Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Uniforms

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by N. A. Corbier View Post
    I don't think the state cares unless someone makes waves, honestly.
    I think that statement's true for most areas. Oregon doesn't have these uniform color laws like MN does... But they do have a few odd little requirements of a similar fashion. I could name off a few companies that have been violating them for years, with no hassle. Why? Because nobody has informed the state. It boils down to the fact that the licensing board is too busy handling the influx of new licenses to spend any time on investigations, unless someone raises a big stink about something. I'm sure the same is true in most states.
    Corbier's Commandos - "Stickin it to the ninjas!"
    Originally posted by ValleyOne
    BANG, next thing you know Bob's your Uncle and this Sgt is seemingly out on his a$$.
    Shoulda called in sick.
    Be safe!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
      So, the slick belters (which is most of the security around here) can wear whatever color they want and everyone that carries even OC is bound by the statute. Thanks for the clarification N.A.

      With that being said, some security companies around here still wear some or all blue and carry gear up to, and including, a firearm.

      Good ol Minnesota!
      Yeeeeaaaaah, we wear all black, but now one of our younger/newer go-getters is dissapointed because he thought we could wear blue now.
      Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

      Comment


      • #48
        The difference between the black you guys wear and the dark blue that most suburban departments wear is very slight. I actually don't think that it is good to look like the police if you are unarmed. And, despite what the state considers armed, I mean a gun.

        According to the state's definition, every hospital around here has armed guards. Does anyone know that statute number?

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
          The difference between the black you guys wear and the dark blue that most suburban departments wear is very slight. I actually don't think that it is good to look like the police if you are unarmed. And, despite what the state considers armed, I mean a gun.

          According to the state's definition, every hospital around here has armed guards. Does anyone know that statute number?
          Not sure about the statute number but as far as looking like police, I think if we were more in the suburbs we would, but with MPD wearing light blue we look pretty differant.
          Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

          Comment


          • #50
            You guys look nothing like the Minneapolis cops which I believe is a good thing if you aren't carrying a gun. There are a couple of schools of thought on this and I did see a poll of hospital security directors once where several of them stated that they actually dressed their staff to resemble the local cops.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
              You guys look nothing like the Minneapolis cops which I believe is a good thing if you aren't carrying a gun. There are a couple of schools of thought on this and I did see a poll of hospital security directors once where several of them stated that they actually dressed their staff to resemble the local cops.
              I found out that until about 1981, they wore light blue shirts and navy blue pants and then switched to the black. I think that might have been because of MSS 626.88.
              Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
                The difference between the black you guys wear and the dark blue that most suburban departments wear is very slight. I actually don't think that it is good to look like the police if you are unarmed. And, despite what the state considers armed, I mean a gun.

                According to the state's definition, every hospital around here has armed guards. Does anyone know that statute number?
                Its in 323, I think. The Private Security Licensing Act. That site is kind of annoying to navigate.
                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


                • #53
                  My companies basic uniform is navy blue 5.11's, royal blue polo shirts. The badge, name and "division" are all embroidered.

                  Here in Maryland, security companies have all all kinds of color combinations. Some wear all navy blue, some wear the U.S. Postal pants with navy blue shirts, black pants with gray stripe and gray shirts, white shirts. Black pants with the gold stripe (usually federal security personnel, which looks like U.S. Secret Service Uniform Division), um white shirts, black pants, all black. Don't get me started on the badges, because just about everyone has a different badge.
                  "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Anyone know of any uniform shirts that have a stain repellent treatment? I'm almost thinking I'd be willing to for out the extra for that.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
                      I can say that the uniform that Davis wears looks nothing like what the cops wear around here.

                      That being said, if I owned an armed company here, I would follow the statute to the letter to reduce any liability. We all know that lawyers can be snakes that will prey on any weakness in a wrongful death or personal injury case.

                      I can see the conversation in the courtroom going like this:

                      Lawyer: "Per state statute, your officer was breaking the law on the night in question by wearing a forbidden uniform color"
                      Armed Company owner: "I checked with the state and they said it was ok"
                      Lawyer: "You did you talk to specifically?"
                      Armed Company owner: "John Doe"
                      Lawyer: "Do you have this in writing from John Doe?"
                      Armed Company owner" "Well, no I don"t"
                      Lawyer: "Is John Doe an elected official"
                      Armed Company owner "I don't know, I think he just is a state worker"
                      Lawyer: "Do you suppose John Doe has the authority to override and interpret state statute"
                      Armed Company owner: "I guess am not sure, I was just going on what he said"

                      Just playing a little devil's advocate since I would hate to see anyone get jammed up and I have seen lawyers in action around here. But, as employees of companies, we can only wear what our company provides us.
                      Armed Company Owner - defense attorney: "Objection! How can Mr. Company Owner possibly determine the authority granted to every state employee he may be referred to? The fact that he documented the employee's name already adds credibility to his reply"
                      Security: Freedom from fear; danger; safe; a feeling of well-being. (Webster's)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by davis002 View Post
                        Is this by chance the look that "get's you going"?


