On duty black police officer held at gunpoint by racist security guard

[Citizen T]

Er...

In many jurisdictions, on-duty Sheriff's Deputies cannot be without their service weapon. Even if they're out of uniform, they're considered "on duty" 100% of the time and thus must have their service weapon with them.

You can't bar the weapons of law enforcement from a building. The only way a rule like that would apply would be on a military installation.

- - - Updated - - -



Erm...he couldn't legally do that. I feel like you don't understand the way Sheriff's Deputies work in many jurisdictions. The ones here cannot be without their service weapons. Like, they have to have their weapon on their person at all times, even when ostensibly "off duty," as they are considered to be "on duty" at all times.

If rules like that actually applied to law enforcement, they wouldn't be able to clear the building of an intruder, either. And I guarantee you that in the event of an active shooter or something similar, law enforcement is expected to show up with weapons.

At which point they are acting in their official duty as a law enforcement officer so would be able to legally enter. They cannot carry a weapon into a federal office while on personal business. LEOSA does not provide an exemption for entering federal buildings

- - - Updated - - -

No the security officer being arrested is because he pointed a gun at Gaston's back after he turned around. After he told Eklund that he could not disarm while on duty because it would be a violation.

It has nothing to do with systemic ignorance -- it has everything to do with pointing a gun at someone's back after they turn around to comply with orders.

After he said he could not comply the security officer attempted to arrest him. Drawing a weapon to arrest someone obviously armed is allowed. In any case I watched the video and he did not point his weapon at his back. He held his weapon at low ready with his finger outside the trigger guard

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

At which point they are acting in their official duty as a law enforcement officer so would be able to legally enter. They cannot carry a weapon into a federal office while on personal business. LEOSA does not provide an exemption for entering federal buildings

- - - Updated - - -



After he said he could not comply the security officer attempted to arrest him. Drawing a weapon to arrest someone obviously armed is allowed. In any case I watched the video and he did not point his weapon at his back. He held his weapon at low ready with his finger outside the trigger guard

And yet, once again, only one person is being charged with a crime in this instance.

[Captain N]

After he said he could not comply the security officer attempted to arrest him. Drawing a weapon to arrest someone obviously armed is allowed. In any case I watched the video and he did not point his weapon at his back. He held his weapon at low ready with his finger outside the trigger guard

He clearly pointed the weapon at Gaston's back as he's exiting the office.

As for your LEOSA Claim -- there was a 2013 Amendment that was extended to Local Police Officers as long as they're On Duty.

On-duty status determines LEOSA-eligibility. Thus, as long as the person meets the definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" in an on-duty capacity, whether an officer is a full-time, part-time, auxiliary, or reserve peace officer is not relevant in determining whether a person is a "qualified law enforcement officer" under LEOSA. LEOSA's definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" does not include a requirement that a person have law enforcement authority off-duty.[19][20][21]

It doesn't matter that Gaston wasn't there on official business -- he was On Duty and that's all that needs to be said about why Eklund was arrested.

[Milchshake]

He clearly pointed the weapon at Gaston's back as he's exiting the office.

As for your LEOSA Claim -- there was a 2013 Amendment that was extended to Local Police Officers as long as they're On Duty.

On-duty status determines LEOSA-eligibility. Thus, as long as the person meets the definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" in an on-duty capacity, whether an officer is a full-time, part-time, auxiliary, or reserve peace officer is not relevant in determining whether a person is a "qualified law enforcement officer" under LEOSA. LEOSA's definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" does not include a requirement that a person have law enforcement authority off-duty.[19][20][21]

It doesn't matter that Gaston wasn't there on official business -- he was On Duty and that's all that needs to be said about why Eklund was arrested.

Well conservative authoritarians gotta uphold their existing hierarchies. To do this, observe the blame the victim trope:

Like the pregnant woman getting shot, want being "pregnant correctly".

Authoritarian dipshits will try to explain how this officer wasn't "policing correctly".

They will poseur as authorities on the subject, whether being pregnant or policing. Just to make themselves look foolish.

[Captain N]

Well conservative authoritarians gotta uphold their existing hierarchies. To do this, observe the blame the victim trope:

Like the pregnant woman getting shot, want being "pregnant correctly".

Authoritarian dipshits will try to explain how this officer wasn't "policing correctly".

They will poseur as authorities on the subject, whether being pregnant or policing. Just to make themselves look foolish.

It was the same way in the thread where that vigilante group was pointing guns at border crossers. The one where the leader turned out to be psychopath that wound up in jail. Same people posted a law that clearly stated what needed to happen for these vigilantes to be in the right. Turns out that pointing a weapon at someone committing a misdemeanor crime, like crossing the border illegally doesn't fall under the having reasonable belief that a person is committing a felony part of the law.

[Collegeguy]

It might be, it might not be, can't really know for sure.

Everything might be racist, but we will never know for sure.

[Polyxo]

No mistakes for Gaston
No one brakes like Gaston
Certainly no one deescalates like Gaston

[Citizen T]

He clearly pointed the weapon at Gaston's back as he's exiting the office.

As for your LEOSA Claim -- there was a 2013 Amendment that was extended to Local Police Officers as long as they're On Duty.

On-duty status determines LEOSA-eligibility. Thus, as long as the person meets the definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" in an on-duty capacity, whether an officer is a full-time, part-time, auxiliary, or reserve peace officer is not relevant in determining whether a person is a "qualified law enforcement officer" under LEOSA. LEOSA's definition of "qualified law enforcement officer" does not include a requirement that a person have law enforcement authority off-duty.[19][20][21]

It doesn't matter that Gaston wasn't there on official business -- he was On Duty and that's all that needs to be said about why Eklund was arrested.

