Off duty Police told they can't carry at University

[cassandrasdaddy]

jrfoxx you really gonna try to say that wearing your military uniform is equivalent to being a cop in an area where hes worked? well maybe if you were attending class in afghanistan. i'd say nice try but i'd be lying

 

[divemedic]

I wonder with all the bluster, how many cops have:

1 arrested or even drawn on anyone while off duty
2 had an attempt made on their life while off duty (not merely a threat- an actual attempt)

I would be willing to bet that the numbers are so close to those of the general population as to be statistically insignificant.

 

[deaconkharma]

+1 Somekid!

SomeKid
Senior Member



Join Date: 08-25-05
Location: SE Tennessee
Posts: 1,455 Most of you chiming in don't know TN law.

In Tennessee, police are NOT on duty 24/7. They work their shifts, and they go. If a LEO goes onto a college campus carrying a firearm NOT while acting as LEO, they are committing a felony. The federal cited does NOT over-rule this state law, also this is NOT a new campus policy, it is actually bringing the campus into compliance with the law.

"It is worth noting that when the TN legislature crafting our laws, the made every effort to NOT grant LEOs any special exception. It is in fact illegal for a policeman who is working his shift to take his lunch break in a restaurant that serves alcohol, because firearms are prohibited in places that serve beer/alcohol for on site consumption. The only legally valid excuse is that the officer entered as LEO because of his job. Personal lunch break during his shift is NOT a valid excuse.

When the campus cops say they rely on the other cops, what they really mean is they don't want to tell their friends no.

I for one am glad to see some special treatment end. Once I can carry on school grounds, then I will happy to let government men do the same. I find the convenience excuse disgusting. It would be convenient for me as well, but they don't care."

I couldn't have said it better myself, very well put. I have lurked this site for a few years(off and on perusing etc) before joining and I seem to recall alot of pumping up the federal LEO carry law because it would be a foot in the door for us CWP holders. Still haven't seen the foot in the door help us though. I for one am in the same category as it seems you are, tired of the promotion of uber-class citizens.

 

[ProficientRifleman]

PremiumSauces said:

That story confuses my feeble little mind.... it says the officers "have a problem" with this new policy that is designed to "keep students safe". Why would they have a problem with keeping students safer?

You know, that was the exact question I had....

 

[Reyn]

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

Do you have a link?

 

[Checkman]

Okay lets put this thread to rest. Off Topic.

 

[Intune]

I love it. The mods left this thing open long enough for the "bashers" & the "1*ers" to run out of steam! That's a first. Now the only thing left is to discuss the original post in a thoughtful/respectful manner.

 

[jrfoxx]

jrfoxx you really gonna try to say that wearing your military uniform is equivalent to being a cop in an area where hes worked? well maybe if you were attending class in afghanistan. i'd say nice try but i'd be lying

Your right, what would make me think wearing a U.S. military uniform in foreign countries, especially in ones where Americans and especially America'a military, arent exatly liked, would be similar? There is NOTHING more loved in the Middle East than the U.S. military, especially after we invavded a nearby Middle Eastern country

But it really doesn't matter,since you still fail to show me that the officer's in question are actually attending classes in thier uniforms, let alone are REAQUIRED to attend classes in uniform, so I still fail to see who what you are saying is even remotely relevant to the topic at hand. Show me some evidence that these LEO's are required to wear thier uniforms while attending thier classes. I wont hold my breath waiting though.

And even beyond that, I'm not seeing any evidence that not in uniform, not working in thier official capacity, LEO's who are simply taking a college class, are in any more danger than any other student in the class, and thus are more in need of having a gun to protect themselves, or any more deserving of the right to carry a gun to protect themselves, than all the other students.

How many not in uniform, not working in thier official capacity, simply attending a college class, LEO's have ever been attacked in class, or while on the campus. I'll make it easy, and say how many in the last 100 years, as that should give you PLENTY of room to find evidence of it happening. I know for a FACT that quite a few non-LEO's have been attacked while on campus in the last 100 years, so there is plenty of evidence that people DO get attacked on campus, but they arent allowed to carry, so show me the evidence of LEO's getting targeted disproportionatly to other students on campus, that proves they have a need to carry, while the other people who were attacked didnt.

I personally think the cops should be alowed to carry on campus. My only complaint is that everyone else should be able to also. I fail to see why they are at any more risk than anyone else on campus.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

god you gonna make read back to find the link to the article that had the police spokesman complaining about how his boys hada go straight from work to school or vice versa? i'll try but i'm gonna hate ya

 

[Intune]

If an officer is off duty and not in uniform he is not supposed to carry his gun into class.

Many officers told NewsChannel 5 that even off-duty officers can protect students. A few students said they would not feel comfortable with someone out of uniform carrying a weapon. John Cothern, MTSU senior vice president, said if an officer feels a real need to carry their weapon into a classroom, the officer could get permission from campus police.

Can I? If I feel a "real need?" :banghead:

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

thank you! i had just started searching and darndest thing it appears this whole mess started with a version of campus carry and the antis lashing out against it. si in this case the cop haters line up shoulder to shoulder with the antis who when an effort waqs made to allow carry for all came up with this

"In a spate of common sense, the MTSU’s Student Government Association rejected the notion that guns on campus would keep students safer.

With the recent violence striking college campuses, it was no surprise the Student Defense Resolution came before the SGA Thursday.

The resolution asked the university’s administration to lobby Tennessee’s General Assembly or Board of Regents to repeal laws and policies that make carrying guns on MTSU’s campus illegal.

The student leaders rightfully determined armed students would be no guarantee that, should a situation like Virginia Tech occur, students or faculty could stop such a massacre.

Also, when police respond to such a disturbance on campus, how can they determine where the real threat is, if everyone is carrying a gun?

A more common incident of campus violence occurred recently when a male student assaulted a female student. Allowing guns on campus would have done nothing to prevent that tragic event.

Looking at the bigger picture, as MTSU SGA Sen. Lemon Keith pointed out, college students are more prone to alcoholism and depression than other segments of the population. These are two issues that do not mix well with firearms.

With the emotional nature of young adults, it would be easy to see a situation quickly revolve out of hand when guns are involved, be it in a dorm room, a sporting event or anywhere else on campus.

Also, no matter how extensive a permit-holder’s training, there is no guarantee every bullet will be well placed. And in a crowded college environment, a misplaced bullet can end a young life.

Tennessee Board of Regents policy contends firearms are not compatible with a learning environment.

Even if the resolution passed, no change would have been made in regarding its policy, meaning the General Assembly would have had to change laws statewide, allowing guns in every college.

The student who introduced the resolution declared a higher purpose than mere campus safety. He invoked the right to bear arms, claiming there should be no exclusions to the Second Amendment.

In fact, we make numerous exclusions to those rights, airline travel being an obvious example.

A wise man once said, “You’re right to throw a punch ends at the beginning of my nose.”

And when a bullet is involved, there’s much more at stake than a black eye. "


agendas make strange bedfellows


though i like lay with dogs get fleas better

 

[jrfoxx]

Actually, that still wont matter if they are wearing thier uniforms in class, as you'll still need to provide evidence that in or out of uniform, cops who are simply attending a class get target disproportionatly to anyone else in the class, since THAT is really the key here, the uniform thing would just bolster your position that they MAY be targeted since people will at least be able to tell they are a cop, whereas when they are dressed like everyone else, you cant tell, thus making targeting them specifically a WHOLE lot harder and less likely.

Notice the cops at the Applalachian School of LAW, and the mall you mention, were NOT specifically targeted by the shooter, in fact, it would seem he had NO idea there were any cops around. Seems to indicate that LEOs not in uniform, going about normal life with the rest of us, are not easy to I.D. as cops, and thus, dont get singled out.

Also, regardless of what the spokeman you referred to said, I find it hard to beleive they are REQUIRED to be wearing thier uniforms, and dont have 5 minutes to change at the station (I'll bet they have a changing area there, as well as a safe, sucure place to store the uniform and any weapons) before going to class. I've gone straight from jobs to class, and never had a problem changing out of uniform, or grungy work clothes. It just isnt hard to do at all.

ETA: so I'm in agreement with the antis for saying that everyone should be allowed to carry on campus? I dont see people here saying that no one, cops included, should be allowed to carry. People here are just saying that if LEO's feel that campus is a dangerous enough place that THEY need to carry to protect themselves or others, then why cant the rest of us?

The antis want to disarm EVERYONE on campus, cops included, whereas we want the cops to carry, and want US to be able to carry too. Thats kinda the direct OPPOSITE of the anti's, so it's a bit ridiculous to say we are saying the same thing as the antis are. I'd say nice try, but I'd be lying.


If a psycho comes in and starts shooting, I'm in as much danger as the cop in the room, and feel I have just aas much right to defend myself, and the others in the room, as he does. Besides, what if there is no off-duty cop in my class? kinda harda for the off-duty cop with a gun to protect me if he isnt there, isnt it? There is NO way I can guarentee that there will be a cop with a gun in all my classes, but I CAN guarentee that I will be in every class I attend, so If I was allowed to carry, I could do what the cop who isnt there would. If an off duty cop with a gun makes me safer, as people are claiming, than why wouldnt ME having a gun make me ever safer yet, since I will always be there, but the cop wont.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

send some cash to the bradys for
'lecause" through the sga

 

[Intune]

The concealed carry vote took place IIRC in Oct. '07. The date for the OP video is 8.21.8 and the MTSU security sent an email to the local PD stating "off-duty police officers will not be allowed to CCW in classrooms but could seek permission to have the weapons on campus."?? Car carry, so safe....

 

[Guns and more]

i had just started searching and darndest thing it appears this whole mess started with a version of campus carry and the antis lashing out against it. si in this case the cop haters line up shoulder to shoulder with the antis who when an effort waqs made to allow carry for all came up with this

Can anyone figure out what this guy is trying to say?

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

the anbti gunners in the sga (student government) in responce to some actions by campus carry have responded by pushing this lil piece of policy through.and the folks on here are lined up in lockstep with em. funny in a trgic way. see guys who claim to identify with rtkba being punked by the antis. their cop phobia overwhems em.

 

[Happiness Is A Warm Gun]

the anbti gunners in the sga (student government) in responce to some actions by campus carry have responded by pushing this lil piece of policy through.and the folks on here are lined up in lockstep with em. funny in a trgic way. see guys who claim to identify with rtkba being punked by the antis. their cop phobia overwhems em.

Interesting how see same facts differently.

The LEO have been a tool by the antis.
How many times have you heard "people don't need a gun, just call the cops".
How many times have cops illegally stopped people for excerising their RKBA?
How many times have cops (FOP, Police Chiefs, etc) spoken out against some law (conceal carry, open carry, lifting waiting periods, etc)?

Of course in all those cases the LEO are excempt. The antis aren't stupid enough to infringe on the rights of cops, just the rights of the other 99.99999% of "serfs" in this country.

There should be NO (as in absolutely) no additional "rights" for cops. Now LEO shouldn't have less rights but they shouldn't have more.

If cops want to carry into a diner then citizens should be able to carry in the same diner.
If cops want to carry when they go to school then citizens should be able to carry when they go to school.

What you seem to be missing is that NOBODY if for restrictions on right to carry. Some of us are against "special protection" for LEO. If LEO get their way then CCW will still be illegal on campus EXCEPT LEO will get an exception. I am tired of all these exceptions.

If LEO lose this fight then maybe when legislature proposes some laws to allow CCW on Campus FOR EVERYONE then LEO will get on board. News reports will have LEO talking about how it is a good idea. FOP will release a press statement saying they support it. Police Chief will be on record as saying "allowing law abiding people right to self defense makes sense and reduced crime".

As long as LEO have this "special class" it will never happen. Divide and conquer has been anti's use for LEO. Give LEO enough rights that they don't mind depriving everyone else.

I also don't buy the whole "only cops are in danger argument"
what about:
Bail Bondsmen
Correction Officers
Social Workers
Child Protective Services
Car Repo man
IRS Auditors
Mental Health Professionals
Substance Abuse (court mandated) Program Workers.

