Asked to Leave Logansport Mall for OCing Off Duty

[96harley]

I am with you cox. I choose to carry concealed. That being said, I go into restaurants off-duty and into the public. Try to, as much as possible, keep things hidden. I fully support the citizen's right to carry 100%. As I have said before, open or concealed, it's their choice. What some people forget about LEO's is they rub elbows with people whom citizens don't encounter on a daily basis, bad people. When in the uniform you are the first target in a perp's sight picture. Face it, you and I work for the government. We really have to work hard to earn the respect and support of the public. I have to admit there are segments of the government I distrust and they will have to in turn earn my respect. It so important we ALL defend not only the 2nd but the constituion in it's entirety. Until the government earns my respect I will be vigilant, as we should all be. That badge and uniform doesn't make us super heroes, bullet proof, or better than the people we serve. On the other hand it doesn't make us everyone's enemy either. Cox we may not like some of the rules but we set the example. Be safe.

 

[Donnelly]

So, Boycott Logansport Mall at all cost.

Most of us in Logansport already do. Hence why there are only 4-5 stores open in the entire mall.

I have to ask, is it a Simon Mall ?

No, it is not.

Is it posted up? I go to that Dunhams semi regularly when I visit family in the area and have never seen signs.

There are a couple "No Weapons" decals at the front doors in the middle entrance.

There's really only one way to get this "private property" BS rule thrown out....

Open a private property business as a polling place. Then put up a sign that says "no women, blacks, or those over the age of 60 or under 30 allowed". Stand out there and start asking people to leave. Once the s#!^ is stirred up enough, and they tell you the 15th, the 19th, and the 26th overrule your property rights, maybe they'll agree the 2nd overrules theirs.

Don't you know that "Civil Rights" trump "Constitution Rights" every time?

 

[Birds Away]

There's really only one way to get this "private property" BS rule thrown out....

Are you saying you are against private property rights? You don't think that if someone comes to your house that you should have the right to ask them to leave?

 

[92ThoStro]

At least they are consistent, that's what I want to see. I Don't blame the OP for boycotting the mall, or wanting them to change the policy, and I don't see what him being a cop has to do with knowing the mall's gun policy. A gun policy is not a law, it's a store policy.... so what law are you saying the OP didn't understand?

I suppose since he went and returned the merchandise while armed, after being told to leave, that would be criminal trespassing. However they said no firearms allowed, they didn't say he had to leave, and they also told him he could slide. If that is the "law" you are talking about him not knowing well enough to be a cop.

Same thing with my place of employment. I want to be able to carry as a customer, and if off-the clock employees cannot carry as a customer, I want signs posted up, and I want other customers including off-duty LEOs to not be able to eat there while armed. Picking and choosing who can defend themselves is ridiculous. Be consistent.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Hmm... So its OK to keep your average lowly citizen from exercizing their rights but when it is keeping the Man down, THEN we need to boycott?

The "some animals are more equal than others" bit does not cut it with me.

+1 Logansport Mall.

I'm with you TF. The original post made it seem as if OP expected a break because of his "status." I immediately went into facepalm mode. Only after someone called out OP was there a clarification.

The million dollar question, is what would the OP have done "if" the mall rep had said "oh, you're a LEO, then you're fine to OC here, just not anyone else).

I'm just conjecturing, I'm not trying to offend the OP, but his original post should have clarified why he identified himself.

Further, I also didn't like the reference to the employee. Pointing out "broken English," and "Spanish voice," does what for the story? Even with those apparent "hindrances," the OP obviously got the point. I'm not going to call it bias, but it looks like ..... Well.... Bias. A LEO should be mindful to avoid appearing as such.

 

[Kutnupe14]

...and by the way, if I own a mall property, I wouldn't allow firearms either. I'd worry more about my bottom line and liability than being a gun friendly business. Simply put there are enough people that OC (CC people rarely care) that could break my business, but soccer moms? You gotta keep them happy.

