Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
And the news, internet, and every other source of publicity continue to give them their fame, so other worthless sacks of skin and bone can be lead down the same path.Originally Posted by UrbanWolf
Bingo! We have a winner. It's goes much deeper than just television ratings though.
They use it to spin into propaganda to create and push fear into the sheeple and indoctrinated useful idiots of society who take it as the news in order to convince them to support giving up rights and play into supporting gun control. It all goes much deeper than what is on the surface and what Americans have been lead to believe, but I am not going to touch on that or delve into the subject matter any deeper here.
Last edited by DavieD55; 11-08-2018 at 13:22.
Why do you have off-duty LEO providing unarmed "security"?
Hearing claims of "PTSD"
I wonder how many will regret adding that to their list of ailments for VA compensation upon leaving the service.
Won't take much to put them on a no-guns list for having a mental disorder.
You are right, but ? In a broader sense, people generally don't run out and get a pistol and CCW the minute they reach 21 or whatever age limit is locally. Especially those in college who are trying to pay tuition, living expenses, afford apple computers and phones, etc. Young people (we are talking non-military here) tend to be oblivious to the risks in life, so again wouldn't tend to carry or even see the need to carry. Despite it being a country style bar, I doubt many at all in the Thousand Oaks area would carry on any particular day.
14 . Always carry a change of underwear.
Bouncer. Push the overly rowdy out onto the street. "Roadhouse".
14 . Always carry a change of underwear.
Right. So all six of them have to play bouncer? They can't have 4 bouncers and 2 armed overwatch guys?
Weapons = bigger cost for the venue. If the biggest threat the bar is likely to face are rowdy drunks, why pay extra for armed security? Also bigger liability: If one of the armed guards shoots somebody and it's not justified, it's a huge cost to them and thus liability insurance is more expensive.
One thing I've always wondered about "off duty" cops "moonlighting" in uniform, maybe someone who is current or former LE can fill me in: Are they covered by the department for liability or by the venue that actually hires them? Are they paid by the venue or are they paid by the department and then the venue pays the department directly?
I'm just thinking about, say, the DPD cops who work at bars, concert venues or similar events. They may be "off duty" as far as the department is concerned because they aren't working at their regular place of duty, but to me, the public, if they are wearing a uniform and carrying all the equipment that a cop would carry, they sure look "on duty" to me.
Last edited by Martinjmpr; 11-08-2018 at 15:03.
Martin
If you love your freedom, thank a veteran. If you love to party, thank the Beastie Boys. They fought for that right.
I doubt any agency allows officers to "moonlight" in uniform. I'd also bet that most do not allow "moonlighting" at all. When you see an officer at an event I am pretty sure they are on duty and the event organizer is paying the department for them to be there.
And it was put into play:
"Dean also described an incident In April, when deputies were called to his Newbury Park home regarding a disturbance.
"He was somewhat irate, acting a little irrationally. They called out our crisis intervention team, our mental health specialist," Dean said.
Those specialists ended up clearing him because they "didn't feel he was qualified to be taken under 5150," Dean said, referencing the California law code for the temporary involuntary psychiatric commitment of individuals who present a danger to themselves or others due to signs of mental illness."
https://6abc.com/thousand-oaks-shoot...-know/4645948/
Te occidere possunt sed te edere non possunt nefas est
Sane person with a better sight picture
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote