White guard pulls gun on black police officer

[Condo Guard]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/saw-hate-...085226136.html

This occurred in May 2019. The source is Yahoo! News, notorious for getting things wrong. We also don't have the security officer's version of events. So, with those caveats I will stay in my very narrow lane and just say that if it went down as described, the guard was wrong. I worked a site where guns were strictly prohibited, with the only exemption was on duty, uniformed police officers and federal agents on official business.

Paragon used to be a very reputable company, but I know Securitas bought them out awhile ago, so I don't know what their current training and hiring standards are. And the police officer has PTSD and depression from this one incident? There is more to this story.

[Consolewatcher]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/saw-hate-...085226136.html

This occurred in May 2019. The source is Yahoo! News, notorious for getting things wrong. We also don't have the security officer's version of events. So, with those caveats I will stay in my very narrow lane and just say that if it went down as described, the guard was wrong. I worked a site where guns were strictly prohibited, with the only exemption was on duty, uniformed police officers and federal agents on official business.

Paragon used to be a very reputable company, but I know Securitas bought them out awhile ago, so I don't know what their current training and hiring standards are. And the police officer has PTSD and depression from this one incident? There is more to this story.

Three things that I would like to start by pointing out:

1) There is no evidence that the situation was based on the police officer's race. Just because the officer was black does not mean that it can automatically be due to exception. For what it's worth, many people who actually are racist make an "exception" in their thinking for police officers, firefighters, etc..

2) The statement from the city police officer that the deputy sheriff "could go anywhere in the building" because he was a police officer is false. Generally speaking, unless the police have been given permission from the property owner or their representative to enter, they have no more authority than anyone else to enter a building, except under certain circumstances (usually having a warrant, or "exigent circumstances" such as a 911 call). Granted, in a lot of times the police go to a building these circumstances exist, but in this case the news article says it was "routine business".

3) Calling 911 and saying "a person with a gun" is causing problems and not mentioning that he's a police officer is at best deceptive and at worst criminally negligent. It would be like a guard calling 911 and saying that "a guy with a chainsaw is yelling at people", when the guy with the chainsaw was hired to cut trees on the site, was yelling at people because they kept walking under the tree he was cutting, and wasn't threatening anyone.

That being said, even *if* the police officer had no legal authority to ignore the guard's request to leave his firearm in his car, I still think the guard handled it improperly. One thing I would tell all guards is that if a police officer asks/tells you to do something that is against policy (and that isn't legally required), then there's nothing wrong with refusing or telling them you'll check with your supervisor. However, if they insist, then do it and report it to your supervisor. If your company/client wants to, they can take it up with the police department or others about how they coerced the guard into doing something they weren't supposed to do.

[Soper]

The Deputy had every right to ignore the guard. He was on duty and cannot, nor would he, disarm because a guard demanded it. He has more standing than the guard.

That guard is lucky to be alive.

[Consolewatcher]

The Deputy had every right to ignore the guard. He was on duty and cannot, nor would he, disarm because a guard demanded it. He has more standing than the guard.

That guard is lucky to be alive.

I strongly disagree with the guard's actions, but if a property is private property then the guard can deny the police officer entry or set conditions on entry (such as "leave your gun in the car"), UNLESS there are certain circumstances in which the police officer legally required to be allowed entry.

It's similar to a restaurant kicking police officers out. If the restaurant wants to stop them from eating lunch there, they can. If the police receive a 911 call from the restaurant, then they have to let them in to respond/investigate.

[Soper]

That is a govt building open to the public, not private property.

[Consolewatcher]

That is a govt building open to the public, not private property.

Even if it's public, there are still rules that the public (and that includes the police, except for exceptions mentioned above) must follow. It's why, for example, you can't just go into a public building and start filming people.

Of course, that building probably had a policy that the "no firearms" rule did not apply to on-duty law enforcement.

[copelandamuffy]

I try and stay out of cat fights, if I am not so sure of the facts
BUT my local Social Security office does have an armed security officer/ not police officer sitting at the recepton desk

[Condo Guard]

I think there are two issues here - the encounter as a whole, and the fact the S/O pulled his gun. (I've read other articles on this, and they all read the same, so understand there's been a lot of 'cut and paste' on this without further details.)

There was no reason to even unsnap the holster. Given the facts as we have them, this was a rules violation - easily handled by getting the police officer's name, ID #, and reporting it to a supervisor. I think the racial component has not been proven - I see it as a guard who wasn't clear on his role. I think some S/Os think that when they are on their turf they are the private police officer of that area, which is rarely the case.

On a side note, really liking the civilized discussion on a touchy topic - glad the forum is back to its old self, so to speak...

[copelandamuffy]

On a side note, really liking the civilized discussion on a touchy topic - glad the forum is back to its old self, so to speak...

Amen. I have been on this forum since 2006. That was two past Presidents, and current President long ago
Integrator 97. Anyone remember him? I do. If I recall he owned a security business, that was either alarm
or software working with security. He was from Arkansas? He and I were opposites in the political arena
I supported McCain,

Integrator 97 Obama. BUT we kept civil to each other

Civil? That has all but disappeared in 2019.

You favor Jasper Jones to represent your district, and you are labeled
Racist, Homophobic, Sexist Bigot,You may be known of these, but sometimes labels stick.

You vote for Susan Smith, and you are labeled, wimpy, soft on crime, and a snowflake

Don't get me rattled on polling or latest FOX/NBC/CNN/CBS, polling data. Most times not even close, far, far wrong

. I have Comcast for cable television, and phone. Watching television if I receive a phone call the phone # crops up in the top right of my television screen.

