Media report; NFL, MN law enforcement unions....

[ClydeFrog]

I just read a media item on Fox News that 2 MN area law enforcement unions are taking civil actions against the NFL for not allowing off-duty sworn officers to carry/possess loaded firearms on the team property(in the stadium).
NFL policy now states that only contracted LE, armed security & other authorized personnel can have weapons.
The Minnapolis MN area cops point out that in the 32 year history of the Vikings old venue they had no incidents or conflicts.
I know the NFL & other athletic events amped up the security measures after the Boston Marathon incident. The huge increase in NFL players involved in gun arrests & problems(crime, suicide, domestic violence, etc) may have led to the new SOPs too.
I see the law enforcement union members point. In some states, cops & federal agents are given exempt status from "no gun" places. Other locations or jurisdictions only apply to on duty or contracted security(off-duty LE).

Id heard of a off duty police officer who was busted at a NBA arena in Washington DC. He had a weapon & his badge/ID but still faced charges.

Clyde

[JimDandy]

Isn't way too early to go all "Heart of Atlanta Motel" on the NFL. Carry itself is not yet confirmed (nation-wide) as a right, let alone a civil right, let alone a protected class. It's just too big of a jump.

They likely lose on LEOSA too.

(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--
`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or
`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

What I wonder if it might work, and would thus work for everyone, is those states that don't ban in stadiums/concert halls and so forth, and have state preemption. Most of these stadia are government owned and operated- Bringing to mind the earlier story reported in here about some apartment complex banning firearms for tenants. I don't remember many of the details beyond it was government owned, with a contracted property management service who made the decision and then ended up backing down when challenged legally.

ETA: I suppose the key there is how much the stadium is operated by the stadium staff and how much by the NFL when the NFL rents it to put on their games.

[ClydeFrog]

A small college in central Florida near the "Space Coast" recently changed the SOPs/rules re; guns.
A student was attacked in his personal vehicle on college property. He shot at his violent attacker & ended the event.
The school first wanted to expel him for violation of the weapon policy but then a Florida 2A group got involved & took legal action against the college.
The school then modified the gun/carry policy to be more in line with the state laws.
In most other areas of Florida, college students or staff could keep firearms in their personal vehicles on school property but not carry them; open or concealed.

Clyde

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Got a link for that?

[ClydeFrog]

Check www.clickorlando.com .
News article; Brevard College To Change Gun Policy dated; 02/04/2014.



Clyde
PS; Id post a direct media link, but sometimes it can't format on my mobile version.

[Tom Servo]

Direct link to the article is here.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by ClydeFrog

I see the law enforcement union members point.

I see their point, too: They think they're special, and should be entitled to privileges denied to all other law-abiding citizens.

Sorry, but in a venue where there are armed personnel authorized to respond to problems, an off-duty cop IMHO is no better than a private citizen with a carry permit. If the cops can carry, the rest of us should be allowed to carry. If we can't carry, the cops should not be allowed to carry.

Are you going to try to argue that off-duty cops never get drunk or belligerent at sporting events?

[JimDandy]

I certainly won't. By the same token I won't say off-duty cops aren't still cops, as shown by the policies of their department still applying to them off duty.

There are some basic facts. Cops can carry where John Q Public can't. There is no logical reason why they can be trusted to do this with the only variable being whether they are punched in or out on the time clock.

Neither of which apply to an NFL game. Either the stadium is private property while rented by the NFL, and the NFL as tenant sets firearms policy, or the stadium is public property, and the State legislature sets firearms policy.

[ClydeFrog]

US law enforcement officers who are sworn are obligated by oath to enforce the laws/ordinances/statues etc. Both on & off duty.
Are they "special"? yes
Now does that mean they are not accountable for their acts/statements? No.
If they get intoxicated or fight, they face criminal charges the same way a regular person would. They might even get a write-up or - career actions because of it.

John & Mary license holder are not cops & they don't have arrest powers.

[KyJim]

There's a stronger argument for off-duty carry inside an NFL stadium if the off-duty officer is within his or her jurisdiction. They still have arrest powers, etc. even if off-duty. If outside their jurisdiction, they have no greater rights than anyone else unless the legislature grants them special dispensation. I certainly understand why they want to carry; the same reason I would want to carry.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by ClydeFrog

Are they "special"? yes

C'mon.

Do you really expect us to believe that these union LEOs ALL want to be allowed to carry at professional sporting events so they can enforce laws in the event of a problem? No way, Jose. They want to carry because they want their bang-sticks, and because they think they're better than the rest of us so they should be allowed to have their bang-sticks where we aren't.

[Ruger480]

I have to agree with Aguila on this one. It is the mentality that they are special that leads LEOs to think that they are above the law and they don't have to abide by the same rules.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the commitment it takes to be in law enforcement, but part of that includes abiding by all laws and not asking for special privileges.

[ClydeFrog]

As noted, if the sworn LE officers are within the jurisdiction, then yes the unions/labor groups have a valid dispute(s) but I wouldn't think just because I have a valid CCW or carry a concealed gun that makes me some type of cop or that I have the same standards or requirements as a LE officer.

I don't think every sworn LE officer who goes to a athletic event or music concert will get intoxicated or want to fight everyone.
Do police officers get drunk sometimes? Yes! But so do other groups or professions.
In 2009, I worked in a nightclub in a popular tourist destination. We had a group of firefighters who were completely jacked up. One fireman was so drunk he couldn't even stand up! He was also 39 years old.

