A comment to a recent article got me thinking about guns in the courthouse. The author of that comment wrote that he thought only active law enforcement personnel who were not involved in a case could enter the courthouse armed. And then a second reader commented.
Read their comments in the article (below), titled "Security - at what price?"
Back on April 20th I wrote about being shocked by firearms in a courtroom, when the Woodstock Board of Fire and Police Commissioners and the Woodstock police chief, Bob Lowen, were defendants in a civil action in Judge Feetterer’s courtroom.
Both Chief Lowen and Deputy Chief Steve Bozer were sitting in the courtroom with their firearms. I felt that, in a civil action in which the chief was a defendant, the chief and his deputy chief should not have been armed.
Sure, they could have stepped in if some criminal action arose, and they could have provided additional cop power for the courtroom security officer (I still want to call them “bailiffs”). Heaven knows that he’d need it.
Could there have been a subliminal influence on the judge, when he looked over and saw two armed men in his courtroom?
When I was in Colorado, we didn’t have electronic screening at the courthouse doors and deputies who were to testify in trials checked their weapons in a gun locker before entering the courtroom. The only person armed in the courtroom was the bailiff, as far as anyone could see.
Yes, times are different today.
For the most part, the public trusts the police. I say, “for the most part.” Well, having just written this, I am wondering if “most” belongs in that sentence.
Thinking about the recent publicity that courthouse security hires primarily retired police officers, I wonder about their firearms qualifications and their mental and physical sharpness. When you hire security, you expect Security.
How easy would it be to overpower and disarm a security officer in our courthouse? Unfortunately, it would be too easy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I seem to remember when a certain Woodstock female police officer was suspended for a month without pay for talking to an assistant states attorney with her uniform on and her sidearm on. Why do the rules seem to apply to some and not to others. I guess its the same old story different standards for different people...if you are the boss you think you can do what you want...are above the law?....arrogance?
I just gotta ask, Doc. What's the reset of the story. I mean, "police officer was suspended for a month without pay for talking to an assistant states attorney with her uniform on and her sidearm on" is like "doctor suspended for using stethoscope on patient during examination." What did she do, show up at his house in the dead of night, drunk and partially disrobed? Inquiring minds and all that. C'mon out with "the rest of the story"
Mike, as I recall, the officer went from work to the courthouse regarding a case involving her son. The prosecuting attorney reportedly felt threatened or insecure in the presence of an armed police officer.
I think the suspension was 3-5 days, not 30.
You know being a law enforcement officer I understand the concerns of the public, having a trained professional carrying a firearm in the courtroom. I have seen numerous cases where people do get through security with firearms or start shooting just outside the courthouse. Some of us realize the necessity of carrying a firearm into the courtroom and off duty because we have run into former arestee's who are not too happy seeing us. Tell me is the next thing your going to question is our legal right (federal law) to carry a firearm off duty? I go to court for mostly minor violations but have arrested some habitual criminal's who are not the most upstanding citizens, that have threatened me and my family (how would you feel if someone threatened to come to your house and rape your wife (when your working) because you arrested them?). It's not that hard to find most of us.
You claim to have been a reserve deputy or police officer? Well maybe you were playing cop instead of actually living the lifestyle that is required for this position.
As always I disagree with some of your points of interest, but respect your right to voice your point of view.
Andrew, many thanks for your comments.
Back in the "old days" in Littleton, Colo., we checked our sidearms into a security locker before entering the courtroom. And, now that I think about it, there were no metal detectors at the front doors to the building.
My particular surprise and reaction in the courtroom on one day was because the defendant in a civil trial was armed and in uniform. The trial involved a legal action against a City Board and the police chief.
I have no objection to law enforcement personnel carrying off-duty.
And I favor concealed carry by law-abiding citizens in government offices, restaurants and even bars, as long as they aren't consuming alcoholic beverages.
Post a Comment