 

[amboy49]

Mall open carry

I don't understand the mindset or mentality of utilizing open carry in a public arena. What is the purpose ? Intimidation, bluster, or . . . . . ? If the purpose of being armed is for self defense, is a confrontation less likely because an individual is openly carrying a firearm ?

I think this demonstrates a lack sensibility on the OP's part. With the concern(s) of the general public running rampant in today's environment, I think most folks would be either surprised or shocked or both to see an individual walking through a crowded (assumption) mall with a gun while the wearer was not in uniform.

I would think someone in law enforcement would be even more attune to the public reaction. I do take exception to anyone believing their personal right trumps the general consideration for common sense and well being. It brings to mind the theory that it's wrong to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre - regardless of the right to free speech. From a law enforcement standpoint, I suggest your situatinal awarenes would be raised if, while on duty, you encountered someone who was openly carrying a firearm.

Next time use some common sense and don't flaunt your 2nd amendment right. You do a disservice to your fellow gunowners - and to your department for that matter.

 

[Birds Away]

...and by the way, if I own a mall property, I wouldn't allow firearms either. I'd worry more about my bottom line and liability than being a gun friendly business. Simply put there are enough people that OC (CC people rarely care) that could break my business, but soccer moms? You gotta keep them happy.

Absolutely, whatever you do, don't offend the soccer moms. You know how they love to swarm the gun-free killing zones.

I understand your position and agree, it's the soccer mom's position that makes me .

 

[wetidlerjr]

Do they still test for Reading Comprehension in school?
Props to the OP for standing up for all gun owners.

Yes and some remedial reading classes are needed for some members of this board.

 

[LarryC]

Are you saying you are against private property rights? You don't think that if someone comes to your house that you should have the right to ask them to leave?

Well, "private property" seems to have double meanings in Indiana! I know of many people in Indiana that OWN businesses. However there is a sign on the front door stating "STATE LAW - NO SMOKING". I know many of you are against smoking - I have smoked for over 50 years and still do.

I don't hear the clamor about "this is private property - they should be able to tell people what to do on their property" - when smoking is involved!

This is the same "double standard" everyone here really gets angry about when "hunters" don't object to laws banning AR's or High cap mags. Any loss of personal freedoms for a few leads to loss of many freedoms for the many.

If they can pass a law saying it is illegal to smoke in "public places" (owned by private citizens) why can't they pass a law requiring no restriction on firearms.

+1 for the OP, he did stand up for ALL people and let his views be known. Many here seem extremely angry at all LEO's - possibly for the actions of one or two they have had the bad luck to encounter that were Axxholes. It is important for LEO's to understand that there is a lot of resentment against anyone that has the power to foul up a persons life based on their decision alone. Even an unwarranted traffic violation ticket can cost the average person financial heartache. I believe most LEO's are aware of this and try to be fair. (No I haven't had any encounters with LEO's for many years, paid my last traffic ticket over 40 years ago).

 

[Mark 1911]

The reality is that the anti-gun policies of these malls are dictated by the insurance companies and the property management could care less about preserving our American libeties, and disgracefully they could care less about the safety of their patrons. They would prefer to have another Aurora style shooting and clean up the mess than to recognize the Second Amendment.

I applaud you sir for returning your merchandise and taking your business elsewhere. I have adopted the same approach for Westfield (formerly Southlake) Mall in Hobart. I do not shop there any more.

 

[pleiades]

cox7215 you ROCK!! Thank you for standing up for the 2A

 

[dusty711]

Well, "private property" seems to have double meanings in Indiana! I know of many people in Indiana that OWN businesses. However there is a sign on the front door stating "STATE LAW - NO SMOKING". I know many of you are against smoking - I have smoked for over 50 years and still do.

I don't hear the clamor about "this is private property - they should be able to tell people what to do on their property" - when smoking is involved!

This is the same "double standard" everyone here really gets angry about when "hunters" don't object to AR's or High cap mags. Any loss of personal freedoms for a few leads to loss of many freedoms for the many.

