Disarmed by uninformed officer

[Bryanmc]

So let's see. We have a "peace officer", moonlighting as a security guard in a liquor store, who doesn't understand the law as it pertains to liquor stores, who basically illegally disarmed a citizen who was legally carrying a weapon, then improperly handled that weapon (never made clear and safe), who wouldn't return the weapon to the civilian after being shown that he (the peace officer) had an improper understanding of the law and then handed the not clear and safe weapon to an individual unknown to him. Does that about sum it up? I'd be having a long conversation with both his bosses.

[warnmar10]

So let's see. We have a "peace officer", moonlighting as a security guard in a liquor store, who doesn't understand the law as it pertains to liquor stores, who basically illegally disarmed a citizen who was legally carrying a weapon, then improperly handled that weapon (never made clear and safe), who wouldn't return the weapon to the civilian after being shown that he (the peace officer) had an improper understanding of the law and then handed the not clear and safe weapon to an individual unknown to him. Does that about sum it up? I'd be having a long conversation with both his bosses.

Mmm hmm.

[oohrah]

Does your wife have an LTC? If not, the deputy violated the law by giving a gun to an unlicensed person. I would report the ignorant --- in any event.

MPA......as long as she immediately concealed it.

Yes, I know MPA. Since the OP did not say originally, we didn't know if she had an LTC, and just handing an unconcealed weapon to someone, to me, was irresponsible. And in the transition, there was an unconcealed weapon, regardless of which law. A nit, I realize.

[jed]

Since more info has come out, did not clear the weapon nor ask for ID or LTC and handed a loaded weapon to a third person who he has not asked for ID or LTC not to mention his total ignorance of carry statues, I say again this guy has no business wearing a badge. No amount of training is going to fix this kind of stupid. As someone else said, how many times has he already pulled this? He is a tragedy waiting to happen.

[mcscanner]

Since more info has come out, did not clear the weapon nor ask for ID or LTC and handed a loaded weapon to a third person who he has not asked for ID or LTC not to mention his total ignorance of carry statues, I say again this guy has no business wearing a badge. No amount of training is going to fix this kind of stupid. As someone else said, how many times has he already pulled this? He is a tragedy waiting to happen.

I highlighted the important parts. Training addresses all, but the intangible issue of the officers mindset is unclear. If he is prideful and arrogant training will be an uphill struggle. Its to soon to tell if wearing a badge is outside his abilities (mental attitude). Its a difficult job and I don't like to see them make mistakes like outlined in earlier parts of this thread. The sooner this is brought to his superiors attention the better for all.

Mike

[canvasbck]

Here is the email I sent teh Sheriff this morning:

Sheriff Wagner,
I had an encounter with one of your deputies this past Friday evening that I felt needed to be brought to your attention due to the apparent gaps in the deputy’s training that may need to be addressed.

On Friday evening, 03/11/16 I entered White’s liquor store on highway 6. I was openly carrying a handgun in a kydex hip holster. Deputy <redacted> was behind the counter at the store. While shopping, I noticed Deputy <redacted> coming towards me. At the time I assumed that the deputy was about to check my LTC. Deputy <redacted> approached me from my left side (which happens to be my gun side). Without saying anything, the deputy reached out with both hands and began removing my firearm from the holster. I was surprised that he was disarming me, but moved my arm out of his way and asked what he was doing. The deputy stated that I could not have the firearm in the liquor store as he removed the firearm from my holster. I stated that there were no signs posted at the entrance, but if he was giving me verbal notice, I would put the firearm back in my car. Deputy <redacted> then stated that there were signs posted. I informed him that I was certain that there were not any signs posted as I have been in the store before and always check before entering. The deputy then stated that signs were not needed since it is illegal to carry in a liquor store. I politely informed him that there were no laws prohibiting license holders carrying firearms into a liquor store. Deputy <redacted> then stated that “they get more than 50% of their income from the sale of alcohol”. I then stated that he is mistaken, the 51% law pertains to locations where on premise consumption takes place.

