Off duty Police told they can't carry at University

[dalepres]

t should seem apparent to most thoughtful folks that if you want everyone to be okay with law enforcement officers being restricted from bearing arms, then heaven help the future of RKBA for ordinary non-LE citizens

Just the opposite, actually. People think citizens don't need guns because the police have them.

 

[hotshotshoting]

dalepres i guess people do what they have to do but now think about this would it be easier, more convenient and safer to allow them to actually just do their job...

 

[dalepres]

Right! Because that worked out so well in New Orleans after Katrina when the cops left!

New Orleans "WITHOUT COPS" was "JUST FINE."

Actually, New Orleans would have been just fine without cops soon enough except that many of the cops did two things: they joined with the criminals in looting and pillaging and they took the arms from prepared citizens who were in a position to defend themselves. Oh, and a third thing, they forced people who were safe, prepared, and ready to defend their homes from their homes and into the streets without even having a place for them to go.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Just for the record regarding Chicago PD, there is one Sergant (probably much higher now as it was over ten years ago) who's actions on the block near Pershing and Halstead that I shall now and always praise. This officer acted with common sense and a sense of duty to the public trust and public at large. He is a credit to the Chicago PD and I hope and pray he will always be available to the people of the city when they need help.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled bashing.

Selena

 

[hotshotshoting]

there is no doubt in my mind that New Orleans was mishandled by quite a few different people.... but saying that all the cops were bad is like saying we should get rid of the federal government because it took them over 5 days to respond and send assistance to New Orleans...


so lets get rid of conventional govt and have anarchy right? then everyone will be happy.... bah

 

[Treo]

so lets get rid of conventional govt and have anarchy right? then everyone will be happy.... bah

I'm down.

 

[dalepres]

That said, I think that a public college that forces government employees to violate the terms of their employment in order to take classes is walking a pretty thin line. Private colleges, of course, may be as dense as they like.

The problem here would be having terms of employment that require LEOs to break the law, not the other way around as you described it.

 

[divemedic]

federal government because it took them over 5 days to respond and send assistance to New Orleans

I don't know where you get that idea. I was there, and when we arrived it was still raining. We got there less than 48 hours after landfall, and there was a USAR there 24 hours before we were.

do you attend class in uniform? do you have a trade that involve ticking off folks who might actually act on their angry impulse (as opposed to internet heros)

while not required to use their weapon were you napping when the appalachian law schoolshooting happened? or how about the mall shooting where that slacker cop left dinner with his wife to go towards the guy with the long gun? do folks with your major or career do that?

Regardless, I don't see any law that:

1 requires cops to perform their duties while off duty. Yes, cops still have arrest powers off duty, but they are not required to arrest anyone.
2 that requires a person to allow cops on his or her property, unless they have PC or a warrant. Isn't that what the private property posters say?
3 I have to attend some classes in uniform, just I am sure that you are not forced to attend all of YOUR classes in uniform.
4 I also have a job where people threaten me. I still don't think that makes my life more important than anyone else's. Why cops insist that their life is worth defense more than anyone else's is beyond me.
5 Saying that your rights are the same as mine must make me a cop basher. Whatever. I just refuse to believe that anyone is better than me, or has more rights than I do. Maybe the opinion that cops have more rights than I do makes cops into citizen haters.
6 For every situation that you find where an off duty cop subdued a criminal, I can find at least 10 where a non cop did the same.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Anybody who believes police officers don't think they are above the law and deserve special treatment (a.k.a. "professional courtesy") needs to spend some time perusing this web site:

http://www.copswritingcops.com/

Read the nice-sounding intro on the home page, about how no police officer really thinks he's above the law ... then read the actual stories.

 

[NotPbFree]

Concerning TCA 39-17-1350

Assuming this law applies, did the officers attending MTSU go to the Principals office every day to report? Exactly where is the Principals office, I can't find it on the campus map.

1) Who carries a firearm onto school grounds or inside a school building during regular school hours unless the officer immediately informs the principal that the officer will be present on school grounds or inside the school building and in possession of a firearm. If the principal is unavailable, the notice may be given to an appropriate administrative staff person in the principal's office;

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

aguila theres another site out there where cops display the opposite
http://www.officer.com/article/index.jsp?siteSection=5

 

[dalepres]

To be realistic, cops are pretty much above the law. That is why so many of them have these license plates:

They are a signal to other cops that means: "Don't write me a ticket, I am one of you."