I don't rush to my phone if I don't know the #. And more often then not
the name of the business will be displayed Sometimes you might see, something alone the lines of American
Survey Group. I don't pick up the phone. If not picking up the phone am I labeled undecided?


I strongly suggest if you at work, place of business, where ever you may work as a security guard


KEEP YOUR POLITCAL VIEWS AT HOME !!!

I was asked by another guard my views on President Trump?
I requested she look out the window, and down the driveway of the warehouse , and there you will them in a mailbox


That is where I leave my politics I drops off my social and political views inside the

mailbox on my way in, and pick them up at the end of the day

And my wife and I don't talk politics away from the confines of our home

There are no bumper stickers, on our cars except a Boston Bruins
Hockey team bumper sticker

We don't yell to the masses we are voting for Janet Williams !
We have never been to some campaign rally We have never been to some protest, Never any civil unrests

BUT WE DO VOTE. You can bet your booties we will vote in 2020

[Consolewatcher]

I think there are two issues here - the encounter as a whole, and the fact the S/O pulled his gun. (I've read other articles on this, and they all read the same, so understand there's been a lot of 'cut and paste' on this without further details.)

There was no reason to even unsnap the holster. Given the facts as we have them, this was a rules violation - easily handled by getting the police officer's name, ID #, and reporting it to a supervisor. I think the racial component has not been proven - I see it as a guard who wasn't clear on his role. I think some S/Os think that when they are on their turf they are the private police officer of that area, which is rarely the case.

On a side note, really liking the civilized discussion on a touchy topic - glad the forum is back to its old self, so to speak...

Yeah, if I was a guard there, I would have assumed that the "no firearms" rule did not apply to on-duty law enforcement. If the rule had specifically NOT made an exemption, I would have approached the officer and politely informed him of the rules (in the form of "so, according to my boss....... They sign my paychecks, so I needed to tell you." If he did not disarm (or leave), I would have simply documented it and left the matter alone. *If* I felt the need to call the police (ie if my job would be on the line if I didn't), I sure as hell would have mentioned that he was a police officer, and not simply "some guy with a gun".

[SoCalGuard]

Just FYI, I did security for a SSA office. State/City police are not allowed to carry weapons on federal property unless for a duty mission (responding to 911). Although I think the guard overreacted; the LE officer was in the wrong in this case. In addition, the officer was off duty and on leave, he just decided to wear his uniform to help him get what he wanted from the office.

As a guard at the Riverside, CA SSA office, I had to take a gun from an unwilling Riverside Police officer. The officer stormed out and came back with many more officers. In the end he was told to apologize to me by his Lt.

[Soper]

The guard was wrong in that he pulled a gun on someone who society recognizes and allows to, under authority, carry a firearm. If there is an administrative error on an LEO packing in uniform at a SSA office, then get it cleared.

If that guard had shot and killed that officer, you would have seen a major lawsuit. That guard is an idiot.

Im doubting you actually disarmed a Police Officer on duty. No one takes a Firearm off a cop except at Fed court, which is asinine. No security guard would ever take my duty weapon.

[Consolewatcher]

The guard was wrong in that he pulled a gun on someone who society recognizes and allows to, under authority, carry a firearm. If there is an administrative error on an LEO packing in uniform at a SSA office, then get it cleared.

If that guard had shot and killed that officer, you would have seen a major lawsuit. That guard is an idiot.

Im doubting you actually disarmed a Police Officer on duty. No one takes a Firearm off a cop except at Fed court, which is asinine. No security guard would ever take my duty weapon.

By "taking his gun" I'm presuming he meant that he informed the police officer of the rules, and the officer turned over the gun to him. I highly doubt he forcefully "disarmed" him. As mentioned, police don't automatically have the right to enter any private property (which includes government property). There are certain exceptions, such as exigent circumstances or a 911 call.

That being said, the guard should have just informed the police officer of the rules. If he ignored the guard and came in armed anyway, the guard should have simply reported it upwards. Let the IRS' senior management/security management take the issue up with the PD's senior staff.

[oathkeeper2013]

Paragon used to be a very reputable company, but I know Securitas bought them out awhile ago, so I don't know what their current training and hiring standards are.

i worked for paragon for a little over 4 years in the San Francisco Bay Area and by the time I left, they were hiring guys who had little more than a pulse and a trigger finger. Hell, I really did wonder how some of the new hires managed to make it so far in life without choking to death on their own tongue in their sleep. Now, when I started, there was a bit of an application process to complete... You had a pre-hire shoot where potential new hires had to score a minimum of 180 and there were quite a few folks who didn't pass that. After that, there was a medical/physical evaluation followed by a panel interview. If you got hired, you had to do a month long training course sponsored by the company but they've since quit doing a lot of that stuff, and from what I understand from guys still there, the training course is only about a week or so now. Things could be different as Triple Canopy took over the contract in 2018, but who knows. Money always dictates everything, including standards in hiring.

[TOII]

Yes,i t was a federal office. Yes, the Security officer over reacted. NO, the deputy can not carry a firearm on federal property when not responding to a call. so to wrap it up, the deputy was in fact violating federal law. The security officer Should have advised him of that fact and requested the deputy return un armed. the deputy should have then left and returned when unarmed. the security officer should not have drawn his duty weapon. there were laws broken by both sides, though clearly the more egregious violation was by the security officer.