Deputy <redacted> and I then proceeded outside the front door of the store so that he could “show me the signs they have posted”. At this time he still had my firearm in his hands. After allowing Deputy <redacted> sufficient time to read all of the signs on the front of the store, I pointed out the blue TABC sign that prohibits unlicensed possession of a firearm. No 30.07 signs were present nor were there any other signs indicating a prohibition of carry by a license holder.

Once Deputy <redacted> was satisfied that there were in fact no signs, I offered to place the firearm back into my vehicle before going back into the store to complete my purchase. The deputy stated “No, I’ll put it in your car”. As we approached my vehicle, I informed the deputy that my wife was sitting on the driver’s side of the vehicle and I requested him to place the firearm on the passenger side. He stated that he would just hand the firearm to my wife. I expressed apprehension concerning him handing off the still loaded firearm to her and requested that he allow me to remove my holster so he could place the firearm into the holster before handing it off. He agreed and I removed my holster and handed it to the deputy. Deputy <redacted> placed the firearm into the holster and then handed the holstered firearm to her. In the process of handing it to her, he swept my wife’s face with the muzzle of my holstered firearm (this was relayed to me later by my wife, I did not witness it myself). Deputy <redacted> never cleared the weapon, nor did he ever ask for identification from myself or my wife.

I am concerned about numerous aspects regarding this encounter. The two most troublesome aspects, from my perspective, of this encounter are:
1. This individual is representing BCSO while working an extra job in a liquor store without learning the laws that are applicable to liquor stores. I do not expect law enforcement to memorize the entire criminal code, but I would think that an officer would learn the laws that were applicable to specific situations that he has placed himself into. At the least, I would think that an officer would be sure of laws that he is taking physical action on.
2. The deputy placed himself into an extremely dangerous situation when he took it upon himself to reach out with both hands to remove a firearm from a holster. Had I not been compliant, or had I not recognized him as a LEO, the situation could have escalated extremely rapidly and would have had tragic results. Deputy <redacted> is extremely fortunate that I am not someone who had hostile intentions, nor am I one of those more fanatical 2nd amendment proponents. Had deputy <redacted> chosen to engage one of those other types of individuals, the situation would have ended much differently.
I appreciate you taking the time to hear my concerns and I am confident that you will take appropriate steps to address the issues outlined. Please feel free to contact me if you need any further clarification on this matter.

<signature redacted>

And his reply.....

Mr. <redacted>,

Training on the laws on open carry have been held for BCSO employees. I will check to make sure that Deputy <redacted> gets a refresher course on the laws.

Sincerely,

Charles Wagner, Sheriff
Brazoria County, Texas

I have to say, I'm underwhelmed

[Jusme]

Here is the email I sent teh Sheriff this morning:

Sheriff Wagner,
I had an encounter with one of your deputies this past Friday evening that I felt needed to be brought to your attention due to the apparent gaps in the deputy’s training that may need to be addressed.

On Friday evening, 03/11/16 I entered White’s liquor store on highway 6. I was openly carrying a handgun in a kydex hip holster. Deputy <redacted> was behind the counter at the store. While shopping, I noticed Deputy <redacted> coming towards me. At the time I assumed that the deputy was about to check my LTC. Deputy <redacted> approached me from my left side (which happens to be my gun side). Without saying anything, the deputy reached out with both hands and began removing my firearm from the holster. I was surprised that he was disarming me, but moved my arm out of his way and asked what he was doing. The deputy stated that I could not have the firearm in the liquor store as he removed the firearm from my holster. I stated that there were no signs posted at the entrance, but if he was giving me verbal notice, I would put the firearm back in my car. Deputy <redacted> then stated that there were signs posted. I informed him that I was certain that there were not any signs posted as I have been in the store before and always check before entering. The deputy then stated that signs were not needed since it is illegal to carry in a liquor store. I politely informed him that there were no laws prohibiting license holders carrying firearms into a liquor store. Deputy <redacted> then stated that “they get more than 50% of their income from the sale of alcohol”. I then stated that he is mistaken, the 51% law pertains to locations where on premise consumption takes place.

Deputy <redacted> and I then proceeded outside the front door of the store so that he could “show me the signs they have posted”. At this time he still had my firearm in his hands. After allowing Deputy <redacted> sufficient time to read all of the signs on the front of the store, I pointed out the blue TABC sign that prohibits unlicensed possession of a firearm. No 30.07 signs were present nor were there any other signs indicating a prohibition of carry by a license holder.

Once Deputy <redacted> was satisfied that there were in fact no signs, I offered to place the firearm back into my vehicle before going back into the store to complete my purchase. The deputy stated “No, I’ll put it in your car”. As we approached my vehicle, I informed the deputy that my wife was sitting on the driver’s side of the vehicle and I requested him to place the firearm on the passenger side. He stated that he would just hand the firearm to my wife. I expressed apprehension concerning him handing off the still loaded firearm to her and requested that he allow me to remove my holster so he could place the firearm into the holster before handing it off. He agreed and I removed my holster and handed it to the deputy. Deputy <redacted> placed the firearm into the holster and then handed the holstered firearm to her. In the process of handing it to her, he swept my wife’s face with the muzzle of my holstered firearm (this was relayed to me later by my wife, I did not witness it myself). Deputy <redacted> never cleared the weapon, nor did he ever ask for identification from myself or my wife.

I am concerned about numerous aspects regarding this encounter. The two most troublesome aspects, from my perspective, of this encounter are:
1. This individual is representing BCSO while working an extra job in a liquor store without learning the laws that are applicable to liquor stores. I do not expect law enforcement to memorize the entire criminal code, but I would think that an officer would learn the laws that were applicable to specific situations that he has placed himself into. At the least, I would think that an officer would be sure of laws that he is taking physical action on.
2. The deputy placed himself into an extremely dangerous situation when he took it upon himself to reach out with both hands to remove a firearm from a holster. Had I not been compliant, or had I not recognized him as a LEO, the situation could have escalated extremely rapidly and would have had tragic results. Deputy <redacted> is extremely fortunate that I am not someone who had hostile intentions, nor am I one of those more fanatical 2nd amendment proponents. Had deputy <redacted> chosen to engage one of those other types of individuals, the situation would have ended much differently.
I appreciate you taking the time to hear my concerns and I am confident that you will take appropriate steps to address the issues outlined. Please feel free to contact me if you need any further clarification on this matter.

<signature redacted>

And his reply.....

Mr. <redacted>,

Training on the laws on open carry have been held for BCSO employees. I will check to make sure that Deputy <redacted> gets a refresher course on the laws.

Sincerely,

Charles Wagner, Sheriff
Brazoria County, Texas

I have to say, I'm underwhelmed

Yeah me too, that doesn't even begin to cover the issues, and there should have been at least an apology. The Sheriff, if not already fully versed on the law, should have taken the time to read up on it and provide you with a list of items the deputy should be given a refresher cours.

You stated that this occurred in a different county that where the Deputy was working off duty, maybe a similar letter to the Sheriff of the county where this occurred, might be in order. It sounds a lot like the sheriff you wrote hopes to sweep this under the rug. It's your call, but these are the type of situations I feel that LTC holders should make sure get addressed. Not by in your face demonstrations, but polite professionalism that you have already displayed.

Thanks for the update.

[Jusme]

Here is the email I sent teh Sheriff this morning:

Sheriff Wagner,
I had an encounter with one of your deputies this past Friday evening that I felt needed to be brought to your attention due to the apparent gaps in the deputy’s training that may need to be addressed.

On Friday evening, 03/11/16 I entered White’s liquor store on highway 6. I was openly carrying a handgun in a kydex hip holster. Deputy <redacted> was behind the counter at the store. While shopping, I noticed Deputy <redacted> coming towards me. At the time I assumed that the deputy was about to check my LTC. Deputy <redacted> approached me from my left side (which happens to be my gun side). Without saying anything, the deputy reached out with both hands and began removing my firearm from the holster. I was surprised that he was disarming me, but moved my arm out of his way and asked what he was doing. The deputy stated that I could not have the firearm in the liquor store as he removed the firearm from my holster. I stated that there were no signs posted at the entrance, but if he was giving me verbal notice, I would put the firearm back in my car. Deputy <redacted> then stated that there were signs posted. I informed him that I was certain that there were not any signs posted as I have been in the store before and always check before entering. The deputy then stated that signs were not needed since it is illegal to carry in a liquor store. I politely informed him that there were no laws prohibiting license holders carrying firearms into a liquor store. Deputy <redacted> then stated that “they get more than 50% of their income from the sale of alcohol”. I then stated that he is mistaken, the 51% law pertains to locations where on premise consumption takes place.

Deputy <redacted> and I then proceeded outside the front door of the store so that he could “show me the signs they have posted”. At this time he still had my firearm in his hands. After allowing Deputy <redacted> sufficient time to read all of the signs on the front of the store, I pointed out the blue TABC sign that prohibits unlicensed possession of a firearm. No 30.07 signs were present nor were there any other signs indicating a prohibition of carry by a license holder.

Once Deputy <redacted> was satisfied that there were in fact no signs, I offered to place the firearm back into my vehicle before going back into the store to complete my purchase. The deputy stated “No, I’ll put it in your car”. As we approached my vehicle, I informed the deputy that my wife was sitting on the driver’s side of the vehicle and I requested him to place the firearm on the passenger side. He stated that he would just hand the firearm to my wife. I expressed apprehension concerning him handing off the still loaded firearm to her and requested that he allow me to remove my holster so he could place the firearm into the holster before handing it off. He agreed and I removed my holster and handed it to the deputy. Deputy <redacted> placed the firearm into the holster and then handed the holstered firearm to her. In the process of handing it to her, he swept my wife’s face with the muzzle of my holstered firearm (this was relayed to me later by my wife, I did not witness it myself). Deputy <redacted> never cleared the weapon, nor did he ever ask for identification from myself or my wife.

I am concerned about numerous aspects regarding this encounter. The two most troublesome aspects, from my perspective, of this encounter are:
1. This individual is representing BCSO while working an extra job in a liquor store without learning the laws that are applicable to liquor stores. I do not expect law enforcement to memorize the entire criminal code, but I would think that an officer would learn the laws that were applicable to specific situations that he has placed himself into. At the least, I would think that an officer would be sure of laws that he is taking physical action on.
2. The deputy placed himself into an extremely dangerous situation when he took it upon himself to reach out with both hands to remove a firearm from a holster. Had I not been compliant, or had I not recognized him as a LEO, the situation could have escalated extremely rapidly and would have had tragic results. Deputy <redacted> is extremely fortunate that I am not someone who had hostile intentions, nor am I one of those more fanatical 2nd amendment proponents. Had deputy <redacted> chosen to engage one of those other types of individuals, the situation would have ended much differently.
I appreciate you taking the time to hear my concerns and I am confident that you will take appropriate steps to address the issues outlined. Please feel free to contact me if you need any further clarification on this matter.

<signature redacted>

And his reply.....

Mr. <redacted>,

Training on the laws on open carry have been held for BCSO employees. I will check to make sure that Deputy <redacted> gets a refresher course on the laws.

Sincerely,

Charles Wagner, Sheriff
Brazoria County, Texas

I have to say, I'm underwhelmed

Yeah me too, that doesn't even begin to cover the issues, and there should have been at least an apology. The Sheriff, if not already fully versed on the law, should have taken the time to read up on it and provide you with a list of items the deputy should be given a refresher course.

