False Imprisonment, CCW, and "Code Adam"

[GruntII]

Just my 2 cents.After 15 years wearing a badge and 23 years of ccw experience 1) no one is gonna stop me from leaving unless they are a cop, and 2)0if you see a child struggling with an adult raising sand and you do intervene you damn well better be right. Intervention is dangerous enough when you really know what is going, when you are acting under a preconcieved idea and little actual knowledge the legal and personal consequences can be devastating.Way too many kids get away with throwing fits because they didn't get a coke, a toy or the ice cream cone they think they deserve, misread the situation do some movie hero crap and good faith will not get you out of the situation you get into if you make a mistake. Observe, watch and be a good witness. Act only if you are ready to accept the consequences of being wrong.

 

[gc70]

I would definitely do more than jump and scream and hope someone else does something. A wise old martial arts instructor who valued personal honor above all else once said to me, "Right action first, worry about your fears later. Lives may depend on it." I always try to keep those words in my mind, which sometimes finds me at odds with people who give more thought to consequences than actions.

And if the 'abduction' were just a misunderstanding? Oh well, life's a b----. At least I could go to bed at night knowing I did the right thing instead of knowing I didn't act when I could have.

Here's the scenario: you see a lone person enter a store and a couple of minutes later you see the same person leaving the store, holding a squirming child screaming "No, no, no."

Would you stop the person from leaving the store?

Would you take the child away from the person?

Would you physically injure the person if they tried to resist?

Would you be willing to be present the next time my son returns his daughter to her mother after his court-ordered visitation?

 

[jd25q]

And how do you know that this child you see throwing a hissy fit is being kidnapped? How do you know it's not just a typical brat who wanted to stay and look at the toy aisle for another 20 minutes when Mommy said it was time to go home and cook supper?

Well, the thread started with the scenario of a code adam, so not only do you have a kid screaming, but a child is also reported missing.

I don't think you tackle mom going out the door, but any parent can appreciate the situation and the need to be absolutely sure under those circumstances.

 

[Atticus]

I have plenty of compassion. If I find your lost child, I will return it to your ASAP. If it is injured and in need of medical care, I will do my utmost to see that it gets the needed care. It if it being harmed by a larger/older individual, I will endeavor to stop the harm being done to it. If you ask nicely I may help you look for it, but again your losing it does not grant you any moral or legal authority to detain me if I clearly do not have it.

It? You used the word eight times. You obviously have an issue with kids.

 

[Soybomb]

Trying to detain someone you have no authority to detain seems like an excellent way to immediately get a face full of OC or decked, then later get sued. Ymmv, but I'd be quite certain of who I was trying to hold against their will.

 

[Art Eatman]

Atticus, "it" is easier to type than "he or she". Yeah, yeah, yeah, generic "he"...

Art

 

[cz75bdneos22]

just because you have a gun does not make you a police man.
don't try to be one or you in for a heap of trouble.
as one that works with potential escapees, i only report to police the relevant/pertinent info relating to escapee's last moments with me before they scrammed. it's not my job to detain/apprehend them...that's law enforcement officers duty.

 

[Mark in California]

Do Not Bring A Temper Tantrum To A Gun Fight

I see a lot of "no one will stop me" sort of statements. Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

Before everyone jumps all over me, this comes from real life. We had an Police VS Bad guys ON GOING SHOOTING in the parking lot. The manager ordered the doors locked. He and another manager loaded two 12 ga shotguns. His greatest fear was those on the outside getting inside and second someone leaving the store and walking into a crossfire. No one was allowed out until the police gave the all clear.

The end result was three people taken into custody, and five employee cars being shot 18 time. You know, they towed them away as evidence. The managers car was hit 6 times.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I see a lot of "no one will stop me" sort of statements. Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

There is a difference between voluntarily remaining in a locked store and being unlawfully detained. Trying to leave the store is not criminal, nor is forcing yourself through a barrier that is serving to hold you captive.

Before everyone jumps all over me, this comes from real life. We had an Police VS Bad guys ON GOING SHOOTING in the parking lot. The manager ordered the doors locked. He and another manager loaded two 12 ga shotguns. His greatest fear was those on the outside getting inside and second someone leaving the store and walking into a crossfire. No one was allowed out until the police gave the all clear.

If this happened, then your manager broke the law and violated the civil rights of those in the store. Besides, as a customer in the store, CCW or not, just how certain are you of the manager and other manager being the good guys? How about any other cusomers?

A wise old martial arts instructor who valued personal honor above all else once said to me, "Right action first, worry about your fears later. Lives may depend on it." I always try to keep those words in my mind, which sometimes finds me at odds with people who give more thought to consequences than actions.

