Texas law overrides NFL policy banning armed off-duty officers at games

[AbeBeta]

So Texas law requires you to be armed even if you've been drinking? And further, to take action in some instances?

It would seem that if the law indicates the office is always "on call" then it would preclude them from drinking.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So Texas law requires you to be armed even if you've been drinking? And further, to take action in some instances?

No, it prohibits you from drinking in public places.

 

[Broges74]

It is very rare for an officer of the law on or off duty to lose his gun and esp to have it taken from him. A rogue black hole could devour the earth, too. Both are examples of being many standard deviations from the mean.

Whooa, a peace officer losing their weapon is exponentially more likely to occur than a black hole interacting with our solar system in the next 4 billion years. For someone using standard deviations, you sure ruined the foundation of your argument with that comparison .... Unless you are talking quantum mechanical black holes in which case they could be all around us right NOW!

Anyway, the NFL didn't see a reason to put up a fight but could have and won very easily. Anyone thinking the NFl needs Texas as much as Texas needs the NFL is fundamentally not understanding economics 101. The NFL is a business that generates billions of dollars each year
and the state of Texas is benefitting from their presents. Hence why the city of Arlington provided $325 million in funding to help build the new stadium.

 

[jobberone]

It would seem that if the law indicates the office is always "on call" then it would preclude them from drinking.

No. It precludes them from acting as peace officers if their judgment is impaired for any reason. They can drink what they wish off duty. Drinking and firearms don't mix.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Oh yes I do. Perhaps if you debated with facts rather than emotional reasoning and/or an agenda you wouldn't say such stupid things.

http://www.policeone.com/close-quar...Own-Guns-Likely-Will-Not-Change-R-I-Policies/

Over a recent six-week period, a handful of officers from Rhode Island to Illinois had their guns taken from them after they allegedly were overpowered by suspects or inmates. In each case, the ending was deadly.

The incidents have shaken departments and raised questions about safety procedures. But some law enforcement experts say not much will change _ and shouldn't. Despite the latest tragedies, they say there's no evidence that basic procedure is failing officers.

"You do not write policies to deal with the extreme," said Michael Brady, an expert in police procedures in the Administration of Justice department at Salve Regina University in Newport. "The one thing the incidents do have in common is that they are a reminder of how dangerous police work is."

On March 11, a defendant on trial for rape in Atlanta allegedly overpowered a courthouse deputy, took her gun and killed four people, including two law enforcement officers. A little over a month later, a Providence detective was killed with his own weapon while interviewing a suspect at police headquarters.

Police in Augusta, Ga., killed an inmate who fled on April 21 after overpowering a state corrections officer and taking his gun, authorities said. Two days later, a man under arrest in Spring Valley, Ill., wrested away an officer's gun and beat him with it. The suspect then fatally shot himself, police said.

"It's one too many when it happens," Brady said. "But if you look nationwide, the frequency of a police officer's gun being taken by a suspect is extremely rare."

There are no national statistics on how many times officers' guns are taken away. But the FBI says that of the 616 law enforcement officers killed on duty by criminals from 1994 through 2003, 52 were killed with their own weapon, amounting to 8 percent.


Police are trained to protect their weapons if they are attacked, and to resist using their guns unless a threat is imminent. If a weapon is grabbed, the officer always tries to retrieve it and often succeeds, experts said.

Aren't you kind of proving my point with that post? You claimed it doesn't happen but now are stating it does, even if rarely.

 

[justbob]

It would seem that if the law indicates the office is always "on call" then it would preclude them from drinking.

Most officers are not "on call 24 - 7......And all officers know if they are not on scheduled call out to inform chain of command that they can't respond if they have been drinking.
That being said --an officer out in public carrying a weapon should not be drinking. And the biggest majority don't.
Liability and criminal negligence would shift to them if someone was accidentally shot while they were under the influence. Same as them having a wreck while drunk. You do have to plan ahead and think things out if you plan on leaving home with your weapon.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Aren't you kind of proving my point with that post? You claimed it doesn't happen but now are stating it does, even if rarely.

Perhaps, but you can't build society on the exception. I mean, you can carry any point to the extreme but how much sense does it make to plan around extremes?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I don't know if it is an extreme. It does seem a lot of Texas law is based on extremes based on the discussions that occurred on this board over the years.

 

[jobberone]

Whooa, a peace officer losing is gun is far more likely to occur than a black hole interacting with our solar system in the next 4 billion years. For someone using standard deviations, you sure ruined the foundation of your argument with that comparison .... Unless you are talking quantum mechanical black holes in which case they could be all around us right NOW!

Anyway, the NFL didn't see a reason to put up a fight but could have and won very easily. Anyone thinking the NFl needs Texas as much as Texas needs the NFL is fundamentally not understanding economics 101. The NFL is a business that generates billions of dollars each year
and the state of Texas is benefitting from their presents. Hence why the city of Arlington provided $325 million in funding to help build the new stadium.

The point was extremism not the relative amount. Both are at the extremes of the Bell curve.

And we don't know how many primordial black holes are around us but since we haven't been swallowed by one in 5 billion years there must be relatively few nearby.

 

[jobberone]

Aren't you kind of proving my point with that post? You claimed it doesn't happen but now are stating it does, even if rarely.

I didn't once say it doesn't happen. If you're going to just make up stuff, refuse to educate yourself before speaking out, admit you're not interested in reading about the laws of OUR land, and be disingenuous then maybe you should not say anything.

 

[CooterBrown]

They could kick someone out for cursing although I don't believe cursing to be illegal.

Cursing in and of itself is not illegal, however cursing in a public place can be a criminal offense. It is called, "disorderly conduct" and is a Class C misdemeanor in Texas, meaning subject to a fine of up to $500. Penal Code Section 42.01(a) "a person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly: (1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;" The way it is usually looked at is this: if you curse in public and nobody objects, there has been no tendency to incite an immediate breach of the peace, but if somebody says "hey, watch your mouth there are children present." (or words to that effect) and you continue to curse in public you have incited an immediate breach of the peace. This is because the person who objected might punch you in the face for your failing to stop cursing. And, if someone does punch you in the face in that scenario, they didn't assault you because you uttered, "fighting words" which are an invitation to fight. You, on the other hand, can be arrested and charged under the statute cited above. (both persons could be arrested and charged with disorderly conduct because fighting in public is another form of disorderly conduct. It's just that you would have two counts and they would have one. But, in the real world in Texas, the person who punched you would probably not be convicted of doing anything wrong.) The legal advice and moral of the post is: if someone asks you to watch your language in public, just do as they ask.

Okay, Go Cowboys! And, I hate the #@%#$#@@$%^)(#@ Commanders and whoever they turn into when they eventually give in to PC stuff. (just to keep some football in the post.)

 

[jobberone]

So Texas law enforcement can't go out for a drink...ever?

Are you deliberately being obtuse or working on reaction?

 

[justbob]

Don't mind the discussion on the OP ---but several of you are throwing in one liners to basically troll the true discussion. If you don't agree with Texas and their gun laws or any other --that's your choice but don't continue the subtle remarks because you don't.
And comments about the drinking are in the same category

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't know if it is an extreme. It does seem a lot of Texas law is based on extremes based on the discussions that occurred on this board over the years.

I would not say that. I would say that it is based on how the majority of Texas Citizens feel on any given issue. Now, for somebody who lives in Canada, that might seem extreme but then again, some of the things Canadians do could also be viewed as extreme to folks who are not Canadian.

That's perception. It's not necessarily reality.

 

[AbeBeta]

Most officers are not "on call 24 - 7......And all officers know if they are not on scheduled call out to inform chain of command that they can't respond if they have been drinking.
That being said --an officer out in public carrying a weapon should not be drinking. And the biggest majority don't.
Liability and criminal negligence would shift to them if someone was accidentally shot while they were under the influence. Same as them having a wreck while drunk. You do have to plan ahead and think things out if you plan on leaving home with your weapon.

So most off duty officers don't drink in public?

That's funny because I used to work a night shift - I'd stop off at a bar after work at 6am and more often than not there would be tons of police officers coming off their shifts and doing the same.

 

[AbeBeta]

Don't mind the discussion on the OP ---but several of you are throwing in one liners to basically troll the true discussion. If you don't agree with Texas and their gun laws or any other --that's your choice but don't continue the subtle remarks because you don't.
And comments about the drinking are in the same category

Comments about drinking are highly relevant to this discussion - and I don't find my remarks subtle at all

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Not and have a gun.

 

[AbeBeta]

Most officers are not "on call 24 - 7......And all officers know if they are not on scheduled call out to inform chain of command that they can't respond if they have been drinking.
That being said --an officer out in public carrying a weapon should not be drinking. And the biggest majority don't.
Liability and criminal negligence would shift to them if someone was accidentally shot while they were under the influence. Same as them having a wreck while drunk. You do have to plan ahead and think things out if you plan on leaving home with your weapon.

1. The article just posted here used the 24-7 reference

2. If they cannot respond b/c they have been drinking, how would that be relevant to the sort of emergency situation that might arise in a stadium? This isn't them being called in to work, it is something happening in front of them.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So most off duty officers don't drink in public?

That's funny because I used to work a night shift - I'd stop off at a bar after work at 6am and more often than not there would be tons of police officers coming off their shifts and doing the same.

Where do you live?

 

[AbeBeta]

Where do you live?

California. You can't tell me cop mentality/behavior differs between states and you really can't tell me that cops don't drink