[steve4102]

Originally Posted by JimDandy

Neither of which apply to an NFL game. Either the stadium is private property while rented by the NFL, and the NFL as tenant sets firearms policy, or the stadium is public property, and the State legislature sets firearms policy.

The New MN stadium is built with tax dollars, whether that makes it a Public building I am not sure.

I would think that the "Renters" of a "public" building have some legal rights to set Firearm Policy. My question is, who are the "renters" of the MN Stadium during NFL games? I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the MN Vikings have signed the Lease agreement for the New Stadium and they are the renters, not the NFL.

If the NFL are not the official "renters" then public building or private building they should have no say in firearm policy.

[JimDandy]

There's a stronger argument for off-duty carry inside an NFL stadium if the off-duty officer is within his or her jurisdiction. They still have arrest powers, etc. even if off-duty.

How many states have a version of the WASHINGTON MUTUAL AID PEACE OFFICERS POWERS ACT That seems to imply any Washington State local police officer has arrest powers anywhere in the state:

In response to an emergency involving an immediate threat to human life or property;

meaning any time an off-duty officer WOULD take action, no matter where they're from, they have jurisdiction in states with something similar to this on the books. While mutual aid agreements I've seen in a quick search require a semi-formal request, and approval from the requested agency, this appears to cover those emergency situations where such a request isn't prudent because of a time factor.

This is probably at least part of how the city of Bellevue was able to discipline one officer for not arresting another officer for driving under the influence on a Seattle street in the news story I linked above.

While I think ClydeFrog is right the officers have a valid point, I'm not sure they have a valid dispute. Either it's a private property when the NFL is a tenant(or Rarely owner) and they can set the firearms policy, or it's public property and the State Legislature sets the policy in accordance with whatever "sensitive location" prohibitions will pass muster. Even LEOSA didn't extend to allowing retired and off-duty officers the ability to carry in sensitive places.

As has been reported in numerous locations some Texas law I haven't been able to find yet allows/requires off duty officers to carry while attending (At least) Dallas Cowboy games armed with no mention of Houston's stadium either way. Without such a law distinguishing them, I don't understand how a challenge based on their LEO status is any more or less applicable than a basic 2A challenge to public property (Assuming the stadium is actually public property) and no state law banning or allowing the banning of firearms from the property.

Can anyone explain what the actual grounds they're challenging on is?

[ClydeFrog]

If you wanted to contact the police group directly they may have a media rep or a public affairs specialist.
They also may have put out a press release explaining these issues.

I heard about the Bellvue WA police incident. I was in Bellvue for a few days in the summer of 2012. It's a nice, upscale area of Seattle. It's not ritzy or glamorous but it's decent place to live or work.


edit: www.MPPOA.com is the MN law enforcement union group behind the civil actions. Dennis Flagherty(check spelling) is the group's point of contact.

Also, there is a media article in the Minnapolis Star-Tribune from 02/19/2014 about the civil actions.
Clyde

[JimDandy]

Oh parts of Bellevue are very upscale/glamorous. With the "Microsoft Millionaires (the guys who were at Microsoft at the outset) some neighborhoods are Mansion Centric. Bellevue is often referred to as a bedroom community for Seattle. Like a lot of folks around here, I live in Bellevue, and go to Seattle to work.

I can't find a link to a filing yet but I'll keep looking. I did find a link to a news story that had more in depth reporting of the suit. TwinCities.com reports there's A Minnesota State Law

Subd. 17.Posting; trespass.

which includes

(g) This subdivision does not apply to:
(1) an active licensed peace officer; or

That the police are claiming prevents the NFL from enforcing their no firearms policy on off-duty law enforcement.

The NFL's response according to the story appears to be a version of:

The ticket is a license to attend the game.

If you bring a firearm, they revoke your ticket/license

Off-Duty Law Enforcement aren't being trespassed for a firearm, but instead for having a revoked ticket/license.

[KyJim]

How many states have a version of the WASHINGTON MUTUAL AID PEACE OFFICERS POWERS ACT That seems to imply any Washington State local police officer has arrest powers anywhere in the state:

I've dealt with a similar statute in Kentucky a couple of times but, IIRC, it only allowed outside-the-jurisdiction authority in response to specific requests from another police agency or in multi-jurisdictional task force sorts of things.

[ClydeFrog]

I think in some situations & jurisdictions a "off duty" sworn LE officer can use a "good guy letter" to be armed or authorized to have weapons while outside of his/her duty station(jurisdiction).
Author & legal use of force expert Massad Ayoob wrote a few online & printed articles about the subject. He travels a lot on business & is also a sworn LEO. I think he's a reserve captain but Im not 100% sure.
Ayoob wrote of a incident where a young NYPD officer was dejected at a major airport because he thought he'd make a big "gun collar" for busting Massad Ayoob.
Ayoob flashed his NYPD approved documents & away he went, .

[JimDandy]

Yeah, Ayoob is a LEO. It sounds like you're talking about LEOSA, which has limitations. It doesn't trump private property owners from setting firearms policy, Safe Schools or other Sensitive Locations.

[ClydeFrog]

I think Ayoob was writing more about the times where he'd get his PD chief's documented authorization to assist another LE agency in a different jurisdiction. He'd be off duty but on "official business".

Clyde
PS; Years ago, I had a little "dust up" with a guy who claimed to be a US Treasury agent. He had a federal shape badge & creds. I was working security & found him in a back parking lot(private property) with a unknown female.
The "T man" was quite irate & became aggressive. I calmly explained I could contact the local sheriff's office & we'd settle the whole matter. The angry guy took off after I said that.
I recall him screaming; "I can go where I want! I'm a federal agent!".