So what if the martial arts instructor valued personal honor all else. What does that have to do with Code Adams? Right action first is great. As noted here for possible kidnappings in stores, just how do you determine what is the right action and doing it first when you don't know the kid or parent?

Also as for knowing or not knowing the right thing to do, how do you address a Code Adam when unbeknownst to you, it was a Code Adam diversion by thieves to have a chance to haul out desired items?
http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=6E0C9518-459A-4996-89FB-E109FC65B5B2

Being locked into a story

Maybe I am mistaken, but I seem to recall the Adam Walsh abduction was probably carried out with the napper taking Adam to a close door leading to a back room and subsequent exit. Ironically, had Code Adam procedures been in place when Adam Walsh was abducted, the procedure would not have stopped the abduction. The napper and Adam would have been gone long before the employees covered the exits.

I find this sort of irony bizzare. As a Code Adam would not have caught Adam's napper, the LAPD changing some officers and SWAT sidearms to 1911s is a fine idea, but making it happen came as a result of the North Hollywood bank robbery where the robbers wore body armor. The new guns and maybe calibers would not have been much help as they could not penetrate body armor either.

 

[SomeKid]

When I was little...

my martial arts instructor would take us (junior students) and have a little session on what to do if someone tries to kidnap you.

Some of you may have already heard of this, but it is for those who haven't.

What he taught us, was that if someone ever tried to take you, you scream as loud as you can:

HELP! HELP! YOU'RE NOT MY DAD! HELP! HELP! YOU ARE NOT MY DAD!

And he also taught us to punch the crotch, and sidekick the knees. (This was based off the scenario that they were leading you away by the hand. He had different tactics for different scenarios, but one theme tied them all together: screaming that the kidnapper was NOT your parent and yelling for help.)

All in all, it was a very good lesson.

He also pointed out very clearly if you just wail and whine people are going to think you are a brat, and you will get kidnapped.

Mark, shootout or not, nobody has a right to tell me I can't go where I want. If it gets me killed, it is my own fault.

 

[GruntII]

Before everyone jumps all over me, this comes from real life. We had an Police VS Bad guys ON GOING SHOOTING in the parking lot. The manager ordered the doors locked. He and another manager loaded two 12 ga shotguns. His greatest fear was those on the outside getting inside and second someone leaving the store and walking into a crossfire. No one was allowed out until the police gave the all clear.

As many have stated this was an illegal detention by arms, this can lead to all kinds of felony charges. Not to mention if you want to leave and a manager holding a shotgun says you can't being able to later say in the civil suit you were as afraid of the manager as you were the bad guys outside. A lot of people are infected with what I call the good intentions bug, your good intentions do not give you the right to interfere with my rights. It doesn't matter how much you think you are saving me or protecting me. Personally in the case cited above I would have tried to get criminal charges not only with the local authorities but with the ATF , I mean after all they transfered those weapons no matter long without paper work.I also would have file a civil suit and tried ot interest the newsies in the deraged cowboiy manager who held me inside at gun point. There are enough Shyster Shyster and & Shyster law firms out there to that on would take the case on speculation.

 

[DunedinDragon]

Which brings me to the issue of "Code Adam" I work at Toys R Us and yesterday we had a Code Adam called, I ran to the nearest wall and blocked the fire exits and then I started to wonder..."What if someone wants to leave, am I correct to stop them?"

I've been looking online at Florida Law but it's all greek to me.
What does this area of the law mean to those of us who exercise CCW?

Just to clarify this in terms of Florida law:

787.02 False imprisonment; false imprisonment of child under age 13, aggravating circumstances.--

(1)(a) The term "false imprisonment" means forcibly, by threat, or secretly confining, abducting, imprisoning, or restraining another person without lawful authority and against her or his will.

(b) Confinement of a child under the age of 13 is against her or his will within the meaning of this section if such confinement is without the consent of her or his parent or legal guardian.

(2) A person who commits the offense of false imprisonment is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3)(a) A person who commits the offense of false imprisonment upon a child under the age of 13 and who, in the course of committing the offense, commits any offense enumerated in subparagraphs 1.-5., commits a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

I think that's pretty clear...I certainly wouldn't detain anyone that demands to leave since I'm not to keen on losing my right to own arms as a convicted felon.

 

[joab]

An inattentive parent should not be a death sentence for the child

Anybody that can not spare five or ten minutes for the safety of a defenseless child has no honor and cannot possibly be a good parent and is way beneath contempt.

What in your life is so important that it can't wait ten minutes before you start your macho posturing?