SECTION 1. AMENDATORY 47 O.S. 1991, Section 11-106, as last amended by Section 1, Chapter 189, O.S.L. 1999 (47 O.S. Supp. 2000, Section 11-106), is amended to read as follows:

Section 11-106. A. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm, may exercise the privilege set forth in this section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

B. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:

1. Park, or stand, irrespective of the provisions of this chapter;

2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation;

3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as speeding does not endanger life or property; and

4. Disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in specified directions.

C. 1. The exemptions herein granted to the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle shall apply only when such vehicle driver is properly and lawfully making use of an audible signal or of flashing red or blue lights or a combination of flashing red and blue lights meeting the requirements of Section 12-218 of this title, except that an authorized emergency vehicle operated as a police vehicle need not be equipped with or display a red or blue light visible from in front of the vehicle.

I think this is a common cause for cop bashing, both online and in real life. How many times do we all see cops speeding in their police or private vehicles - and I mean really speeding. Don't make excuses about emergency pursuit - you see the Oklahoma law above. They must use lights and/or sirens to speed. So, cops think they have special privilegs. They thnk that they do not have to follow the laws they enforce on the rest of us. It is not surprising when some push that elitism to the point of drug dealing or home invasion robberies.


(EDIT) Let e just add that there is a mostly-on-topic purpose to this post. This thread is about special privileges for law enforcement officers. Things like have been posted in this thread are the arguments of the THR community as to why LEOs should not have special privileges. My post is about how those special privilegs get exaggerated and abused - thus the feelilngs of many that those special privileges should not exist. Cops have good and bad, just like the rest of us.

 

[LongRider]

If the LEO here or anywhere did not believe that they are a special class than we have no argument. Or at least I have no argument. As I said I support and recognize a police officer off and on duty to have the ability to defend themselves. I fully support their right to bear arms where ever when ever how ever they have a need to be 24/7. No problem with that at all. We are citizens and brothers in arms, I happily join them in fighting any rule that limits their right to bear arms.

Those elitist that would deprive me of the same rights, my right to bear arms, my right to live and defend my life are scum sucking fascist maggots period. Who are unworthy of the badge they wear. A disgrace to all the decent Law Enforcement men and women who have dedicated their lives to serve to the community not self service. They are bold faced lying scum bags who violate the oath they swore to up hold and protect the Constitution of The United States. These low life's are worst than traitors unworthy of the badge they wear and the privilege of being citizens of this nation. They need to move to the soviet union and join the KGB and be with swine who think as they do.
I like to think that those kinds of dirty cops are rare and few between

 

[jrfoxx]

do you attend class in uniform? do you have a trade that involve ticking off folks who might actually act on their angry impulse (as opposed to internet heros)

Yup, done both, so I guess I'm no "internet hero". Feel free to try again.
Also, where does it say these LEO's were attending class in uniform? is it standard LEO practice for off-duty (or not on the clock, for the hair splitters) cops to attend college classes in uniform?
I've taken MANY college classes, and NEVER seen an LEO in uniform, but know for a fact there were some LEO's in attendance taking classes.Seems like that solves that issue, since there is no evidence thats the issue at hand, and I've attended classes in my military uniform (yes, some people made it quite clear wha they thought of me, and were quite ticked off at my presence, and any one of them could have easily gotten a weapon and harmed me, just like an LEO, or anyone else)

might want to do a litle research before attacking me with the "internet hero" remarks. A simple search here and on TFL and APS should straighten you out on that..

 

[SomeKid]

razorback, nice try, however the laws governing K-12 and colleges are different. You cited the K-12 law. Try again.

 

[hotshotshoting]

and you somekid cited law that was 2 years older than hb 218

 

[209]

This is a long response and the first part is totally off the subject of police barred from carrying, but the thread kind of slipped this way, so....

divemedic said:

To be realistic, cops are pretty much above the law. That is why so many of them have these license plates:


They are a signal to other cops that means: "Don't write me a ticket, I am one of you."

There are even websites on the net where cops complain about cops busting other cops. Many of them feel entitled to a free pass, and that is a large source of friction between the police community and the public they serve. If you as a LEO are really concerned with the negative opinion that many people have of the police, the police must do a better job of eliminating the bad apples.

Cop or not, I am always against any law that allows one group to have a privilege that is not available to everyone.

