State Laws for Security.

[mad_malk]

Now i'm not talking about laws that govern the regulating of security. i mean laws that protect or help better define your job. For instance in Florida Security is issued light colors Green and Amber. Under Florida law 784.07 Assault or battery of law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, public transit employees or agents, or other specified officers; Now includes Uniformed security guards.

So please share any laws for your state that are similar.


P.S. some time this year a bill will be back up for vote that will give Uniformed security guards the legal Authority to detain and hold for LEO. This would go beyond the limited scope that is currently in effect. IE legal ability to stop and detain trespassers till LEO shows up and wrote out a trespass notice. Currently only retail LPO's can do that. The only way regulars SO's can detain a trespasser is if they become violent or posses a Dangerous weapon.

[gcmc security part 2]

Now i'm not talking about laws that govern the regulating of security. i mean laws that protect or help better define your job. For instance in Florida Security is issued light colors Green and Amber. Under Florida law 784.07 Assault or battery of law enforcement officers, firefighters, emergency medical care providers, public transit employees or agents, or other specified officers; Now includes Uniformed security guards.

So please share any laws for your state that are similar.


P.S. some time this year a bill will be back up for vote that will give Uniformed security guards the legal Authority to detain and hold for LEO. This would go beyond the limited scope that is currently in effect. IE legal ability to stop and detain trespassers till LEO shows up and wrote out a trespass notice. Currently only retail LPO's can do that. The only way regulars SO's can detain a trespasser is if they become violent or posses a Dangerous weapon.

Or they are trespassing on a designated construction site, which is also a felony in the state of FL.

We've discussed the battery law here before, and if you read the statute, it states you have to have at least one patch or emblem that identifies your employer and that you are a "licensed security officer". My companies uniforms do not cover us. Luckily the one place our officers see the possibility of being attacked the greatest is a hospital and they were already covered by this statute before the addition (emergency medical care provider includes security whether employed by the hospital or not)

I'm curious as to how the detainment bill will be worded if it will have the same restrictions on it.

Hope to see it pass this year.

[mad_malk]

Wording is what got it taken off the table last year when the statute got passed on security being designated with amber and green. I am interested in the wording as well. apparently under the original wording we could after properly identifying our selfs we could Detain as in cuff and hold against there will for a very broad range of reasons with the stipulation that we notify and contact LEO ASAP to take custody and make the actual arrest or release. Pretty much under the same as Loss Prevention but for almost any thing which is why i believe it was taken off the table.

Interested in the new wording and limitations.

[gcmc security part 2]

See the problem with it is, the way 493 is, Security Officers can only use force in defense of life or GBH now. How do you detain someone? Can't handcuff them, that's using force. Hopefully that gets fixed when they fix this.

[mad_malk]

See the problem with it is, the way 493 is, Security Officers can only use force in defense of life or GBH now. How do you detain someone? Can't handcuff them, that's using force. Hopefully that gets fixed when they fix this.

There reference for some of the change is based on
810.09 Trespass on property other than structure or conveyance.
(c) If the offender is armed with a firearm or other dangerous weapon during the commission of the offense of trespass on property other than a structure or conveyance, he or she is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Any owner or person authorized by the owner may, for prosecution purposes, take into custody and detain, in a reasonable manner, for a reasonable length of time, any person when he or she reasonably believes that a violation of this paragraph has been or is being committed, and that the person to be taken into custody and detained has committed or is committing the violation. If a person is taken into custody, a law enforcement officer shall be called as soon as is practicable after the person has been taken into custody. The taking into custody and detention in compliance with the requirements of this paragraph does not result in criminal or civil liability for false arrest, false imprisonment, or unlawful detention.

[Brent311]

As others have stated on other threads, and I have just find out myself, Mississippi has no laws regarding security guards. I guess this could be good in some ways. Authorities (atleast where I am) pretty much leave us alone and are glad we are there most of the time.

[bigdog]

Wording is what got it taken off the table last year when the statute got passed on security being designated with amber and green. I am interested in the wording as well. apparently under the original wording we could after properly identifying our selfs we could Detain as in cuff and hold against there will for a very broad range of reasons with the stipulation that we notify and contact LEO ASAP to take custody and make the actual arrest or release. Pretty much under the same as Loss Prevention but for almost any thing which is why i believe it was taken off the table.

Interested in the new wording and limitations.

