stealthyeliminator
Regular Member
Off-duty cop & security guard - limited as a cop, or empowered as an agent of the ...
Off-duty cop takes job as security guard. Not uncommon. So here's the question - when he's acting as a security guard, is he not empowered as an agent of the company he's working for? In such a case, he's not "restricted" per se as he would be acting as a police officer on public property. In this case some guys were audio/video recording in front of Wal-Mart. The security guard apparently had a huge issue with it and seems to over-react a bit. As a police officer he would have clearly been out-of-line and would have had no authority to tell them to stop filming. But, as Wal-Mart, including the parking lot, is private property, would they not have the authority to tell someone to quit recording on their property? And so then, if they would, would the security guard, as an agent of the private company controlling the property, not also have been within right to tell them to stop recording?
This is all not taking into consideration Wal-Mart's policy on the issue or the "reasonableness" of the level of force used by the guard. I simply am asking whether or not it would have been legitimate for him to tell them to stop recording. I believe it would be.
News coverage of the example incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcouU9SW3-0
FYI: My first reaction was that the guard was way out of line and had no right to tell them to stop recording. However, after thinking about it, I changed my mind and so I decided to post this thread and ask your opinion. I believe the issue is confused by the fact he's an off-duty officer. IMO that is irrelevant. He didn't identify as a police officer and was not acting as such. He was a security guard placed in control of the property and was acting as such. I don't believe he was being reasonable or professional, and perhaps actually ended up assaulting the two men as the level of force used doesn't seem reasonable at all, but was probably within his rights in telling them to stop recording, in my opinion.
Off-duty cop takes job as security guard. Not uncommon. So here's the question - when he's acting as a security guard, is he not empowered as an agent of the company he's working for? In such a case, he's not "restricted" per se as he would be acting as a police officer on public property. In this case some guys were audio/video recording in front of Wal-Mart. The security guard apparently had a huge issue with it and seems to over-react a bit. As a police officer he would have clearly been out-of-line and would have had no authority to tell them to stop filming. But, as Wal-Mart, including the parking lot, is private property, would they not have the authority to tell someone to quit recording on their property? And so then, if they would, would the security guard, as an agent of the private company controlling the property, not also have been within right to tell them to stop recording?
This is all not taking into consideration Wal-Mart's policy on the issue or the "reasonableness" of the level of force used by the guard. I simply am asking whether or not it would have been legitimate for him to tell them to stop recording. I believe it would be.
News coverage of the example incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcouU9SW3-0
FYI: My first reaction was that the guard was way out of line and had no right to tell them to stop recording. However, after thinking about it, I changed my mind and so I decided to post this thread and ask your opinion. I believe the issue is confused by the fact he's an off-duty officer. IMO that is irrelevant. He didn't identify as a police officer and was not acting as such. He was a security guard placed in control of the property and was acting as such. I don't believe he was being reasonable or professional, and perhaps actually ended up assaulting the two men as the level of force used doesn't seem reasonable at all, but was probably within his rights in telling them to stop recording, in my opinion.