Ahh, now it kind of comes to the meaning and use of discretion. Most states allow officers to use discretion. I'd say it's actually all states, but I may be wrong- places like CA may have eliminated it. Now since officers are human, I'll be the first to say that occasionally one of them may use their discretion inappropriately. But, in most cases, I find a fairly proper use of discretion by most of the officers that I work with and the ones I know through my dealings with other departments.

The millions of times each year that officers uses discretion appropriately never makes the news. The first time an officer uses it inappropriately, it's a national story and then used as cannon fodder by those who like to point to the police as the enemy.

But, that's the game the media plays and the way public perception is formed. Kind of like what happens when a law-abiding citizen who happens to have a gun runs afoul of something. It turns into a media circus and is then used by the anti-gun folks as cannon fodder. I am constantly amazed by the people that seize on those types of reports and then go to the rooftops so they can lend their voice to the herd of outraged citizens. The media loves and only continues to print those stories because.... they sell!

Without getting into specifics, I use a sliding rule when using discretion in traffic situations and other minor violations of law.

Keep in mind, I'm not talking felony issues here when my use of discretion is going to be viewed with a great deal of scrutiny.

But for said minor violations, some of the criteria I use are based on the job of the person. Some of it is based on life-experiences I have had. Some of it is based on the person's attitude and some is based on what comes back during the check process. A few other things come into play. It's a total overview of the incident I am dealing with at the time.

Again without naming my personal criteria since this is for all intent purposes a public forum and available to anyone. Anyone who can figure out who 209 is could conceivably make me eat my words some day in court, so I'll just give you a laundry list I have gleaned from quite a few officers as to their criteria when looking at jobs of people they stop for minor violations:

Top Ten​

Police officers (should require no deep thinking as to the reason) Emergency room nurses (should require no deep thinking as to the reason)
Emergency room doctors (should require no deep thinking as to the reason)
State Attorneys (should require no deep thinking as to the reason)
Judges (should require no deep thinking as to the reason)
US Marines (probably based on prior service by the officer)
US Army soldiers (probably based on prior service by the officer)
EMS personnel (should require no deep thinking as to the reason)
Local and State politicians (probably based on a desire to keep one's job)
Federal politicians (same as above)

Next on the list​

Family members of some of the above people (actually this one fit into both eleven and twelve since the officers had two distinct groups of family members listed)
School teachers (again no clue why)
People with CCWs (Surprised- aren't you? It probably made the list because a lot of the officers polled were firearms instructors)
Tow truck drivers (I don't know about this one- I guess some officers like tow truck drivers)



That list was generated last year by two groups of officers I dealt with during training. And actually the list goes on, but the above are examples of some of the top ones. I will grant you the list is the result of unofficial polling and subject to the small segment of officers who were predominately from one region and state, but I also communicate with officers from other places in the states and those I've queried say most of the occupations listed are used in determinations in their areas.

Discretion is used. Traffic officers do it everyday. I work in an area that has rather low speeds posted (mostly 25 to 35 zones). My criteria when running speed enforcement is 15 over if traffic is fairly light and there aren't a lot of pedestrians around). Another officer I know uses 10 over. I've heard tell that there is an officer in a neighboring town that uses 5 over.

I'm pretty strict when it comes to illegal parking in disabled parking spaces. I know other officers that don't even look at that.

I know of officers that have made "other" arrangements for a local politician in lieu of taking enforcement that have "done the right thing". I personally know of an officer that arranged to get a local politician home when found to be DUI lose his job because it was viewed as an improper use of discretion.

I know of officers that have let an officer off with a pass and had nothing said. I know of several incidents where officers have lost their job by using that particular discretion based on the reason for the interaction.


As to the use of the "blue line" plates, I have to laugh. We have a police association in CT that give members stickers and placards. The rule-of-thumb in one town in the state is that people using those are probably criminals since the officers themselves have diluted the identifiers by making them available to everyone the officer know. Consequently the stickers are being used by the wrong people. The officers in that area won't even use them anymore.

Same goes with FOP stickers, blue-line plates, etc. Police officers are human. Once someone comes up with a secret squirrel code we can use to ID ourselves to another officer, some nitwit tells everyone in his extended family and in his network of friends what it is and the use of it no longer signifies the original meaning because it has become common knowledge. It is then worthless and no longer an identifier.

