ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th July 2019, 05:36 AM   #121
Reactor drone
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,175
Originally Posted by rockinkt View Post
Of course he should not leave his firearm in his vehicle. I am stating that he should not have been there in the first place. More important - he should not have continued further into the office area against the security guards orders. That type of behaviour in a uniformed police officer on private business is outrageous.

He didn't continue further into the office though did he? After being told by the guard that he couldn't enter with his gun he turned and went back to the elevator, followed by the guard who had drawn his gun.
Reactor drone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:36 AM   #122
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I call bull **** on that highlighted part.

1) Whatever happened in your 'parking lot' has nothing to do with people going into a public IRS office.

2) Armed officers arrived when called, (probably with the same department as the accosted cop). No one told them to wait outside the waiting room while the security guard took care of the 'suspect' and brought him out.
Call BS on whatever you like. It's the IRS, so it's an hours wait, right? Except it's not. Most calls are answered in 20 minutes. Collections will have a longer delay, but the reservation system is automated and really has no delay. the 1040 line is maybe 15 minutes.

The cops weren't called by the IRS. They were chasing the suspect. They were not allowed entry. Hell, during that time, I was not allowed entry, in car or on foot. Got admin time for the hour or so as I cooled my heels in the exterior lot.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:43 AM   #123
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by Reactor drone View Post
He didn't continue further into the office though did he? After being told by the guard that he couldn't enter with his gun he turned and went back to the elevator, followed by the guard who had drawn his gun.
I guess the question is, did the deputy start the screening process. You are not allowed to back out of it. If the deputy did start the screening process and was told he had to stay there, then leaving is a breach of security and that is a problem.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:48 AM   #124
Reactor drone
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,175
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
I guess the question is, did the deputy start the screening process. You are not allowed to back out of it. If the deputy did start the screening process and was told he had to stay there, then leaving is a breach of security and that is a problem.
Looks to have been a 1min 40s conversation so who knows?
Reactor drone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 09:21 AM   #125
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,714
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Some folks here have no idea how difficult it is to get simple issues resolved with the IRS.

You cannot call any local office, they don't take calls. You have to call the main number.

Some offices do accept people without an appointment. But also, you don't know until you get there that you need an appointment.

Former accountant here. This is absolutely right.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 09:37 AM   #126
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,714
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I addressed that in my previous post:



I doubt the wait time for the phone number for this local facility is one hour.

I brought up the appointment issue because not all federal offices or IRS locations accept public visits. To know that this office does, he would have had to looked at a website or called them, which would tell him he needs an appointment.

If he got a letter, I would assume he would call the phone number on the letter. If that doesn't work and he wants a different number, I would expect someone to check on-line. He would find a phone number for this local office. He would call it. They would give him the information or set up an appointment.

I'm not saying his actions were entirely unreasonable. Maybe he was driving on patrol. He saw this IRs office. He needed to take a break and use the restroom. He figure he could do that and just pop in to the IRS office to ask his question.

I'm sure people just stop in to ask questions without realizing they need an appointment. I just find it odd to do that when all you need is a phone number. Why not just call? Especially if you would otherwise be going into a federal facility with a gun, cop or not.

But some people like to do things the old fashioned way. Or it is a matter of a type of convenience.

Again, I don't think it really has anything to do with anything. But it did strike me as a bit odd.

As someone mentioned, local IRS offices do not accept phone calls from taxpayers.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 09:41 AM   #127
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,329
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
I guess the question is, did the deputy start the screening process. You are not allowed to back out of it. If the deputy did start the screening process and was told he had to stay there, then leaving is a breach of security and that is a problem.
If there was any truth to the above the SG still would have no business attempting to detain the deputy or drawing down on the deputy while he exited the office.

Leaving a federal building in itself does not constitute a fed/state crime and the officer declining to disarm isn't fed/state crime.

If you have information to the contrary I'd love to see it.

