Security Guard points gun at uniformed deputy because gun free zone

[earplug]

To many fucking rules. Its going to be a shambles.

[CS1983]

so.. if I quote your quote^2 will something start a thread?

Is that you John Wayne, is this me?

Why doesn't the rent a bbq outrank anyone? Are some pigs more equal than others, a la Orwell? (no offense to those who do the shit for real; I respect you, but the system is definitely going to visit its aunt for the next 9 months).

Who is this deputy sheriff? How does homeboy punisher gloves know he isn't the next Akim Abdul Al-Jabar shoot-em-up false flag that the Flubs.. err. FBI has had on their radar for the last year? Why does a uniform mean anything? (tip: search stolen valor. My favorite is the dude who'd cause a T-10 to rip its shit like Taco Bell was its midnight snack, aka 2/75 in the mall but looking like the local Reserve component).

I don't buy the "calm demeanor; weapon holstered" schtick. Any true believer can be calm when needed.

Either way, why is this dude special?

Who is he? He claims Sheriff Dept.? So what?

[Irving]

Like all social norms, generally people in full uniform should be treated like they are who they are saying they are. Does that create a potential weakness? Sure, but it's an important part of maintaining a functional society. MOST people in normal situations aren't psychopaths and shouldn't be treated such, or society would fall into shambles.

That doesn't mean just letting police do what they want just because they are police, and that doesn't mean the security guard abandoning his duties just because a guy happens to be a cop either. As long as cop want trying to storm the castle, guard could have just as easily stalled him out at the door without elevating the situation.

[FoxtArt]

While I mostly agree, I don't think it's necessarily best to "teach" that, as it does create an exploitable weakness, but I'm not talking about this situation (especially for e.g. daughters). I think my passing take for the moment is people should have their local dispatch #'s memorized. Not for this situation, but there are a lot of other cases where you don't have time to look that up. How many times have off duty officers been pulled over by people impersonating LEO in the news? It's very rare, but not entirely irregular, and for every off duty officer they happen to have pulled over, there is probably a good 200 regular joes. [many of these impersonators don't have malicious intents, but still] I think the best approach is to treat uniformed LEO as LEO only when their behavior, equipment, vehicle, etc. match fully with what you know the department has. If there's any irregularity, then be more aware, and if they are confrontational (pulling you over, etc.) make a quick call to dispatch (non emergency) and state that you want to confirm an officer contact is from their department.

In this case, if rent-a-rambo was legitimately suspicious, he could've informed the officer to wait while he called dispatch to verify his employment. If a real officer didn't comply with that and barreled in (outside of emergency situations or plain sight doctrine) I'm pretty sure it would have serious implications.

[Zundfolge]

I don't buy the "calm demeanor; weapon holstered" schtick. Any true believer can be calm when needed.

You can believe whatever you want, but this is what should be (and likely is) the standard for the law.

You don't get to use lethal force against some one because you "think" they "might" become a threat, you only have that right when they actually do. Otherwise we'd all be justified in shooting anyone wearing a gun anywhere under any circumstances.

[Gman]

What I do know is that none of us was there. That's about it.

The rest will play out in court. We don't know what was said from either side or how the entire shituation escalated.

On another note, don't LEOs have ID in addition to the uniform/badge?

[Skip]

What I do know is that none of us was there. That's about it.

The rest will play out in court. We don't know what was said from either side or how the entire shituation escalated.

On another note, don't LEOs have ID in addition to the uniform/badge?

True.

I don't even think the proper identification of the LEO was in question. This security guard wasn't letting anyone slow down his acceleration from 0 to retard in three seconds. Now had the LEO actually been a threat and his ID was in question, then I guess that's a factor to consider. He kept his weapon holstered and was fairly calm.

Sidetrack: This is my fear with "POLICE" windbreakers and carrier patches in home invasions. That stuff is really to come by.

[Snowman78]

What I do know is that none of us was there. That's about it.

The rest will play out in court. We don't know what was said from either side or how the entire shituation escalated.

On another note, don't LEOs have ID in addition to the uniform/badge?

Yes, mine has a photo And description - looks like a driver license.

[DDT951]

His weapon was holstered and his demeanor was calm. Ergo, not a threat.

So calm demeanor and holstered weapon means someone is not a threat?

Should police take guns from people who they are investigating (aka the 2A audit) if they have a calm demeanor and have the weapon holstered or in a sling while they are invistagating since they are not a threat?

[Zundfolge]

So calm demeanor and holstered weapon means someone is not a threat?

Should police take guns from people who they are investigating (aka the 2A audit) if they have a calm demeanor and have the weapon holstered or in a sling while they are invistagating since they are not a threat?

Yes, I'm saying unequivocally that someone with a calm demeanor and a holstered weapon is not a threat (assuming there aren't other extenuating circumstances ... like them calmly making a threatening statement). To accept anything less than this means that anyone can use lethal force against anyone who is in possession of a firearm regardless of the circumstances.

When police are investigating someone with a calm demeanor and weapon holstered they should not be pointing guns at them. Doesn't mean they shouldn't take their gun during the duration of the contact.

Yes I'm saying officers that draw down on someone just for the "crime" of possessing a firearm should lose their jobs (if not their freedom).