That only defines eligibility for LEOSA to carry a conceal weapon without having a conceal carry permit. Nothing there says that all LEOs are automatically always on official business. My god, that would allow LEOS to have pretty much unlimited authority all the time. You couldn't even charge one with trespass for not leaving your property if he was there and would not leave - even while off duty.

- - - Updated - - -

Well conservative authoritarians gotta uphold their existing hierarchies. To do this, observe the blame the victim trope:

Like the pregnant woman getting shot, want being "pregnant correctly".

Authoritarian dipshits will try to explain how this officer wasn't "policing correctly".

They will poseur as authorities on the subject, whether being pregnant or policing. Just to make themselves look foolish.

The only person I'm blaming is the one that broke federal firearms law. If that was me that walked into an IRS office armed, it would have ended much differently with me arrested and this would never have been news. I am required to know where and when I can carry. LEOS should also be held to at least the same level of accountability.

[Captain N]

That only defines eligibility for LEOSA to carry a conceal weapon without having a conceal carry permit. Nothing there says that all LEOs are automatically always on official business. My god, that would allow LEOS to have pretty much unlimited authority all the time. You couldn't even charge one with trespass for not leaving your property if he was there and would not leave - even while off duty.

It states that On Duty status is what is required for LEOSA Eligibility, and Gaston was On Duty -- if you want to twist the law to fit your own biases because you've been pretty clear that it 's OK to point weapons at dark skinned people in the past that's on you.

As for your Off-Duty nonsense that's also covered right in my quote. Qualified Law Enforcement Officer is any officer that is currently On Duty.

Furthering this nonsense by lying isn't helping your case.

[Citizen T]

It states that On Duty status is what is required for LEOSA Eligibility, and Gaston was On Duty -- if you want to twist the law to fit your own biases because you've been pretty clear that it 's OK to point weapons at dark skinned people in the past that's on you.

As for your Off-Duty nonsense that's also covered right in my quote. Qualified Law Enforcement Officer is any officer that is currently On Duty.

Furthering this nonsense by lying isn't helping your case.

You're exactly right. On duty officer is LEOSA eligible.

However, the problem you are failing to realize is that the federal law that forbids carrying firearms in a federal facility does not have a LEOSA exemption. LEOSA's only purpose is to allow qualified law enforcement officers the ability to carry their weapon in other jurisdictions and states where they do not have a concealed carry permit. Federal law does not allow carrying in federal facilities unless it's a law enforcement officer in their official duties. Going in to ask a personal question is not official duties.

[Ivanstone]

The only person I'm blaming is the one that broke federal firearms law. If that was me that walked into an IRS office armed, it would have ended much differently with me arrested and this would never have been news. I am required to know where and when I can carry. LEOS should also be held to at least the same level of accountability.

Careful. If you expect police officers to be held accountable once, you'll be expected to uphold that standard all the time. Your fellow conservatives might take away your right wing card.

[Citizen T]

Careful. If you expect police officers to be held accountable once, you'll be expected to uphold that standard all the time. Your fellow conservatives might take away your right wing card.

I'm a strong believer in police accountability. I'm very much against the modern idea of militarizing police. This more than any idea of racial bias is the biggest problem with the public trusting police - even if most of the public don't realize it. When police see their streets as a battlefield instead of their home something is wrong.

[Ivanstone]

I'm a strong believer in police accountability. I'm very much against the modern idea of militarizing police. This more than any idea of racial bias is the biggest problem with the public trusting police - even if most of the public don't realize it. When police see their streets as a battlefield instead of their home something is wrong.

And will you vote for politicians who will keep a leash on the police?

Somehow I doubt it.

[Citizen T]

And will you vote for politicians who will keep a leash on the police?

Somehow I doubt it.

If they have enough other issues that agree with then sure. I'm not a single issue voter.

[Jotaux]

So, was he there on official police business?

[Togashii]

Snip

Damn, you seem so disappointed that the ni... ah black man didn’t get put in his place. So sorry he didn’t get killed for your jollies. Next time though, eh?


Infracted.

[Ivanstone]

If they have enough other issues that agree with then sure. I'm not a single issue voter.

So never then.

Its pretty easy to take a stand on police accountability when you know that you'll have never have to do a damn thing about it.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The only person I'm blaming is the one that broke federal firearms law. If that was me that walked into an IRS office armed, it would have ended much differently with me arrested and this would never have been news. I am required to know where and when I can carry. LEOS should also be held to at least the same level of accountability.

So, if everything the Security Guard did was Legal and Right and everything the Deputy did was Illegal and Wrong...why is the Security Guard facing criminal Charges while the Deputy is pursuing civil action against both the Guard and his employers?

[Citizen T]

So never then.

Its pretty easy to take a stand on police accountability when you know that you'll have never have to do a damn thing about it.

My vote for local sheriff is heavily weighted on this issue.

[Jotaux]

So, if everything the Security Guard did was Legal and Right and everything the Deputy did was Illegal and Wrong...why is the Security Guard facing criminal Charges while the Deputy is pursuing civil action against both the Guard and his employers?

This is a pretty weak argument. How many times have we seen an innocent person killed by police with there being no legal repercussions? Did we say “well the officer wasn’t charged so they must have been in the right”?