ETA - If the reports are correct, the SG told the deputy to exit the building to secure his duty firearm - if leaving was a problem the SG shouldn't have asked the deputy to do so.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

Last edited by BStrong; 18th July 2019 at 09:57 AM.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 09:42 AM   #128
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,329
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
As someone mentioned, local IRS offices do not accept phone calls from taxpayers.
The California Franchise Tax Board isn't any better.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 09:48 AM   #129
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,714
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
I'm constantly amazed at how archaic and complex the US system seems to be. I've come to the conclusion that having all the weird deductibles is a cunning ploy to make the population think that by "reducing" the headline tax rate, they're paying "low tax," even though for most they may be no lower or actually higher than those in what they are convinced are "high tax" countries.

It's mainly because the government uses the tax code to encourage or discourage certain behaviors (e. g., having children, getting and staying married, or owning a home), and also to favor certain industries <cough>crony capitalism<cough>.

When I was going back to school to be an accountant, Congress passed a law establishing separate marginal tax rates for capital gains, further broken down by the length of time the sold asset had been owned, and with additional complicating factors, making the calculations extremely complex. A couple of my professors derisively referred to this as the "Accountants' Full Employment Act."
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:15 AM   #130
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
If there was any truth to the above the SG still would have no business attempting to detain the deputy or drawing down on the deputy while he exited the office.

Leaving a federal building in itself does not constitute a fed/state crime and the officer declining to disarm isn't fed/state crime.

If you have information to the contrary I'd love to see it.

ETA - If the reports are correct, the SG told the deputy to exit the building to secure his duty firearm - if leaving was a problem the SG shouldn't have asked the deputy to do so.
oh, I fully agree that the guard was way over the line of acceptable behavior from what we know today

If he was told that he was not permitted to enter with his side arm, and tried to enter, it would be a federal violation. I'm going to withhold judgement on if there is more to the story than we have now. Calling him a wannabe or racist is unfair.

I'm just pointing out the deputy coming in for a phone number is a bit curious since the number is on the notice he already had. And provide a bit of knowledge on how it works, for those who don't eexperience dealing with this process regularly.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:20 AM   #131
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,170
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
oh, I fully agree that the guard was way over the line of acceptable behavior from what we know today
Excepting of course from police officers. Then it is just business as usual, they can pull a gun on anyone for any reason and it is just not a big deal.

But the hypocrisy coming from those who support the cops say drawing down on a guy who bought a candy bar putting it in his pocket wanting this guys life ruined is telling. Then of course are the times when the police open fire on entirely the wrong people and of course that is also not a serious offence either.

The real problem here isn't the gun, it is contempt of cop.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

Last edited by ponderingturtle; 18th July 2019 at 11:21 AM.
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:32 AM   #132
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,837
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
I'm constantly amazed at how archaic and complex the US system seems to be.
Complex yes; how is it archaic? I've never compared it to anything else.

Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
I've come to the conclusion that having all the weird deductibles is a cunning ploy to make the population think that by "reducing" the headline tax rate, they're paying "low tax," even though for most they may be no lower or actually higher than those in what they are convinced are "high tax" countries.
Probably not. When I was single with no dependents, living in barracks (or at home) with zero investments, it was simply a matter of filling out the 1040a form with my income; most of it was left blank, I filled in the standard deduction then looked up the tax from the tax table. I sent in the form then waited for the small refund, if any.

When I got married, had kids, bought a house, invested in tax deferred accounts and accumulated interest income everything changed. The percentage of my income that I paid went down as I got older; I had more kids and bought the house and increased the size of my tax deferred investments. With the kids grown and moved out and the mortgage paid off, that percentage then increased a bit.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:32 AM   #133
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Excepting of course from police officers. Then it is just business as usual, they can pull a gun on anyone for any reason and it is just not a big deal.

But the hypocrisy coming from those who support the cops say drawing down on a guy who bought a candy bar putting it in his pocket wanting this guys life ruined is telling. Then of course are the times when the police open fire on entirely the wrong people and of course that is also not a serious offence either.

The real problem here isn't the gun, it is contempt of cop.
in the WAPO coverage, the responding police said that they could go anywhere in that building they wanted. He is wrong. Maybe he should try that logic at Area 51
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:43 AM   #134
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,170
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
in the WAPO coverage, the responding police said that they could go anywhere in that building they wanted. He is wrong. Maybe he should try that logic at Area 51
Yea it is simply wrong, of course with a warrant maybe, but a warrant on the IRS would be really interesting to see.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:45 AM   #135
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,329
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
in the WAPO coverage, the responding police said that they could go anywhere in that building they wanted. He is wrong. Maybe he should try that logic at Area 51
Only in "anywhere."

An officer responding to a complaint or that observes a penal code violation that involves threat to life or limb, theirs or others, can (under the theory of exigent circumstances) enter private or public property w/o warrant to effect an arrest or to stop/subdue a threat.

If the responding officers believed that the SG posed an immediate threat in that encounter they could have entered the building to make the arrest.

A federal "no-firearms" rule would not restrict their actions.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:45 AM   #136
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
In a follow up news report the accosted cop reported he felt racism contributed to the cop wanna-be's reaction.
There's a shocker.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:47 AM   #137
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,170
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Only in "anywhere."

An officer responding to a complaint or that observes a penal code violation that involves threat to life or limb, theirs or others, can (under the theory of exigent circumstances) enter private or public property w/o warrant to effect an arrest or to stop/subdue a threat.

If the responding officers believed that the SG posed an immediate threat in that encounter they could have entered the building to make the arrest.

A federal "no-firearms" rule would not restrict their actions.
Yep they hold the constitution in contempt so why not federal law.

I'm waiting for the cop to try that at a nuclear power plant.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:56 AM   #138
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,472
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Yea it is simply wrong, of course with a warrant maybe, but a warrant on the IRS would be really interesting to see.
Or with the permission of the IRS.

Not particularly directed at turtle but rather the general audience:

If the building is open to the public then it is open to the police. I would expect that at least the front desk was open to the public and probably not much else. I would expect if the police showed up, the office manager would probably let them in, pretty much every where I've worked would have handled that way. Most front desk people would probably just let them in regardless. When I was a security guard the training was that if a cop showed up on business, call the manager and have them deal with it. If a cop showed up not on business, treat them like anyone else.

The post up thread about this being all police arrogance was just plan ignorant. As far as I can tell we have no idea how much of the office was open to the public and how much of the office was devoted to dealing with the public.

Evidence that I am aware of:
The cops statement to the effective of, HE went in in uniform and with his gun. The guard said we don't allow guns in here leave it in your car. The Cop said he couldn't leave it in his car. The guard said, well then leave.

The video evidence appears to be the cop entering an area that appears to be open to the public then leaving (fairly casually from what I can tell.) with the guard following shortly there after with his gun drawn.

That appears to be entirely consistent with the cops story and the guard's response seems entirely out of proportion to the events. Now, if it hadn't been a cop in uniform but just some dude with a gun, I'd kind of get it.


As a former security guard, there are a lot of ******** in security, there are some racists in security, and there are a lot of cop haters in security. The Venn diagram of those groups is three overlapping circles but the hates cops circle is easily the biggest.

Last edited by ahhell; 18th July 2019 at 12:01 PM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:04 PM   #139
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Only in "anywhere."

An officer responding to a complaint or that observes a penal code violation that involves threat to life or limb, theirs or others, can (under the theory of exigent circumstances) enter private or public property w/o warrant to effect an arrest or to stop/subdue a threat.

If the responding officers believed that the SG posed an immediate threat in that encounter they could have entered the building to make the arrest.

A federal "no-firearms" rule would not restrict their actions.
they could no more enforce the laws in that building as they could on a military base. Even if they had a warrant for the arrest for an employee, they would call TIGTA to make the arrest. They do not just walk in to enforce it.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:15 PM   #140
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Or with the permission of the IRS.

Not particularly directed at turtle but rather the general audience:

If the building is open to the public then it is open to the police. I would expect that at least the front desk was open to the public and probably not much else. I would expect if the police showed up, the office manager would probably let them in, pretty much every where I've worked would have handled that way. Most front desk people would probably just let them in regardless. When I was a security guard the training was that if a cop showed up on business, call the manager and have them deal with it. If a cop showed up not on business, treat them like anyone else.

The post up thread about this being all police arrogance was just plan ignorant. As far as I can tell we have no idea how much of the office was open to the public and how much of the office was devoted to dealing with the public.

Evidence that I am aware of:
The cops statement to the effective of, HE went in in uniform and with his gun. The guard said we don't allow guns in here leave it in your car. The Cop said he couldn't leave it in his car. The guard said, well then leave.

The video evidence appears to be the cop entering an area that appears to be open to the public then leaving (fairly casually from what I can tell.) with the guard following shortly there after with his gun drawn.

That appears to be entirely consistent with the cops story and the guard's response seems entirely out of proportion to the events. Now, if it hadn't been a cop in uniform but just some dude with a gun, I'd kind of get it.


As a former security guard, there are a lot of ******** in security, there are some racists in security, and there are a lot of cop haters in security. The Venn diagram of those groups is three overlapping circles but the hates cops circle is easily the biggest.
the guard stated the deputy put his hand on his gun. Which you can maybe see on the video. The deputy did rest his hand on his sidearm. Not aggressively so, just a normal cop stance, from what I saw.

The point remains, this is a federal agency so you play by federal rules. One of those rules is no guns. Unless he was called there for enforcement actions, he can't bring his firearm in. He wasn't so he can't, by law. The security guard was 100 percent right in denying him entry and 100 percent wrong, from what I've seen in drawing his weapon
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:42 PM   #141
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,329
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
they could no more enforce the laws in that building as they could on a military base. Even if they had a warrant for the arrest for an employee, they would call TIGTA to make the arrest. They do not just walk in to enforce it.
There isn't any question here that the deputy was entering the building to "enforce the law," and my comments wrt "Exigent Circumstances" were intended to explain a very specific situation that isn't generally understood by the public.

Could an LEO off the street enter private property or federal property w/o warrant? No.

Could a LEO personally observing an armed assault (or have reasonable suspicion of same) on a person enter private property or federal property w/o a warrant under exigent circumstances? Yes.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/exigent_circumstances

Exigent circumstances are exceptions to the general requirement of a warrant under the Fourth Amendment searches and seizures.

In Missouri v. McNeely (2013), the Supreme Court clarified, "A variety of circumstances may give rise to an exigency sufficient to justify a warrantless search, including law enforcement's need to provide emergency assistance to an occupant of a home . . . engage in “hot pursuit” of a fleeing suspect . . . or enter a burning building to put out a fire and investigate its cause."

Courts will typically look at the time when the officer makes the warrantless search or seizure to evaluate whether at that point in time a reasonable officer at the scene would believe it is urgent to act and impractical to secure a warrant. Courts may also consider whether the facts suggested that the suspect was armed and planning to escape, whether a reasonable police officer would believe his safety or others’ safety was threatened, and whether there was a serious crime involved.


Comparisons of military reservations or other sensitive facilities aren't germane to this discussion
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 06:04 PM   #142
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,746
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Rubbish!
The Mall Cop was completely in the wrong, as evidenced by the fact that he has been arrested and charged.
Jeez, I hope you never get selected for jury duty.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 07:34 PM   #143
Jim_MDP
Philosopher
 
Jim_MDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 6,931
Perhaps the SG was feeling more Mall Ninja than Mall Cop.
If so... well played Sir, well played.




* It's a dated reference now, look it up if you're confused.
__________________
----------------------
Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

Last edited by Jim_MDP; 18th July 2019 at 07:36 PM.
Jim_MDP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 07:50 PM   #144
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well I sure wouldn't have diverted from my job to go make a personal errand. Still, if he's not allowed to leave his firearm behind while on-duty he acted properly as far as that's concerned
I disagree. I think acting properly would have been to wait until he was off duty and could stow his firearm, before entering a federal building.

I think entering a federal building on personal business, while carrying a firearm required by your official duties, is very improper.

The more I think about it, the more I think SG is wrong about who is the wannabe cop in this scenario.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 07:54 PM   #145
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,892
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Yeah but it sounds like an excuse to just ignore what we see. How likely is it that someone in an official police uniform is actually a fake?
It's not a question of likelihood, it's a question of risk management. Which is to say, it's a question of what's the worst that could happen, if you let an armed stranger into a federal building unchallenged, just because they're wearing the costume of a deputy sheriff.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 10:16 PM   #146
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,222
Originally Posted by Reactor drone View Post
He didn't continue further into the office though did he? After being told by the guard that he couldn't enter with his gun he turned and went back to the elevator, followed by the guard who had drawn his gun.
This

The officer was leaving, as instructed by Wannabe Mall Cop, and yet Wannabe Mall Cop still pulled his gun and pointed it the Officer's back.