 

[tellner]

If I don't have a child with me, I'm not a suspect. I would almost certainly voluntarily stop at the door. That's not the issue here. The discussion is about security guards (not police) who decide to hold me against my will. That merits some combination of nondeadly force and impressive lawsuits.

 

[Travis Lee]

Oh, come on.

ever hear of probable cause? Reasonable suspicion?

If I send my 13 year old into the store for a quick transaction, interrupted by a "Code Adam", why should he be forcibly restrained by self appointed store vigilantes? Legally, THAT is kidnapping.

And if I have my OWN child with me, do you think I'm letting some brain dead security guard separate us when things get wiggy? NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

I can see the perfect scenario of a predator going into a store, instigating a "CODE ADAM" and snookering store security into wresting a child from his parent and just hand him over to the predator, while the heroic store security hold the real parent for the police. Why not? Seems outlandish? Why not the same trick pulled by a non-custodial parent with no legal visitation? Do YOU have proof of parentage for that child?

What possible legal or moral justification is there for the practice of turning every retail store, mall, or place of business into a supermax prison when somebody CLAIMS that they lost some one?

If it is justifiable to "lock down" a toy store, why not set up road blocks for 10 blocks around? Pull over and interrogate every soccer mom with a child in the back seat? Why not search every home and business within 3 miles? And then everywhere within 15 miles when the child is still missing?

Such a SMALL inconvenience. And arrest or shoot all those who fail to see the logic.

I am getting sick of every forcible intrusion into our lives being justified by the cry of "It's for the CHIIIILDREN!" And somehow it's never enough to keep children safe.

--Travis--

 

[DRZinn]

You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

And you will either be beaten severely at that time or sued later. Depends on how many there are. Try to lock me in your store? I don't think so.

Now, if there's a shootout going on outside, I wouldn't even try to leave, BUT it's entirely my choice.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I think that's pretty clear...I certainly wouldn't detain anyone that demands to leave since I'm not to keen on losing my right to own arms as a convicted felon.

Since the section of statute you cited explicitly states that it applies to false imprisonment of child under age 13, I fail to see how it clarifies anything with regard to store personnel attempting to detain adult customers during a Code Adam. The statute you cited just makes it a felony to kidnap a kid -- which it already was before that law was passed.

I see a lot of "no one will stop me" sort of statements. Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

You have things reversed. Even in California, it is illegal for any property manager or owner to lock required fire exits, and it is illegal to detain people against their will in the absence of evidence that they have committed a crime. Wishing to leave a store is not a criminal act ... even in nutty California.

 

[Lupinus]

I work in a grocery store and in customer service, we are the ones who actualy decide to call the code adam and are expected to know the procedure from start to finish.

No one is forced to stay and the building is not sealed up tight.

Upon learning of a missing child the employee notified brings the parent (guardian, sibling, whatever) to the customer service desk where we get a discription call over the PA system a code adam which would sound something like this-

"Ladies and gentlemen may I have your attention please. We have a code adam, for those of you who do not know that means there is a missing child in the store. Thier name is (insert name) and they are (insert age and discription of the child and their cloths here) if anyone has seen this child please allert the nearist store employee. (insert name agian) please come to the front of the store your (mother, sister, whatever) is waiting for you."

In the mean time just about every employee looks for the child and certian employees are tasked with manning all the stores exits and checking the areas someone might take a child, the bathroom, offices, back rooms, etc for either the child or signs they were there such as cloths or hair clippings since people who abduct a child will sometimes attempt to make them look different or even of the opposit sex by changing their cloths and cutting their hair.

The store is not sealed. I repeat NOT sealed off and people can come and go as they please. Now there would be people at fire exits and those would be closed off for exit unless there was indeed a fire. Also in stores with more then one entrance and exit (mine for example has three) they might close the other doors and leave just the main entrance/exit open for people to go through, try and go through the others and you will be asked to go through the one which is still open. This is so that there is less areas for a possible kidnapper to sneak the child out through and also so that a manager can take the parent to the exit so that they can help watch to see if anyone is trying to sneak their child out. If the parent isn't moved to the exit and you have a child matching the discription you might be asked to move off to the side for a moment and the mother would be brought over to take a look and see if it's their child. But no one is forceably made to stay in the store agianst their will and certianly not anyone who doesn't even have a child with them. Now that isn't to say if you have a kid matching the discription and are trying to leave the store in a hurry you might not be tackled but it is a completly opposit of policy, someone like that is supposed to have the cars tag number writtin down. If the child isn't found in I believe ten or 20 minutes (not sure which but its one of the two) the polie are called and when they arive they take control of it and I have no clue what their procedure is.