                        Another violation of Minnesota law! (No white security vehicles) This thread is actually what caused me to register at Security Info Watch. Everyday I see violations of both 169.98 and 626.88. Despite what some members here think, a state employee or police officer can't make it legal just by saying its ok.


                        169.98 POLICE, PATROL, OR SECURITY GUARD VEHICLE.
                        Subdivision 1. Colors and markings. (a) Except as provided in subdivisions 2 and 2a, all
                        motor vehicles which are primarily used in the enforcement of highway traffic rules by the State
                        Patrol or for general uniform patrol assignment by any municipal police department or other law
                        enforcement agency, except conservation officers, shall have uniform colors and markings as
                        provided in this subdivision. Motor vehicles of:
                        (1) municipal police departments, including the University of Minnesota Police Department
                        and park police units, shall be predominantly blue, brown, green, black, or white;
                        (2) the State Patrol shall be predominantly maroon; and
                        (3) the county sheriff's office shall be predominantly brown or white.
                        (b) The identity of the governmental unit operating the vehicle shall be displayed on both
                        front door panels and on the rear of the vehicle. The identity may be in the form of a shield or
                        emblem, or may be the word "police," "sheriff," or the words "State Patrol" or "conservation
                        officer," as appropriate, with letters not less than 2-1/2 inches high, one-inch wide and of a
                        three-eighths inch brush stroke. The identity shall be of a color contrasting with the background
                        color so that the motor vehicle is easily identifiable as belonging to a specific type of law
                        enforcement agency. Each vehicle shall be marked with its own identifying number on the rear
                        of the vehicle. The number shall be printed in the same size and color required pursuant to this
                        subdivision for identifying words which may be displayed on the vehicle.
                        Subd. 1a. Vehicle stop authority. Only a person who is licensed as a peace officer or
                        part-time peace officer under sections 626.84 to 626.863 may use a motor vehicle governed
                        by subdivision 1 to stop a vehicle as defined in section 169.01, subdivision 2. In addition, a
                        hazardous materials specialist employed by the Department of Transportation may, in the course
                        of responding to an emergency, use a motor vehicle governed by subdivision 1 to stop a vehicle
                        as defined in section 169.01, subdivision 2.
                        Subd. 1b. Operation of marked vehicle. Except as otherwise permitted under sections
                        221.221 and 299D.06, a motor vehicle governed by subdivision 1 may only be operated by a
                        person licensed as a peace officer or part-time peace officer under sections 626.84 to 626.863.
                        This prohibition does not apply to the following:
                        (1) a marked vehicle that is operated for maintenance purposes only;
                        (2) a marked vehicle that is operated during a skills course approved by the Peace Officer
                        Standards and Training Board;
                        (3) a marked vehicle that is operated to transport prisoners or equipment; or
                        (4) a marked vehicle that is operated by a reserve officer providing supplementary assistance
                        at the direction of the chief law enforcement officer or the officer's designee, when a licensed
                        peace officer as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, paragraph (c), who is employed by that
                        political subdivision, is on duty within the political subdivision.
                        Subd. 2. Specially marked patrol vehicle. The commissioner of public safety may authorize
                        the use of specially marked State Patrol vehicles, that have only a marking composed of a shield
                        on the right door with the words inscribed thereon "Minnesota State Patrol" for primary use in the
                        enforcement of highway traffic rules when in the judgment of the commissioner of public safety
                        the use of specially marked State Patrol vehicles will contribute to the safety of the traveling
                        public. The number of such specially marked State Patrol vehicles used in the enforcement of
                        highway traffic rules shall not exceed ten percent of the total number of State Patrol vehicles
                        used in traffic law enforcement. All specially marked State Patrol vehicles shall be operated by
                        uniformed members of the State Patrol and so equipped and operated as to clearly indicate to
                        the driver of a car which is signaled to stop that the specially marked State Patrol vehicle is
                        being operated by the State Patrol.
                        Subd. 2a. Specially marked police or sheriff vehicle. The chief of police of a home rule
                        or statutory city, and the sheriff of a county, may authorize within the jurisdiction the use of
                        specially marked police or sheriff's vehicles for primary use in the enforcement of highway traffic
                        laws and ordinances when in the judgment of the chief of police or sheriff the use of specially
                        marked vehicles will contribute to the safety of the traveling public. A specially marked vehicle
                        is a vehicle that is marked only with the shield of the city or county and the name of the proper
                        authority on the right front door of the vehicle. The number of specially marked vehicles owned
                        by a police department of a city of the first class may not exceed ten percent of the total number of
                        vehicles used by that police department in traffic law enforcement, and a city or county that uses
                        fewer than 11 vehicles in traffic law enforcement may not own more than one specially marked
                        vehicle. A specially marked vehicle may be operated only by a uniformed officer and must be
                        equipped and operated to indicate clearly to the driver of a vehicle signaled to stop that the
                        specially marked vehicle is being operated by a police department or sheriff's office.
                        Subd. 3. Security guard vehicle. (a) All motor vehicles which are used by security guards in
                        the course of their employment may have any color other than those specified in subdivision 1 for
                        law enforcement vehicles. The identity of the security service shall be displayed on the motor
                        vehicle as required for law enforcement vehicles.
                        (b) Notwithstanding subdivision 1, paragraph (a), clause (1), a security guard may continue
                        to use a motor vehicle that is predominantly black in the course of the guard's employment if the
                        vehicle was being used in this manner before August 1, 2002.
                        Subd. 4. Effective date. Subdivisions 1 to 3 shall apply to those motor vehicles purchased
                        subsequent to January 1, 1981.
                        Subd. 5. Vehicle security barrier; exemption. Marked State Patrol vehicles are exempt
                        from compliance with any rule requiring a security barrier between the front and rear seats of
                        the vehicle. A State Patrol vehicle shall be equipped with a security barrier at the option of the
                        officer assigned the vehicle.
                        History: 1959 c 554 s 1,2; 1961 c 458 s 1; 1969 c 1129 art 1 s 4; 1971 c 491 s 36; 1980 c
                        578 s 10; 1981 c 37 s 2; 1985 c 248 s 70; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 162 s 1,2; 1987 c 334 s 1,2; 1989 c
                        17 s 1; 1993 c 326 art 7 s 3; 2002 c 267 s 1-4
                        ATTN. SPECOPS AND GECKO45 my secret username is CIDDECEP and I am your S2. My authorization code is Six Wun Quebec Oscar Fife. Your presence here is tactically dangerous and compromises our overall mission parameter. Cease and desist all activity on this board. Our “enemies” are deft at computer hacking and may trace you back to our primary locale. You have forced me to compromise my situation to protect your vulnerable flank. This issue will be addressed later.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post