Wannabe Mall Cop was rightly arrested and charged.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:26 PM   #147
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,119
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I addressed that in my previous post:

Quote:
Maybe he thought they accepted people without an appointment. But that information is easily found on-line. And wouldn't it be easier to call that office instead of stop in?
So what? Who gives a **** what other people would do? Who cares what could have been found online?

That's a ludicrous expectation.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I doubt the wait time for the phone number for this local facility is one hour.
Sorry to bust your imaginary version of reality but you don't know that.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I brought up the appointment issue because not all federal offices or IRS locations accept public visits. To know that this office does, he would have had to looked at a website or called them, which would tell him he needs an appointment.
What is wrong with you people? You're just making **** up.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
If he got a letter, I would assume he would call the phone number on the letter. If that doesn't work and he wants a different number, I would expect someone to check on-line. He would find a phone number for this local office. He would call it. They would give him the information or set up an appointment.
Good Gawd! This is your imaginary world. Hate to burst your bubble but the real world differs.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I'm not saying his actions were entirely unreasonable. Maybe he was driving on patrol. He saw this IRs office. He needed to take a break and use the restroom. He figure he could do that and just pop in to the IRS office to ask his question.

I'm sure people just stop in to ask questions without realizing they need an appointment. I just find it odd to do that when all you need is a phone number. Why not just call? Especially if you would otherwise be going into a federal facility with a gun, cop or not.

But some people like to do things the old fashioned way. Or it is a matter of a type of convenience.

Again, I don't think it really has anything to do with anything. But it did strike me as a bit odd.
Well forgive me but I find your naïveté odd, but not uncommon judging by this thread.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 18th July 2019 at 11:27 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:28 PM   #148
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,119
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
No.



I would assume all non-employees would be required to check in with the guard. Employees would have an alternative secure method of entrance. Certain contractors would likely have the same type of access.


No one checks in with the gawd damn guard.

The idiots in this thread should go visit an IRS office or shut their pie-holes up.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 18th July 2019 at 11:30 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 06:48 AM   #149
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Sorry to bust your imaginary version of reality but you don't know that.
Sorry to bust your imaginary version of reality, but I do know that, and you are wrong.

Quote:
What is wrong with you people? You're just making **** up.
Not like your fictional hour wait on the appointment line. That's like 100% legit.

There hasn't been an hour long wait for any line other than the Automated Collections Service is well over 2 years not. During filing season, the 1040 line wait was around 25 minutes. Right now, it's maybe 27 minutes. Mostly because filing season has ended and most of the seasonal employees are furloughed.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 06:52 AM   #150
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
No.



I would assume all non-employees would be required to check in with the guard. Employees would have an alternative secure method of entrance. Certain contractors would likely have the same type of access.
Employees pass through the guard station and are subject to inspection. It depends on the building, and employees do use a different door, but it's the same general area as the general public.

My current building uses rotating doors, but also has normal doors for the disabled. They are manned by guards. It's not open to the public, but it's still guarded.
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 07:10 AM   #151
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,472
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
the guard stated the deputy put his hand on his gun. Which you can maybe see on the video. The deputy did rest his hand on his sidearm. Not aggressively so, just a normal cop stance, from what I saw.

The point remains, this is a federal agency so you play by federal rules. One of those rules is no guns. Unless he was called there for enforcement actions, he can't bring his firearm in. He wasn't so he can't, by law. The security guard was 100 percent right in denying him entry and 100 percent wrong, from what I've seen in drawing his weapon
I tend to agree with you, though, I think the the guards wrongness was worse than the cops. From the video, it looks like the cop walked in, was told to leave, and left. Then the guard pulled his gun on a non-threatening cop, regardless of where his hand was.