If they can pass a law saying it is illegal to smoke in "public places" (owned by private citizens) why can't they pass a law requiring no restriction on firearms.

Lots of double standards for sure. What gets me is leo is ok in uniform and they usually end up shooting the wrong people. We have seen it recently in New York and California.

 

[mulsas]

Always interesting to hear the situations that other people run into out there, thanks to the OP for sharing. This thread seems to be heading in alot of different directions.

 

[theweakerbrother]

Wow. I don't get the hate here. If this guy wasn't LE, you guys would be ready to stage open carry walks into Dunham's and other forms of pro 2A activity. This guy is just "stating the facts, ma'am" and gets dog piled.

OP, you did the right thing. The only thing you should be given a hard time over is getting an EOtech instead of an Aimpoint.

 

[sampo]

Wow! I almost get sick thinking about all of the people, who aren't even from our part of the country, who apparently are offended by the sight of OC. The Mall Manager doesn't have a clue! Will never shop there.

 

[huntall50]

Wow, look at the peeing contest that develops even with like minded people. They easily are diverted from the subject and drawn into mud slinging on a non relevant issue. No wonder our rights are under attack, we make ourselves easy prey.

 

[MG77]

I was asked to leave the Logansport Mall the other day as I was walking out of Dunhams from buying a new eotech 512 and some ammo. I was then approached buy some "half security", "half janitor guy" with a dust mop who told me firearms was not allowed in the mall and I was being asked to leave, (I just came from a few hours of range time with some of my Logansport PD friends of mine) I then identified myself as a police officer (Yes I showed Badge and ID) and was told, "only if I am in full uniform" I could be in the mall with my side arm on.

I requested that this mall security person call the mall manager and have them meet me on the spot to discuss this issue. (Thinking this guys has to be just blowing me smoke) So the person in charge of the mall walks up and I explain the situation to her and asked if this is how the mall treats all guest who carry a firearm and to toss out the fact for the moment that I was a police officer. In her very broken half English, half Spanish voice, I was then told that the mall does not allow people to carry any firearms in the mall and only police officers on duty, but they would "let me slide this time"

I then said, "no need to let me slide for anything". I then opened my bag and explained to the mall manager that the 429.99$ sight and ammo was going right back to the store for a full refund and I would never be back. I then explained to the manager of Dunhams why I was returning the items and that I will NEVER be back in that mall again. I have sent a letter to Dunhams Corp and the Company that runs the mall.....

So, Boycott Logansport Mall at all cost.

Thanks for the info, thanks for your service, and thanks for standing up for our rights.

 

[INDSIM]

Man this is driving me nuts!!

I understand what a delicate topic this is, indviduals 2nd amend. rights, etc, etc. Then we throw an "LE" into the mix who was open carrying in a public place. I understand that some LE's may not agree with me, since what I'm about to say is specifically directed towards the OP or any other officer who open carry's while not on duty, in a public place.

Your tactics suck and the only "LE's" that I've seen carry openly like that are new boots or idiots that don't stay in LE very long! It's one thing to be on duty in plain clothes, in your own jurisdiction or working a case. But to be an LE and open carry in a mall is just stupid!

It doesn't even take a new boot, who has common sense, to change the practice of open carrying in a small amount of time!

It doesn't matter if your a LE or not, it's their property and can ask you to leave. You may not be breaking any laws, but if your making their customers feel uncomftorable, then that's your own fault!

I strongly support the 2nd amend., and believe it's a persons right to carry openly if they have the proper documents, etc, etc. I also believe in the fact that a business has the right to say no guns on the property.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Wow, look at the peeing contest that develops even with like minded people. They easily are diverted from the subject and drawn into mud slinging on a non relevant issue. No wonder our rights are under attack, we make ourselves easy prey.

Yeh, it's a fun little experiment... I start on page one, get to reading... and skip straight to the last page to see how far devolved the comments have gotten. Easy way to guage if it's worth getting involved or not in a thread. This one crashed around page 3 or 4.