I don't share the same morals as every other police officer. I don't have the same ethics. Still I try to do my job as best I can. I probably do things some segment or special group would consider wrong. But I do them based on my understanding of the law, my moral compass, and my ethics. I don't consider myself above the law. If use of discretion is to be viewed as a bad thing, we can always go to a "Judge Dredd" type society where the letter of the law is followed. No sane person wants that.

Back on topic-

Now, as to the law in TN - Evidently it is the law if what is posted here is true. Each police officer affected by it will have to make their own decision as to the way they will handle it. I'm in a rather spirited discussion with a lot of LEOs on another forum about the whole topic. The general consensus is the law is stupid. I know what I would do if it was the law around these parts. But, I'm not telling....

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Here is a point that has not been brought out in the thread. Officers make many arrests and put people away for months, years, and life. At the trials, some of these 10 time losers make death threats against the officer and his family, to be carried out by the looser when he gets out of prison, or by another gang members who are already on the street. The need for the officer to carry anytime and anywhere is essential for protecting himself, his family, or even you, if the need arises. I don't think non LEO's have the burden of death threats hanging over their heads on a daily basis.

You might not think so, but then you'd not be thinking correctly.

I don't know where you are an LEO. I live near a medium-size city. Actually, more like between two medium-size cities. And in the past few years we have had numerous known gang members walk out of trials for serious felonies as free men because witnesses were too intimidated to testify against them. We have had other cases where witnesses who were willing to testify were killed before the cases came to trial. To my knowledge, at this very moment there are three cases of young men who simply disappeared within the past three years. They went out -- one for a pack of smokes, one to look at a used car, and I don't remember the reason for the third -- and have never been heard from again. What we have NOT had in this entire state within my lifetime, so far as I know, is anyone actually getting out of prison and trying to kill an LEO, or having one of his "associates" try to kill an LEO.

I'm sorry, but the argument that police officers are more at risk than "civilians" is a non-starter. You'll have to do a lot better than that to justify any argument that police are more "entitled" to carry when off-duty than the rest of us.

 

[TAB]

209 what does some ones occupation have to do with them getting off with a warning or getting a ticket it? ( I understand you did not say what yours are... but thats not the point)

Personally, I could not sleep at night if I were use that... Same with race, gender, age...etc

The abuse of power( discretion is power) is wide spread, I do beleave it time to remove that power.

No, bs... If I were to pull over my own mother, I could not let her relation to me, be a desiding factor. Atleast if I wanted to be able to sleep at night.

 

[hotshotshoting]

i know plenty of leos who will ticket other leos for breaking laws as well...

 

[Treo]

Good Lord ! Will this accursed thread never die?

 

[Old Dog]

Yep, probably time to shut this one down ... even Treo and I have run out of comments.

 

[209]

Good Lord ! Will this accursed thread never die?

Probably not until it's locked.

But since we have managed to go astray, I'd invite people to open a new one on Armed Polite Society where we could delve into some of the side issues.

 

[209]

209 what does some ones occupation have to do with them getting off with a warning or getting a ticket it? ( I understand you did not say what yours are... but thats not the point)

Personally, I could not sleep at night if I were use that... Same with race, gender, age...etc

The abuse of power( discretion is power) is wide spread, I do beleave it time to remove that power.

No, bs... If I were to pull over my own mother, I could not let her relation to me, be a desiding factor. Atleast if I wanted to be able to sleep at night.

You know that's a trick question often asked to propective candiates during oral boards (i.e. what if you stopped your mother for.....?). Usually, the ones that answer as you stated are viewed as extremely rigid in their thinking and don't make the top of the list.

I have worked with rigid officers. I didn't like it much and neither did the public. That's why discretion is usually allowed in various statutes. America doesn't want (or didn't want) the police to be robots at least when the laws were penned. Petition your state to change that. I doubt you'd be happy with the consequences.

 

[Intune]

The general consensus is the law is stupid. I know what I would do if it was the law around these parts. But, I'm not telling....

Excellent. So we all should legally carry. This thread remaining open has been a real eye-opener.

Without getting into specifics, I use a sliding rule when using discretion in traffic situations and other minor violations of law.

Me too! That's freakin' amazing. Whoa, TWINS!
Oh, you're the guy in the car BEHIND me? Let's get our slide rules out & work on this little problem. The last thing I want to hear is, "what we have here... Is a failure... To communicate..."

'You have the right to remain silent." Impossible.