@SketpicGinger,

What is your expert opinion in this matter, you seem awfully certain that no one would check in with the guard at this facility. It is not uncommon for security guards to also act as receptionist at secure facilities, so I see no reason to think that is especially unlikely at an IRS office.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 07:12 AM   #152
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,472
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Well in the UK it is certainly a breach of a publican's licence to serve alcohol to a police officer in uniform.
Interesting, I'd understand if a cop would be punished for drinking in public while in uniform but punishing the guy that sells/gives him the beer seems......unfair.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 08:32 AM   #153
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 9,584
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
He is guarding a federal building, IRS offices have been targets for attacks many times. This isn't like a mall cop.
Neither was the cop visiting the building. Maybe it's a bit naïve to expect the security guard not to over-react.
Information Analyst is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 08:36 AM   #154
Joe Random
Master Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Interesting, I'd understand if a cop would be punished for drinking in public while in uniform but punishing the guy that sells/gives him the beer seems......unfair.

I have an alcohol server's permit for the state I live in, though serving isn't part of my actual job. Were I to serve people on the restricted list (under aged, visibly intoxicated, etc.) I face escalating fines and other administrative penalties. Sounds like the above comes from the same reasoning : you served someone who was known to you to be legally prohibited from drinking, at least under the circumstances in which you served them. Whether the person was a 12 year old or LE in uniform, they weren't permitted to drink yet you served them still, so here's your fine.

Last edited by Joe Random; 19th July 2019 at 08:55 AM.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 08:50 AM   #155
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Not that it means anything, but they did not file a false arrest charge. When has a DA not filed extra felonies when available?
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 09:17 AM   #156
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post


No one checks in with the gawd damn guard.

The idiots in this thread should go visit an IRS office or shut their pie-holes up.
Here is how it works for the general public. The guard will ask you if you have an appointment. If you don't you kick rocks. If the building houses multiple agencies, you will get ask which agency you are visiting. Then you get searched.

If you are a badged employee, you show your badge, they do a quick check to see if you match your photo, and you go in. You may or may not get searched, depending on the orders of the day. If it's been upgraded, you scan your badge and the machine unlocks the door. Fun times.

How many federal building do you visit on a weekly or monthly basis which you used to form your opinion?
Leftus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 09:25 AM   #157
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,612
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
Here is how it works for the general public. The guard will ask you if you have an appointment. If you don't you kick rocks. If the building houses multiple agencies, you will get ask which agency you are visiting. Then you get searched.

If you are a badged employee, you show your badge, they do a quick check to see if you match your photo, and you go in. You may or may not get searched, depending on the orders of the day. If it's been upgraded, you scan your badge and the machine unlocks the door. Fun times.

How many federal building do you visit on a weekly or monthly basis which you used to form your opinion?
I have visited several federal facilities this summer where this was not the procedure. Are you certain it was the procedure at the facility that this thread is about? Why?
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 09:37 AM   #158
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,119
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I tend to agree with you, though, I think the the guards wrongness was worse than the cops. From the video, it looks like the cop walked in, was told to leave, and left. Then the guard pulled his gun on a non-threatening cop, regardless of where his hand was.

@SketpicGinger,

What is your expert opinion in this matter, you seem awfully certain that no one would check in with the guard at this facility. It is not uncommon for security guards to also act as receptionist at secure facilities, so I see no reason to think that is especially unlikely at an IRS office.
Anyone who wants to check, try the number, walk into your local IRS office. It's bizarre to see the foot stamping here when I have been in the local IRS office a number of times and got the one hour wait on the phone when trying to get an appointment.

You don't check in. The guard might help you get what you need but so do other people in the waiting room when they see you looking around.

It's not like walking into the courthouse.

No one searches you. Where does that nonsense come from?

It's laughable for people to insist the way they believe it should be must be the way it is.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 19th July 2019 at 09:39 AM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 09:42 AM   #159
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,119
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I have visited several federal facilities this summer where this was not the procedure. Are you certain it was the procedure at the facility that this thread is about? Why?
It was the procedure he saw in the movies.


I do think entering some federal buildings might be like that, especially after the OK tragedy. I don't think certain people in the thread have ever walked into the public IRS or SS office.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2019, 09:48 AM   #160
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,119
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Neither was the cop visiting the building. Maybe it's a bit naïve to expect the security guard not to over-react.
I'm still leaning toward there being no written policy for what to do when LEOs enter the building with guns.

Or, there might be a policy no one trained this guy on.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.