                          Another violation of Minnesota law! (No white security vehicles) This thread is actually what caused me to register at Security Info Watch. Everyday I see violations of both 169.98 and 626.88. Despite what some members here think, a state employee or police officer can't make it legal just by saying its ok.

                          I hear ya, but I've only ever heard of the vehicle statute being enforced once. On Guard Inc, the predecessor to Wolf Protective Agency used to have a green, unmarked, fully equipped Ford Taurus back in 1997. A patrol officer got pulled over by MPD one night and was cited.

                          Ok, actually twice.

                          Now I work for HCMC. When I first started here in 2002, our squad had red and blue lights on the bar. Then, a cop that had a beef with one of our nurses, went directly to a County Commissioner and complained. Amber city from then on until I designed our new car and found that municipal or government service vehicles could have amber and blue. Kinda geeky but oh well.
                          Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by sgtnewby View Post
                            I hear ya, but I've only ever heard of the vehicle statute being enforced once. On Guard Inc, the predecessor to Wolf Protective Agency used to have a green, unmarked, fully equipped Ford Taurus back in 1997. A patrol officer got pulled over by MPD one night and was cited.

                            Ok, actually twice.

                            Now I work for HCMC. When I first started here in 2002, our squad had red and blue lights on the bar. Then, a cop that had a beef with one of our nurses, went directly to a County Commissioner and complained. Amber city from then on until I designed our new car and found that municipal or government service vehicles could have amber and blue. Kinda geeky but oh well.
                            Ya,

                            I don't ever here about enforcement. If the police enforced this law, Abra and Macco would be making some serious money. Almost all the armored cars are also in violation of this law because they fall under the definition of security guards.
                            ATTN. SPECOPS AND GECKO45 my secret username is CIDDECEP and I am your S2. My authorization code is Six Wun Quebec Oscar Fife. Your presence here is tactically dangerous and compromises our overall mission parameter. Cease and desist all activity on this board. Our “enemies” are deft at computer hacking and may trace you back to our primary locale. You have forced me to compromise my situation to protect your vulnerable flank. This issue will be addressed later.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Here's our uniform and squad...

                              I'm not sure if the squad is legal or illegal. Is there a differance between private and public security? As far as color is concerned?
                              Attached Files
                              Last edited by sgtnewby; 06-09-2007, 05:19 PM.
                              Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Minnesota Statute defines what a security guard is in Chapter 323, I believe, or whatever it is you call statutes or chapters. They exempt a few types of public police-hired security, but I don't think they exempt your type.

                                You're either a licensed police officer in MN, or you're not.
                                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