Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 65

Thread: Security guard pulls gun on Lucas County Sheriff's deputy

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Lester Polfus View Post
    I always find it amazing that entities try to have security, particularly armed security, as cheaply as possible and are shocked when something goes awry.
    Name of the game. Probably wont ever change either.

    And what's with the black gloves the guard is wearing? He frisking that many people or dealing with nasties?

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Waco has a giant VA facility with its own police force. In the past, when they called the local pd for help, they would tell the local cops that they could not enter the property with firearms. Guess what? The locals would leave unless the VA cops relented.

    Clarifying these regulations is needed. When the shooting incident with the nutty doctor occurred at Ft. Hood, local cops responded. I would have thought that Army military police would be trained for such.

  3. #33
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by willie View Post
    Waco has a giant VA facility with its own police force. In the past, when they called the local pd for help, they would tell the local cops that they could not enter the property with firearms. Guess what? The locals would leave unless the VA cops relented.

    Clarifying these regulations is needed. When the shooting incident with the nutty doctor occurred at Ft. Hood, local cops responded. I would have thought that Army military police would be trained for such.
    Few things going on here:

    1) The law is perfectly clear: only federal LE may carry firearms in federal facilities/property unless it is official business. Some administrators let local LE carry weapons regardless as long as they're in uniform, some go full retard and say no to anyone, anyhow, anyway, as you noted about Waco (if we take that as fact). The law itself cannot be written more clearly, however.

    2) Most military bases share an MOU with the local LE agency for backup. For instance with Joint Base Myers-Henderson Hall, that includes both the Pentagon Force Protection Agency as well as Arlington County PD, or with the Navy Yard in DC that means Metro PD and US Park Police. So what happens on a military base during an active shooter is the same thing that happens in a regular ole' town: anyone with a badge and gun, grab your balls and go. Multi-agency response is not indicative that the Provost Marshal's Office isn't trained for active shooters. Practically everyone in the US with the exception of NYC goes multi-agency response for active shooters, and that includes many military bases.

    Quote Originally Posted by lwt16 View Post
    Name of the game. Probably wont ever change either.

    And what's with the black gloves the guard is wearing? He frisking that many people or dealing with nasties?
    Truth on the first sentence.

    As for the second, my guess is this is the sort of security guard that would come to work dressed like Noah MacManus if he had no uniform regulations.

    __________________________________________________ ______________________

    ETA: All fun aside, let's keep in mind that we shouldn't take his actions as the norm for FPS contracted security guards. They actually have a fairly burdensome training requirement compared to most armed guards, and lets not forget that it was an FPS contracted security guard that we were all unknowingly singing the praises of a few weeks back with the Dallas federal building shooting.
    Last edited by TGS; 07-11-2019 at 03:17 PM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  4. #34
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Athens, AL, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Few things going on here:

    1) The law is perfectly clear: only federal LE may carry firearms in federal facilities/property unless it is official business. Some administrators let local LE carry weapons regardless as long as they're in uniform, some go full retard and say no to anyone, anyhow, anyway, as you noted about Waco (if we take that as fact). The law itself cannot be written more clearly, however.

    [snip]
    So the guard's interpretation that the uniformed deputy was not allowed to carry his weapon into the IRS offices is correct because the deputy was not at the premises on official business. And the security guard was following the intent of the law when he asked the deputy to return without his weapon. But the guard blew it when he drew his weapon and accosted the deputy when he was in the act of leaving.
    Last edited by farscott; 07-11-2019 at 06:26 PM.

  5. #35
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by farscott View Post
    So the guard's interpretation that the uniformed deputy was not allowed to carry his weapon into the IRS offices is correct because the deputy was not at the premises on official business. And the security guard was following the intent of the law when he asked the deputy to return without his weapon. But the guard blew it when he drew his weapon and accosted the deputy when he was in the act of leaving.
    Yep.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  6. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Quote Originally Posted by whomever View Post
    18USC930 says:

    "(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
    ...
    (d) Subsection (a) shall not apply toŚ
    (3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.

    So (d)(1) covers local LEOs if they are on official business. (3) has the 'or other lawful purposes' test. I would certainly argue that an LEO carrying on personal business, in or out of uniform, on or off duty, ought to count as 'other lawful purposes'. But then so would a civilian with a carry permit, and my sense is that they are generally not going to be permitted.
    "Other lawful purposes" seems like it would be broad enough to cover pretty much any non-criminal conduct. I am not a lawyer, but given that language, I have a hard time understanding how civilian carry permit holders are not legally allowed to carry in federal buildings. Is there a different statute that somehow makes things more restrictive without being in conflict with that one, or have the courts just interpreted the law in such a way as to make the effective outcome different than the plain language?

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by olstyn View Post
    "Other lawful purposes" seems like it would be broad enough to cover pretty much any non-criminal conduct. I am not a lawyer, but given that language, I have a hard time understanding how civilian carry permit holders are not legally allowed to carry in federal buildings. Is there a different statute that somehow makes things more restrictive without being in conflict with that one, or have the courts just interpreted the law in such a way as to make the effective outcome different than the plain language?
    I would assume that "lawful purposes" only includes what's "lawful" under federal law.

  8. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Quote Originally Posted by CleverNickname View Post
    I would assume that "lawful purposes" only includes what's "lawful" under federal law.
    Admittedly this is a simplistic and absolutist argument, but the 2nd amendment is federal law, and it explicitly states that bearing arms is lawful.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by olstyn View Post
    Admittedly this is a simplistic and absolutist argument, but the 2nd amendment is federal law, and it explicitly states that bearing arms is lawful.
    Oh I agree with you. The problem is finding a federal judge that does too.

  10. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    south TX
    Quote Originally Posted by blues View Post
    As regards IRS, my recollection is, (back in the 80's), that IRS made their special agents lock up their guns in the office. They could not walk around with them on their person unless they were going into the field, and even then, if memory serves, they were to sign them out or account for their leaving the office. I've no clue how they handle such these days.
    One of my FITP classmates was an IRS SA. At the time, since they'd had a few people ND in their hotel rooms, the official policy was to install a trigger lock on the weapon without manipulating (clearing) the weapon prior to storage. Seriously. I don't know if it has changed in the intervening years.
    (Formerly known as Sotex.)

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •