Disarmed by uninformed officer

[Jusme]

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.

That is true, but I would still expect some type of contact from the deputy, apologizing for his mishandling of the situation, (to put it mildly) Again I'm a big picture guy, and if one deputy is so misinformed on the issues, (not just the laws pertaining to 30.07, TABC, and improperly disarming/arming LTC holders,) then it may be a department wide issue that will result in a situation turning out like you describe. I do hope there is follow up between you and the Sheriff's Department, and that they provide you with more than a "we'll take care of it" answer.

[TresHuevos]

This whole incident illuminates why I don't agree with sworn peace officers being employed as private security officers. This exposes both the officer and the employing agency to litigation and physical risk. This past October we had a Constable in our county die in an altercation while providing security at a haunted house. Full disclosure, I am a manager for a private security company and yes, police performing these off duty jobs are viewed as competition. When I place one of my people at a site they are well trained in the particular post orders for where they are working. That includes that company's weapon policies as well as who can be on site and what to do if someone is a trespasser. Obviously the same can't be said for an off duty officer who just shows up.

[Abraham]

OP: Do you know any pro-gun print and/or TV journalists?

If "sweeping this under the rug approach" is all you get, consider the idea of finding a pro-gun journalists and tell him/her the story.

This specific LEO is, as others have noted, a menace to society.

What good is a refresher course if he didn't learn what he's supposed to learn the first time around?

The multiplicity of errors with your experience with him reads like a horror movie.

[mojo84]

What do you specifically want and expect from the sheriff?

[canvasbck]

What do you specifically want and expect from the sheriff?

I don't know what I want/expect. I just know that as of right now, I don't have confidence that the situation will be remedied.

I understand, in this litigious society, the reasons why they won't apologize, but to the person who was wronged, an apology from the wrongdoer goes a long ways and sends a message from the wrongdoer to say "lesson learned".

[Jusme]

What do you specifically want and expect from the sheriff?

I don't know what I want/expect. I just know that as of right now, I don't have confidence that the situation will be remedied.

I understand, in this litigious society, the reasons why they won't apologize, but to the person who was wronged, an apology from the wrongdoer goes a long ways and sends a message from the wrongdoer to say "lesson learned".

I understand your conundrum, If you push too hard the result may be posting of signs at liquor stores and other businesses in your area, if you don't push enough, there may be repeats of this type of action. I would as others have stated file a formal complaint against the individual deputy, his actions may not be representative of the department. This will cause the sheriff to at least launch an investigation, and give you more of a detailed report of the outcome. I would also send a letter to the County Attorney, describing these events, they will then know that there is a problem and may push the sheriff to take action. At least it will let them know that the county could be held liable in the event that something happens.

[Keith B]

What do you specifically want and expect from the sheriff?

I don't know what I want/expect. I just know that as of right now, I don't have confidence that the situation will be remedied.

I understand, in this litigious society, the reasons why they won't apologize, but to the person who was wronged, an apology from the wrongdoer goes a long ways and sends a message from the wrongdoer to say "lesson learned".

If all you are looking for is education for the BCSO Sheriff and Deputies, then I would go in to a formal meeting with the Sheriff and just let him know what transpired and that you do not have intentions of filing a formal complaint. Let him know your goal is to make sure that all of their officers get retrained on laws concerning legal carry. Most times when you go in and lay out your expectations, then they can work from that and craft a plan of attack that remedies the issue and satisfies the request.

If he hedges on any of it, then ask if a formal complaint is the appropriate avenue to get the issue resolved.

[E.Marquez]

This whole incident illuminates why I don't agree with sworn peace officers being employed as private security officers. This exposes both the officer and the employing agency to litigation and physical risk. This past October we had a Constable in our county die in an altercation while providing security at a haunted house. Full disclosure, I am a manager for a private security company and yes, police performing these off duty jobs are viewed as competition. When I place one of my people at a site they are well trained in the particular post orders for where they are working. That includes that company's weapon policies as well as who can be on site and what to do if someone is a trespasser. Obviously the same can't be said for an off duty officer who just shows up.

With all due respect... I strongly disagree.
The premise is// "personal responsibility"
I think you will agree, you and your company do not have access to any information or needed training not available to any commissioned law enforcement officer.
I think you will agree, that any officer that ask for and accepts an off duty assignment will do so with some advance warning (time before reporting for duty)
And IF that officer is professional as most are, they are completely capable of being as informed as any of your private security officers plus the come with the benefit of much broader training and background in most cases PLUS powers of arrest.

Sorry, no, you as a private security company do not have ANY advantage not available to a LEO. You are commended for taking advantage of the knowledge available to you and ensuring your employees are properly informed.. but personal responsibility applies here, the LEO (and your employee.. not you) is personally responsible to know and understand the rules, policies and laws that are going to be expected to observe, enforce, maintain.
A tall order for a LEO in general, but a simpler task for a specific job...like say maintain good order in a liquor store.

[TresHuevos]

This whole incident illuminates why I don't agree with sworn peace officers being employed as private security officers. This exposes both the officer and the employing agency to litigation and physical risk. This past October we had a Constable in our county die in an altercation while providing security at a haunted house. Full disclosure, I am a manager for a private security company and yes, police performing these off duty jobs are viewed as competition. When I place one of my people at a site they are well trained in the particular post orders for where they are working. That includes that company's weapon policies as well as who can be on site and what to do if someone is a trespasser. Obviously the same can't be said for an off duty officer who just shows up.

With all due respect... I strongly disagree.
The premise is// "personal responsibility"
I think you will agree, you and your company do not have access to any information or needed training not available to any commissioned law enforcement officer.
I think you will agree, that any officer that ask for and accepts an off duty assignment will do so with some advance warning (time before reporting for duty)
And IF that officer is professional as most are, they are completely capable of being as informed as any of your private security officers plus the come with the benefit of much broader training and background in most cases PLUS powers of arrest.

Sorry, no, you as a private security company do not have ANY advantage not available to a LEO. You are commended for taking advantage of the knowledge available to you and ensuring your employees are properly informed.. but personal responsibility applies here, the LEO (and your employee.. not you) is personally responsible to know and understand the rules, policies and laws that are going to be expected to observe, enforce, maintain.
A tall order for a LEO in general, but a simpler task for a specific job...like say maintain good order in a liquor store.

I can agree with some of what you are saying here but not all. To say that there is not ANY advantage is disingenuous. Any job at all is based on the premise of personal responsibility but, do the peace officers have a dedicated supervisor with knowledge of that post that will come by and check on them and relieve them in the case of an emergency? Can the officer simply report a felony in progress outside of his post without having to abandon that post and make an arrest? Does a private security company expose the community to a potential litigation or short/long term disability issue if the correct amount of "personal responsibility" is not exercised?

[mojo84]

My son is working his way through college as a armed security patrol supervisor. He will tell you himself, comparing a $10-12/he standing post security guard to a full time police officer working as,part time security is very seldom going to come down in favor of the security guard when it comes to quality of training, experience and qualifications. There are exceptions to everything but all things considered, a real cop beats a rent a cop.

[TresHuevos]

My son is working his way through college as a armed security patrol supervisor. He will tell you himself, comparing a $10-12/he standing post security guard to a full time police officer working as,part time security is very seldom going to come down in favor of the security guard when it comes to quality of training, experience and qualifications. There are exceptions to everything but all things considered, a real cop beats a rent a cop.

I believe that your son is correct in most cases. My main complaint, as a taxpayer, is the liability that the community assumes so that the police officer can make some extra money. I can't hire an off duty building inspector to come down and bless off on my family room addition can I? Why not? If a police officer can use their authority on behalf of a business owner who is paying them then the same should be true for the rest of the government employees who wish to operate on a quid pro quo basis for extra money.

[Bryanmc]

There are exceptions to everything but all things considered, a real cop beats a rent a cop.

Considering the instant discussion. that's not necessarily true. In reference to my statement earlier in this thread, it would have been better if the deputy was acting as a private security guard vs a LEO (I was quickly informed that Texas peace officers have jurisdiction everywhere). If he was acting as a peace officer when he disarmed the op, he was enforcing a law that didn't exist. If he was acting as a private security guard, he committed an assault. Whichever authority he was acting under he was over the line. Were I the OP. I would have preferred the sheriff to be a little more distinct in his reply, something like "Thank you for the information, the situation will be addressed immediately."

[BarbarianLou]

TresHuevos, If you needed something inspected by a building inspector outside of traditional business hours, and you had the proper permit, I'm sure most would agree to stop on by for few extra bucks.

I think it's pretty obvious your bias is causing interference with how you are viewing this situation.

You are not posting a lot of facts, but yet you are representing your opinions as fact.

Private security, or off duty LEO's hired as private security, still have to operate within the confines of the Law.

I would rather find out about this one LEO's behavior in a situation like this, rather than see about it on the news when he makes a gaff ON duty, and it's too late to correct. This was not a good situation at all, obviously, but no one got hurt, and we can all learn from it.

The main point here is to let someone know, so the situation and training can be corrected.

[E.Marquez]

So you agreed with all the important points I made, except you can't make any money from the LEO working by provided what you feel is advantageous supervision.. Ok I'll concede your point you can't make any money from a LEO working that job. The rest is a biased personal opinion, not fact.
You state the LEO can not report a felony without leaving his post? Is suggest the off duty LEO could use a phone and never leave his post.. much like a Security guard would use his phone to call the supervisor or a Fellow employee can call it in?.. I feel you're responding in a way that you perceive will support your position, not stating facts.

I your apparent care and feeding of your employees .. Many managers do so less aptly. So respect were it is earned.
The rest we will just have to disagree on.

[Abraham]

In the meantime, this particular LEO may or may not receive retraining as there's no way to be certain. (for all the good it may or may not do, given his efforts at the liquor store considering he'd presumably already received 'training' that apparently didn't stick for any number of reasons... )

Or, perhaps when training fails potentially due to this LEO's inattention or disregard or whatever, this LEO has the attitude of - "Hey, do what I tell you. Don't be bugging me about the fine points of law, boy"

Some of us seem to have the attitude of being ever so gentle in our attempt to stop this LEO's irresponsibility.

Let's approach the Sheriff with our hat in our hands and gulp, ask the nice Sheriff how he recommends we go about doing what we can to prevent similar arbitrariness.

Sweeping this incident under the rug is putting a band aid on a very serious problem.