Having been in contact with Fasco and fascos lobbyist I can say that this information is incorrect. The reason the bill was taken off the table is we didnt have a sponsor in the florida house last year for the bill. If youdo a search we have a thread on last years detention bill. Link to HB143 Detain and Hold for Law enforcement http://flhouse.gov/Sections/Document...3&Session=2008.
As far as the use of force I was assured by fasco's attorney/lobbyist that this wording will be added to the bill as a commitee amendment

493.6118I(1)(j) Commission of an act of violence or the use of force on any person except in the lawful protection of one's self or another from physical harm or in the process of a lawful detention and hold of a suspect for law enforcement.

[mad_malk]

Having been in contact with Fasco and fascos lobbyist I can say that this information is incorrect. The reason the bill was taken off the table is we didnt have a sponsor in the florida house last year for the bill. If youdo a search we have a thread on last years detention bill. Link to HB143 Detain and Hold for Law enforcement http://flhouse.gov/Sections/Document...3&Session=2008.
As far as the use of force I was assured by fasco's attorney/lobbyist that this wording will be added to the bill as a commitee amendment

493.6118I(1)(j) Commission of an act of violence or the use of force on any person except in the lawful protection of one's self or another from physical harm or in the process of a lawful detention and hold of a suspect for law enforcement.

thank yuo for your valuable information. i must have misunderstood what the notice from the newsletter said, here it is .

Senate Bill 1298 – Security Officer/Authority
to Detain. The proposed language would
allow a security officer to temporarily detain
a person until the law enforcement officer
arrives. At that time, the custody of
the detainee would be transferred to the responding
law enforcement officer. Mr. Ben
Poitevent informed Director Bevis that the
proposed language had been withdrawn for
the legislative session.

But again i wasn't looking to discuss any laws just to compile a list of laws that apply to security out side of the administration such as 493 in it's entirety. but a list like 784.07 and other laws in a similar vain

[Minneapolis Security]

Director Bevis.....hehe

[HotelSecurity]

In Canada a citizen can arrest if he witnesses an Indictable Offense (Felony). He can not arrest for a Summary Conviction Offense (Mistomenior (sp?). The owner of property or his agent can arrest for ANY criminal act he witnesses if it occurs on or in relation to his property. Therefore Security has more powers than a regular citizen.

[CorpSec]

Minnesota has some of the best laws regarding arrests by a private person that I have ever seen. We may arrest for misdemeanors commited in our presence or any felonies if we have reasonable belief that the person we are arresting committed the crime. If the person escapes from us and runs into their house, the law allows us to bust into their house and arrest them in there! We don't even need to get the cops involved, we can take them to the judge ourselves if we wanted.

629.37 WHEN A PRIVATE PERSON MAY MAKE AN ARREST.
A private person may arrest another:
(1) for a public offense committed or attempted in the arresting person's presence;
(2) when the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in the arresting person's
presence; or
(3) when a felony has in fact been committed, and the arresting person has reasonable cause
for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
History: (10573) RL s 5232; 1985 c 265 art 10 s 1

629.38 REQUIRING A PRIVATE PERSON TO DISCLOSE CAUSE OF ARREST.
Before making an arrest a private person shall inform the person to be arrested of the cause
of the arrest and require the person to submit. The warning required by this section need not be
given if the person is arrested while committing the offense or when the person is arrested on
pursuit immediately after committing the offense. If a person has committed a felony, a private
person may break open an outer or inner door or window of a dwelling house to make the arrest
if, before entering, the private person informs the person to be arrested of the intent to make the
arrest and the private person is then refused admittance.
History: (10574) RL s 5233; 1985 c 265 art 10 s 1; 1986 c 444

629.39 REQUIRING PRIVATE PERSON MAKING ARREST TO DELIVER ARRESTEE
TO JUDGE OR PEACE OFFICER.
A private person who arrests another for a public offense shall take the arrested person before
a judge or to a peace officer without unnecessary delay. If a person arrested escapes, the person
from whose custody the person has escaped may immediately pursue and retake the escapee, at
any time and in any place in the state. For that purpose, the pursuer may break open any door
or window of a dwelling house if the pursuer informs the escapee of the intent to arrest the
escapee and the pursuer is refused admittance.
History: (10575) RL s 5234; 1983 c 359 s 132; 1985 c 265 art 10 s 1; 1986 c 444

[Maelstrom]

I like our State's citizen arrest laws... any person, anytime for any offence (of which we are a witness), thus we can detain till the police arrive any trespassers found on our not-publicly-accessible site