All these people are more likely than the average person to have someone want to harm or kill them. Why aren't they in a "special class"?

No "special classes" of citizens. PERIOD. If it takes cops losing this battle for RKBA to win the war then so be it.

Everyone should be able to carry or NOBODY should be able to carry. If cops want to carry they should get "on board" with RKBA.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

"Bail Bondsmen
Correction Officers
Social Workers
Child Protective Services
Car Repo man
IRS Auditors
Mental Health Professionals
Substance Abuse (court mandated) Program Workers."

sadly many of those are barred from carry for stupid reasons

 

[jrfoxx]

So, because some people who arent cops, were trying to be allowed to carry thier guns, just like the cops, are in lockstep with the antis becasue they wanted to carry guns too? That doesnt even make any sense at all.

Also, the fact that the antis retalliated to the carry movement by saying that even cops cant carry on campus isnt the fault of the carry movement people, since THEY arent the ones who said no one can carry, including cops.

By your definition, all people whould NEVER push for more gun/carry rights at all, ever, anywhere, because the antis might respond by passing more anti-gun, anti-carry laws. pretty ridiculous position to take.

Also, the fact that the antis retalliated and screwed the cops, makes the people who caused the retaliation cop haters? I fail to see how you come up with that. How does me, or anyone else, wanting to carry a gun on campus make me a cop hater, even if my efforts cause SOMEONE WHO ISNT ME, to screw cops? If anything, it's the antis who pushed this through that would be the "cop haters", not the people who just wanted to carry on campus to protect themselves just like the cops want.
I dont see anything that shows that this campus carry movement said "if we cant carry, then neither should the cops" and/or that THEY were the ones to make the rule that cops cant carry. Seems like you are making up some facts that arent there. People who want to carry are not at fault for the actions of the anti-carry people.The anti-carry people are. If you want to lay blame on who screwed the cops, and is thus a "cop hater", blame the antis who actually made and are enforcing the rule, as THEY are the only ones at fault for students, cops or not, not being allowed to carry.

also, I'm still waiting for all the links to articles about off duty cops getting disproprtionatly target on campus.

What you seem to be missing is that NOBODY if for restrictions on right to carry. Some of us are against "special protection" for LEO. If LEO get their way then CCW will still be illegal on campus EXCEPT LEO will get an exception. I am tired of all these exceptions.

If LEO lose this fight then maybe when legislature proposes some laws to allow CCW on Campus FOR EVERYONE then LEO will get on board. News reports will have LEO talking about how it is a good idea. FOP will release a press statement saying they support it. Police Chief will be on record as saying "allowing law abiding people right to self defense makes sense and reduced crime".

As long as LEO have this "special class" it will never happen. Divide and conquer has been anti's use for LEO. Give LEO enough rights that they don't mind depriving everyone else.

Well said. We arent trying to take LEO's rights to carry away, we just want to have the same rights to carry. Not really that hard to understand, and I fail to see how that is "cop hating", "cop bashing", or ant-LEO or ant-carry AT ALL. We just want to have our rights too, and dont see why having special classes of citizens with more rights than the rest is a good thing.If these cops need to have a gun off duty, on campus, to protect themselves and others, then so do the rest of us. When the shooting starts from some whacko, I fail to see how only the LEO's are in danger, and thus the only ones who need to carry. I can get mugged, murdered, etc either at random, or as revenge from someone I ticked off (or who thinks I have done something to him) just like cops can.

When someone gets out of prison, and decides to get revenge on the people who put him there, is he ONLY going to blame the cop that arrested him, or is he going to blame he person that called the cops, and then testified in court against him, too? Will they guy magically remember the cops face and name, but not the witness's, judges, etc, thus putting the cop at special risk? I fail to see how, logically. I know I'd be a LOT more ticked at the person who called the cops, ratted me out, and testified in court against me, than the op who simply showed up when called, cufed me, and took me to jail.

In my younger days, I sometimes hung out with people who got arrested, and dont recall ANY of them blaming the cop for it, and wanting revenge on him. They all blamed the person that ratted them out to the cops.