Main reason for not locking it up tight is truthfully they probably don't want a lawsuit but from a practicle view we also don't know if the kid just wandered off as kids have a bad habit of doing sometimes and why we treat it as likly just a missing child but possibly an abduction and cover all bases.

 

[hoppinglark]

just to clear things up
as I clearly stated in my opening post I blocked a FIRE EXIT
Ya'know the ones where there is a big sign on it that reads, "Alarm will sound if door is opened"

Are there laws against using those when there is no fire?

Also I was wanting to know if someone has "Falsely Imprisoned" you, how is the legally correct way to act, but that has already been answered (in the 6th post).


*Edit-It's against Toys R US policy to have a firearm on the property so do you think I would be armed at work?

 

[TexasRifleman]

I see a lot of "no one will stop me" sort of statements. Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

Yes but you are in California, we are talking about what would happen in the United States. Since no one in your country can arm themselves, they are prisoners of anyone that tells them they are.

Big difference.

 

[Autolycus]

If I am attempting to leave and I do not have a child with me then I do not expect a hassle. If they try to stop me from leaving and I do not have a child I will create a hassle. However as the original poster stated he blocked a fire exit so its not a big deal. However I do not think they are being unreasonable in keeping a closer eye on people who are leaving with their children. As long as no one is detained.

And for the storekeeper with the 12 ga I would be suing. However common sense would probably prevail and most people would not leave if a gun fight was going on outside.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

just to clear things up
as I clearly stated in my opening post I blocked a FIRE EXIT
Ya'know the ones where there is a big sign on it that reads, "Alarm will sound if door is opened"

Are there laws against using those when there is no fire?

No, there are no laws against using them when there is no fire. A store may (for obvious reasons) prefer that customers not depart by unsupervised fire exits, and that's why such doors may be alarmed, but the law does not prohibit anyone from using them; only store policy does that.

The reason they are alarmed is that it IS illegal for them to be locked or blocked in such a way that they cannot be used at any time there are people in the building. Even in the event of a Code Adam, a person trying to exit through a fire exit would not be breaking any law, but if you attempt to physically prevent them from doing so YOU will be breaking the law.

 

[HankB]

Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

No, I don't believe you. I WILL leave, and if anyone other than a uniformed LEO attempts to physically impede my exit . . . they WILL be sorry. And breaking the door wouldn't be the criminal action - attempting to illegally imprison me would be the criminal action. (And unless I'm dragging along a kid screaming "He's not my Daddy, He's not my Daddy!" I'm quite confident there would be no attempt by well-meaning bystanders to "gang tackle" me.)

 

[sacp81170a]

As a uniformed LEO, I have to articulate a reasonable suspicion to detain someone at all. If I detain someone for more than a few minutes (currently the limit is about 15-20 minutes in my jurisdiction) I had damn well better be able to articulate probable cause. Even LEO's can't just detain people with no evidence. If an LEO were to order a store's doors locked to detain the patrons en masse, he or she would and should be in search of a new career very shortly unless there was an extreme threat to public safety requiring immediate action. (Godzilla or a pack of rabid wolves in the parking lot come to mind.)

Even then, you can't keep people who want to leave in spite of the danger, just like you can't force people to evacuate their homes when a hurricane is approaching. It's still a free country, and people are as free to be stupid as they are to exercise good judgement. Only a nanny state tries to save people "from themselves".

Don't expect the cops to get all panicked and trample over everyone else's rights just because you are panicked (justifiably or not) about your child's safety. I'm sympathetic to the parents out there, but I'm just as aware of the limits of authority. We will do our best to find a lost child or apprehend an abductor, but the best cure for criminals is an alert and self reliant public who refuse to be victims. That's why I'm pro CCW.

 

[Lupinus]

I see a lot of "no one will stop me" sort of statements. Believe me, if they lock the doors you will stay inside. You break the door down and you will be gang tackled because of your criminal actions.

Breaking down their door in such a situation would not be a criminal action as they are falsly imprisoning me and I have every legal right to attempt to get myself out of the building. And if that means I have to shove the store employee out of the way and break their pretty glass door I have every legal right to do so. Yes there is a missing child and I am more then happy to coperate with REASONABLE measures on the stores part such as having to walk a few extra feet to the exit which is open or if I have a child with me that matches the discription letting the mother come take a look to verify it is not their child.

But unreasonable measures, such as locking all the doors and not letting anyone out even those who obviously have a child, is not reasonable and depending on how they go about it or how hard they work at forcing you to stay may very well be a criminal act via false imprisonment or other laws depending on your local laws.

As for tackeling me let them try, not only will be both be feeling it tomorrow but I could use the lawsuit money.