Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another Unlicensed Security officer arrested for Impersonating a LEO in fl.

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

  • #46
    2007 case charges
    He's got 9 counts of the same charge as count 1.


    Case Number: 07-MM-0011906-O Filing Date: 10/12/2007 Case Type: Misdemeanor Case Status: TRIAL Status Date: 10/15/2008 Current Judge: MILLER, W M
    Defendant: BRYAN PAUL ANSLEY Count #: 001 Offense Date: 10/30/2006 Citation #: Complaint Date: Information Date: 10/12/2007 Statute: 493.6120(1) - VIOLATION OF UNIFORM REGULATIONS General Offense Category: Charge Level: MISDEMEANOR Charge Degree: FIRST DEGREE Result: FILED/NOT DISPOSED AT PROSECUTORS LEVEL
    Result Date: 10/12/2007
    "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

    Comment


    • #47
      using a blue light he's probably scr-wed. I was starting to think maybe he was an so with an attorney background.I did run him through dol he has a 119 block like me. So apparently he's an ex cop or co.
      THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

      Comment


      • #48
        If you check the record exemption box on the G license form . they will put it through usually even if your not an ex Leo.
        Ive been told.
        Last edited by bigdog; 10-14-2008, 12:07 AM.
        "Get yourself a shovel cause your in deep Sh*t"

        Comment


        • #49
          I think I had to provide verification of it on mine. Both of those so's had 119 blocks. I would think saying you are current or former and not being would constitute impersonating.
          THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

          Comment


          • #50
            pi's would have :
            The home address and telephone number for this individual is restricted from
            public record in accordance with Section 493.6122, F.S.


            current former leo have:
            The home address and telephone number for this individual is restricted from
            public record in accordance with the Public Records Act, Section 119.071(4)(d) F.S.



            see bottompage on above link.

            then if u look at both individuals through dol site, they are 119.
            Last edited by gixxer32404; 10-14-2008, 12:24 AM.
            THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

            Comment


            • #51
              My stuff is blocked under FSS 119...

              BTW, folks.

              It does not matter if you are not working for a guard firm. If you have a GUN, you are FULLY SUBJECT TO CHAPTER 493's security statutes. That means you MUST have a Class D license, a Class G license, and must be in a uniform, can't use force to protect property, etc.

              It is illegal to provide armed security services as an agent of the owner with a Class W license, or armed as an agent of the owner through Chapter 790.

              A gun store clerk can wear a gun because he's not a security guard. The second you call him a guard, he has to be uniformed, Class G'ed, and Class D'ed.
              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


              • #52
                I just checked a few people's D and Gs... I think they figured my trick out...
                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
                  Originally posted by N. A. Corbier View Post
                  I just checked a few people's D and Gs... I think they figured my trick out...
                  I'm lost^^^.I'm guessing you'd need to explain your trick through a pm,not openly??Are u still in Fla.?
                  THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I'm curious of what your trick was.

                    It's not uncommon for a cheap company up here to get a contract with 4 motels in close proximity and hire ONE so to patrol all 4 motels with a street dividing the property. Also so expected to walk all floors hourly, and outside. One motel/hotel was @ least 4 floors. And pay so under $8.00 an hour.
                    THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I marked no, not eligible, then marked "yes," I would like the exemption.
                      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


                      • #56
                        but u are or aren't current or former leo??
                        THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I don't live in the state of Florida. Your status for 119 has to be a florida law enforcement officer.
                          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


                          • #58
                            current or former...yes.
                            I believe it also covers firemen judges, child abuse investigators, and spouses among some other classes of people.
                            THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I think this case is still 'open'.
                              THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS WEBSITE/BLOG ARE MINE ALONE AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF MY EMPLOYER.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by N. A. Corbier View Post

                                It does not matter if you are not working for a guard firm. If you have a GUN, you are FULLY SUBJECT TO CHAPTER 493's security statutes. That means you MUST have a Class D license, a Class G license, and must be in a uniform, can't use force to protect property, etc.

                                It is illegal to provide armed security services as an agent of the owner with a Class W license, or armed as an agent of the owner through Chapter 790.
                                I concur 110%
                                www.securityinstructor.net

                                Comment

                                Leaderboard

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X