 

[TAB]

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.

That is intresting, not surprizing, but intresting.

See I see that question as one of morals/ ethics/ integratity, not about being a hard nose.

I've seen way to many bad LEOs flashing a badge to get themselfs out of trouble... Its time for it to stop. Recently there was a big uproar here about 2 officers being pulled over for DUI and letting them keep driving or going free. One was envoled in a single car accident, the other was allowed to walk home, thankful those envoled were cuaght, but both those LEA are still feeling the heat from those...

 

[win71]

State Agency

I have no idea how any department or state operates other than my own.
There are differences between off duty police shootings and "civilian" CCW type shootings. Now I am only considering my state and my departments policy. If an off duty officer becomes involved in a situation requiring the use of his police officer powers he may use them. It does not require a verbal announcement. Once that process starts anything that occurs is treated the same as if the officer were on duty. That includes shooting criteria, arrest powers, and any injury is considered the same as an on the job injury. If you have followed the departmental policies any civil liability is covered. It's exactly the same as if you were on duty because from the moment you exercise your police officer powers you are on duty. And yes you are on the books and will be paid.
There is, however, nothing in the policy that requires any off duty officer to take any action what-so-ever. In fact except in life or death situations, yours or someone’s else’s, it is discouraged. It's simply not a good idea to try to make an arrest with no mace, no stick, no cuffs, no radio, no back-up, and no way to get any of it.
Now before some start another rant about "see, another example of special treatment for off duty police" think about it. Once police officer powers are invoked in any situation the situation is treated exactly the same as if it occurred during any actual on duty 8 hour work shift.
Think of it as society getting a whole bunce of off duty cops on standby. For free ! If it wasn't like this no off duty cop in his right mind would ever get involved with anything while off duty.

 

[Powderman]

I've seen way to many bad LEOs flashing a badge to get themselfs out of trouble...

Well, since YOU are the on-view expert, how many would that be? And, since YOU have SEEN WAY TOO MANY, please ONLY post those you have PERSONALLY WITNESSED, IN REAL LIFE.

Please substantiate your claim.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

and what action you took to correct it. as a real man not on the internet

 

[bensdad]

Some for me and none for thee. C'mon! You guys know cops have "special" training, qualifications, circumstances, etc.

12 pages that read more like arf.com. The only difference is, there seems to be more LE support here.

 

[LongRider]

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 agree 100% My need is no less.
Is my life worth less than a police officer?
Is my wife's life worth less than a police officer's wife?
Are my children's life worth less than a police officer's children?
It can be reasonably argued and proven statistically that I my wife and children are at far greater risk of being victims of violent crime than an off duty police officer. Look at the crime stats

I don't think non LEO's have the burden of death threats hanging over their heads on a daily basis.

See above That is an assumption unfounded in fact. Every citizen that walks out their door is under a death threat or other crime of violence. Hell, they will come to your home and kill the whole family, you don't even need to leave your house to have a reasonable concern that you or your family will be killed. Regarding specific death threats from individuals. I know the head of an ER in Oakland CA I know gets more death threats than an average police officer. He gets them daily several times a day from some of the most well known and violent gang members in the nation. If one of their own club dies he gets death threats if he saves a life he gets threats from those that tried to kill him. Everyday. Oakland has the most violent trauma in the nation. While at work he has a detail of four retired SEAL's watching his back. I know I got to deal with them four of the biggest ugliest gorillas I have ever seen. Who swooped on me when I rode my motorcycle down from WA and stopped by to visit him. But the same officers who depend on him to save their lives and if they come in shot up you can bet they ask for him by name, the same officers that are so adamant about needing guns because of death threats. Do all they can so that he and no other law abiding citizen can get a carry permit. Correct me if I am wrong but it has been over twenty years since any non LEO got a carry permit in the Bay Area
Fact is unless you can show a verifiable stat that shows beyond any doubt that LEO are victim to more violent crime than the average citizen that claim is nothing but brady bunch style created fantasy created to justify the immoral unethical argument that LEO are a special class of human being whose life is more precious than anyone else's. Meant to disarm the people as the first step in creating a police state.