You stated that this occurred in a different county that where the Deputy was working off duty, maybe a similar letter to the Sheriff of the county where this occurred, might be in order. It sounds a lot like the sheriff you wrote hopes to sweep this under the rug. It's your call, but these are the type of situations I feel that LTC holders should make sure get addressed. Not by in your face demonstrations, but polite professionalism that you have already displayed.

Thanks for the update.

[madwildcat]

I would say this is reason everyone was suggesting a formal complaint. At minimum then at least someone has to take notice of what occurred. I hadn't seen any mention earlier of the "sweeping of the wife with the loaded gun". That would have been an automatic formal complaint in my book (assuming my wife didn't have his job first...). I get we are supposed to give LEOs a little leeway, but after asking directly for him to place it elsewhere, and them him doing something dangerous again, this just seems like someone who maybe doesn't need to be carrying a badge (or at minimum, not working a job that he doesn't knows the laws for).

[maverick2076]

That is a bull response. I would be filing a formal complaint both with his department and with TCLEOSE.

[baseballguy2001]

A refresher course?

Typical.

A formal complaint is the best course. Odds are this deputy and his boss will blow off the complaint too but at least there will be a formal record of it.

Just like all those months ago when a record vote of our representatives voting for Joe Strauss as speaker was oh so important. Or, the Dutton amendment wasn't needed, because ignorant LEO's like this clown and his boss wouldn't be any trouble to law abiding citizens like us.

If any of us had acted like this LEO, we'd be in BIG trouble. My respects to the carrier for keeping a cool head.

[WildBill]

I think the sheriff's response was all that could be expected from him.
He acknowledged that the deputy needed training and would get it.
It would not be proper to admit any wrongdoing or to discuss personnel or disciplinary matters in an email to someone outside the department.
My view is that the bigger mistake is the method that the deputy used to disarm the OP.

[canvasbck]

I think the sheriff's response was all that could be expected from him.
He acknowledged that the deputy needed training and would get it.
It would not be proper to admit any wrongdoing or to discuss personnel or disciplinary matters in an email to someone outside the department.
My view is that the bigger mistake is the method that the deputy used to disarm the OP.

Agreed, the deputy's lack of knowledge was addressed right there on the scene. He is now aware that it is NOT in fact illegal for a license holder to carry in a liquor store.

The bigger issue (the one that has danced around in my head for three days now) is the manner he chose to approach this situation. Had I not maintained SA, I would not have seen him coming towards me and would have reacted much differently when he touched my firearm. This could have been a fatal mistake on his part, not to mention the legal battle I would have been in post incident.

[mojo84]

The letter to the sheriff did indicate additional training is needed and the sheriff said that is what he planned to do. He addressed the concerns without admitting liability, which is understandable.

I had an encounter with one of your deputies this past Friday evening that I felt needed to be brought to your attention due to the apparent gaps in the deputy’s training that may need to be addressed.

The sheriff acknowledged they had been trained and this guy needed a refresher. What else would you reasonably expect since the guy was actually working for the liquor store at the time? If you want him fired? You should now file a complaint with the liquor store and they may terminate his employment there.

[C-dub]

I think the sheriff's response was all that could be expected from him.
He acknowledged that the deputy needed training and would get it.
It would not be proper to admit any wrongdoing or to discuss personnel or disciplinary matters in an email to someone outside the department.
My view is that the bigger mistake is the method that the deputy used to disarm the OP.

When was the last time anyone ca remember a LE department apologizing for anything? They typically don't, because in most or all situations where they would apologize, it means admitting fault. That would open them up to all kinds of legal and financial problems.

I guess we'll know if the OP OCs in that store again what the outcome was and how the "training" went. Since the Deputy was basing his prohibition of firearms in that location incorrectly on the 51% law I don't think the OP has received oral notification that he cannot carry in that store. He did not tell the OP that the store does not allow OC.