and leave policing to the real police."

If it is the latter, then by all rights the security person is not the "aggressor," as they are using lawful force to effect an arrest/stop a criminal occurance and then defended themselves from deadly resistance. If it is the former, then the armed security person "was the aggressor, bringing a gun into the situation and attempting to play cop instead of callin 911 from a distance. The guard should of never been placed in a position to shoot, and only did so because he was a wannabe cop."

[T202]

A couple of things that didn't help his case for self-defense.
The supect that died was shot at close range in the back.
One of the officers at the scene testified that White was at the scene and initially declined to identify himself.

[N. A. Corbier]

A civilian that shoots someone in the back is going to jail. Police have the ability to bring Force Science Institute into play, get expert witnesses, etc. However, the rest of us aren't that lucky.

Maybe in a few years when juries are used to hearing FSI testamony about how someone can turn around and shoot you in less time than most recording cameras can measure... maybe. But, as I've said on a few cop forums... Unless you're a sworn LEO, that defense won't fly far. It may fly in some jurisdictions.

[Black Caesar]

My God. I'm glad I live in Texas.

My cousin shot a guy who had broken into his truck. As with any shooting, it went to a Grand Jury and was no-billed instantly. He had every right to protect his property at night. My cousin is black (runs in the family ), not a LEO or security, lives in a mostly white neighborhood and shot a white guy. Still no-bill.

My sister (she's a Deputy Sheriff in California) calls me a "Texasupremicist" lol. She's But I can't help it. The more I hear about how some states do things, the more pride I have in Texas.

Here Assaulting a security officer is the same offense as assaulting a police officer or fireman. Here we have NO "Duty to retreat" if someone attacks us. I'm still reeling about the fact that some states say you HAVE to run away basically. Leaves this Texas boy goin WTF mate".

And here we can use force to protect property. And whoa be to the fool who trys to steal from you at night (you can use deadly force to protect property at night).

What happened to Mr. White is just, just, hell, I don't know what that is......

[EMTjon]

My God. I'm glad I live in Texas.

My cousin shot a guy who had broken into his truck. As with any shooting, it went to a Grand Jury and was no-billed instantly. He had every right to protect his property at night. My cousin is black (runs in the family ), not a LEO or security, lives in a mostly white neighborhood and shot a white guy. Still no-bill.

My sister (she's a Deputy Sheriff in California) calls me a "Texasupremicist" lol. She's But I can't help it. The more I hear about how some states do things, the more pride I have in Texas.

Here Assaulting a security officer is the same offense as assaulting a police officer or fireman. Here we have NO "Duty to retreat" if someone attacks us. I'm still reeling about the fact that some states say you HAVE to run away basically. Leaves this Texas boy goin WTF mate".

And here we can use force to protect property. And whoa be to the fool who trys to steal from you at night (you can use deadly force to protect property at night).

What happened to Mr. White is just, just, hell, I don't know what that is......

And last I head, texas had a working capital punishment system, too!

You guys have it nice... I'm stuck in Pensyl-tucky.