Most Helpful Opinions
This cop came strutting into a federal building carrying a firearm. "There are venues where a police officer is not allowed to carry a weapon absent some special circumstances, such as planes and various federal facilities."
The security officer told the cop he could not carry his gun into the facility and would have to leave it in his car. The cop refused to comply with the "request". He seemed to think that, by virtue of being a cop, he didn't have to comply with laws. So the security officer, doing his duty, considered the cop to be a possible risk and pulled his sidearm.
Wait a minute, don't cops expect every one to comply with THEIR "commands" or face death?
Now that arrogant cop is suing for emotional distress and loss of wages because he was so traumatized that he was unable to work? Boo hoo hoo. Cops are the biggest cowardly cry babies on the planet. "I was bracing myself to get shot in the back." Really? Maybe that's that something that only a cop, not a security officer, would do.
I think everyone who gets a gun pointed at them by a cop should be able to sue for the same reasons. But when a cop is actually (extremely rarely) fined for violating someone's rights, who pays the bill? Not the cop, that's for sure. It's the taxpayers. So I assume this arrogant, lying, immoral, piece of shit who finagled a free vacation out of the deal will be suing the IRS and not the security officer.12
I don't know the US law on it
Two things that I think matter here
Dose the guard always do that to all cops?
Second why the hell he pulled the gun?
Something seems missing, looks odd if it really just moved from "I can't do that" to pointing a gun at someone
I do think the news here are against the cop to a degree seeing the "His hand close to the trigger" well duh.. where else you place it on a gun? (Near.. not on the trigger)
The secirty guard did not seem he can make a phone call to police while holding the gun, so sounds like that happen when he was in the area he sits?
And on the phone says he dose not leave
So at least to me seems like it was not a simple "You can't come in with q gun leave it in the car" "I cant" and leaves then aimed a gun at him
But I think he started leaving after the gun was pointed at him
How ever can police leave a gun in the car saftly? Why dose the IRS that don't allow to put guns in don't have a room to store them while someone is in?
So much info missing ☹26
I'd have to think it requires some sort of pre-authorization.
Would he have treated the man differently if he had not been black? Maybe a more calm approach? Hard to say.10
What Girls & Guys Said
I don’t believe it is as simple as yes or no. Normally police or sheriffs can carry anyplace normally without question. And I think this was the problem. It of course makes sense that no guns in a federal building UNLESS there is a situation. As an example the police were called on this situation and ran into that IRS building with guns drawn only to find the call they received about a man with a gun was a sheriff. Did the security guard pull his gun on the police? No. They can go in with guns because there was a situation. The guard wasn’t wrong trying to stop the sheriff. Sheriffs just aren’t used to security guards trying to disarm them. ALSO as law enforcement you should never be in uniform and NOT armed. Bad guys see unarmed law enforcement as a soft target. So to make sure this never happens again there needs to be a sign “no guns including law enforcement.” I am a police officer myself and there isn’t anyplace I can’t go without my gun... but I don’t have federal buildings in my town.30
This is a crazy gray area between federal and local since the two existed. Even if the law outlines one thing another law compels to do something differently and the "State" usual wins over Federal due the 2nd and 10th Amendment wording and te State's claim of Federal overeach witing State Boundaries and Jurisdictions. See, jurisdiction is a funny thing where States are comcerned.
So, was the security officer justified, or ore specifically operating within his scope? Yes. Was the officer? In all likelihood, he too likely was. This is one of those thimgs where Comgress will require further examination for rules as Federal property is also a funny animal and Something The State of California for intanse loves to remind the Federal side about. Up to and including limiting Federal Officer access to certain firearms and restrictions within those fires which the State exempts itself from.
How this unfolds should be interesting, but I have a feeling zero aside from an exemption will come of it.
A final note. Typically places with rules where arms must be temporarily surrendered have a separate law enforcment entry point and this entry is always pointed to officers upon entry unless executing their duty. In which, good luck, they are not surrendering their arms.10
If the officer actually entered through the front door and no one had a problem with him being armed but the policy is there then whoever that was on the ground floor of that building didn't do their jobs by letting him know that he violated policy; ( security and signage should have been visible ) but if there's no policy then the guard had no reason to confront the officer armed or otherwise. It can be viewed as being biased but police are just as biased and act exactly as the guard did or even worse.12
Race is absolutely a non-issue, intended here to agitate and bias the reader and obscure the truth.
I have been an armed Federal guard in a Federal building. I am entirely within the the law to disarm and detain any state level person if they don't surrender their side-arm. I am outranked by other Federal officers, such as Secret Service, Marshals and FBI.43
I like the part how the cop refused to give up his gun when the guard asked him to. Is this a problem with ALL black people (even cops)? rofl. The guard had authority here, the cop had NONE. Why was he being such a bitch? Looks like a cop on a power trip while in someone else's jurisdiction. I posted on another thread about this yesterday. We don't know if he was required to surrender his weapon, but why would he need it to talk to the IRS? Apparently still nobody on here interested in the actual law that requires everyone to surrender their guns in federal buildings (with some exceptions). All people wanna talk about are skin colors. Damn racists. lol21
Black men have a very, very, very hard time complying with simple directions or orders. They take everything personally and turn simple exchanges that should take five seconds into gigantic, massive ordeals that end in tragedy because they always think they are being unfairly persecuted.
just look at how black comedians portray white people in their jokes. What do they make fun of whites for? Being polite and well-mannered. Following rules. Doing what they're supposed to be doing. Basically not acting like a fucking 220 Lb. 8 year old with major anger issues and an authority problem. That's what they MAKE FUN of white people for.20
Apparently, federal law does make an exception for state law enforcement employees:
18 USC §930
(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 to—
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
However, the question in this case is whether the security guard was aware of the exception. He could have been improperly trained. Or maybe he was properly trained but forgot (which would not be an excuse.)14
Law enforcement are exempt from gun restrictions ANYWHERE within their state and are actually REQUIRED to carry a weapon, on and off duty at ALL TIMES, even in a federal building. If a crime happens in a federal building then both local and federal laws apply. It is shared jurisdiction. Also, a cop's authority overrides an armed guard's authority. The reason for this exemption is an officer must at all times be able to protect people around them. A cop is a cop from academy graduation until resignation, firing or retirement.11
The problem is that the cop did pass security checks at the main security gate to enter the federal building. The rent a cop was in an office in a different part of the building. So it wasn’t his job to confront a non threatening guy in uniform.
Let’s say a new security guard started working in the building and ran into this rent a cop. Would he have drawn on him? Doubt it.
And the guy called 911 to report the cop to the cop’s friends who then show up. Think about that. This rent a cop was not playing with a full deck5
I don't think racism played a role in this at all (it's being pushed by the msm) I the security guard is just a fucking idiot with a gun and a badge. You can clearly see that it's a uniformed officer, sure people can buy a police uniform but that's not likely. Also the officer wasn't doing anything too provocative either, he didn't pull his gun out at all, I'm actually surprised he didn't shoot the security guard (which I think he would be justified in doing), the security guard pulled his gun out from the get go.
Also you added the act on how officers can't carry in federal building but that actually varies from place to place, some states allow regular people to concealed carry in public schools, but if officers can't have a gun in federal buildings, then that doesn't make sense at all. Police officers and other law enforcement work under the federal government, they should be able to carry their service pistol in federal buildings while on duty.2
You would think the Deputy Sheriff would already know what the rule was for entering a federal building. Still, the guard could have diffused it some, by just talking the situation down with the deputy, or maybe putting on "I shot the sheriff, but I didn't shoot the deputy." Most of federal security is now contractor.20
if that's how he was trained then he did the right thing. you can't carry on federal property. he asked the sheriff to take it to his car. the sheriff was bigger than the guard so he overreacted and got scared. the sheriff should know the rules. i hope their is a no firearms sign on that building.20
I think law enforcement is allowed to enter a federal building. If say a fight breaks out in an SS building they’re allowed to enter to break it up and they don’t have to check their weapons at the door14
Well if the police officer was not authorized and by looking at the qoute you gave he wasn't, then he was asking for it a little. And also if he was a cop shouldn't he have known that was the case and that he would be technically committing a civil offense?20
I don't think he should have pulled a gun on him, but the federal building is federal property, and nobody who is not an authorized security guard is able to carry a weapon in, including the deputy.11
I thought LEO was exempt, but perhaps not.
I wouldn't do too much worrying about it - unless you're a LEO and are not sure where you can carry your weapon.11
Yes that security guard got arrested , he pulled a gun on a Deputy Sheriff
who was coming to the IRS office to discuss personal information and
was approached by that security guard. The Sheriff was in the right
and they are allowed to carry their guns in places.0
It is a violation for an on duty officer NOT to be carrying his/her duty weapon, the security guard over stepped his authority and is probably not trained to the same level as the officer in this incident.
I'd suggest you see this site for information www.lawenforcementtoday.com/.../ From the looks of the 'security gusard2
Let's assume there was just confusion on the intentions of the sherriff... it's one of these events everyone sees a story in but it could have been a non-event!11
No. local and state law enforcement cannot normally go armed into federal buildings. The use of "White" and "Black" in the title seems to be an attempt to elicit certain responses, but the race is completely irrelevant here.10
Most Helpful Opinions
lets ignore the white/black issue and just look at this as a situation both are human beings, both are in the US, both have to abide by their rules of law... both are tasked with a duty of law, one protecting the people and serving the law and what it stands for the other being a security guard who is tasked to lawfully keep the peace in his location and is tasked with protecting the property he is employed to protect
now I'm not in the US but from what i understand is that some security services are licensed to carry firearms to a certain classification while on duty but those firearms are supposed to be drawn only if the situation calls for it to be...
however I'm assuming that this Guard was not one that was in a place where the need to carry was the case?
or the officer was in plain clothes or maybe overstepped his rights as i hear a lot of that going on not just over there but it happens over here in the UK too
also if the security guard had a concealed carry permit and was in an area where muggings or armed robbery etc was an issue, then I can understand that would allow him the right to carry however while he is on duty as a security guard i would assume that his employers would have to be registered and insured for their employees to carry firearms
so if we treat this as a race issue then we would have to also look at if the roles were reversed... would it be any less wrong or right for it to happen if the shoe was on the other foot, would and what details which led up to the drawing of a weapon on a police officer?
I'm not sure it was a race issue to begin with and cannot accept it could be without more info, if however he was being aggressive to the deputy because he was black, then sure it will land the guard in very hot water, but if it's a case whereby the deputy was in plain clothes or people had been robbing the place he was on duty at dressed as officials then no...
also if he isn't licensed or allowed to carry during work ours or on the premises then the guard can find himself without work and facing a large legal penalty