Just in case you were under the impression that there were no more cop haters…look at this.
This ‘proclamation’ was posted on the AMC Garden State 16 in Paramus, New Jersey. It must be a joke, right? I mean, look at the discrepancies.
First, it says “No undercover officer”, followed by “no law enforcement of any kind.”
Second, what ‘rights of a private premesis’ (sic) are they referring to. Last we checked; corporations are firing workers that discriminate against cops. We haven’t found many, at least not with a national footprint, that is adopting a company-wide ban on providing goods and services to law enforcement members.
The one company that we have seen publicly admit that they will not serve officers is a Dallas area moving company. Shedrell “Sed” Ellis, owner of On the Move in Plano, Texas, took to Facebook to tell everyone that his company would not work for anyone in law enforcement.
Why? He was upset with the sentence handed down to Amber Guyger after she was found guilty of murdering Botham Jean after she claims she walked into his apartment, thinking it was hers.
While Ellis says he doesn’t blame cops for the sentencing, he also didn’t believe anyone would take him seriously if he stopped serving judges, lawyers or jurists.
Man, that is some sound business logic. Need I remind you that Ellis was arrested in 2014 for stealing a TV from Wal-Mart. Sounds like he has been in the moving business for a while.
But, just to be prudent in our writing, I reached out to Ryan Noonan, Director of Public Relations for AMC Theaters. I informed him that I was working on an article regarding this incident and asked if the poster was indeed endorsed by corporate, as it indicates.
Mr. Noonan responded:
Hi – it’s not legitimate. People are posting fake signs in hopes of creating confusion and outrage online and generating media coverage. It’s not my place to tell you what or what not to write, but the people who are doing this are desperate for the kind of media attention you’re talking about giving them, and these articles are only spawning more copycats.”
He was nice enough to provide links to articles written that had covered this very thing. Or did they?
Each of the three articles he referenced were written about hoax posters that were aiming their ridicule at singles and guys who look like they have never had sex.
AMC took to social media to let people know that the theaters themselves were not behind the hoax proclamations, saying:
“So sorry for any confusion! This sign was not posted by us, and this is not our policy. The sign was removed as soon as it was found by the theater team.”
Someone took credit for the sign shortly after – Twitter user @jinpayn. He issued an apology stating that it was supposed to be funny, not offensive.
He received an email from AMC’s Vice President of Security that basically stated he is unwelcome at AMC theaters and if caught in one of their properties, he will be trespassing, and law enforcement will be involved in handling the matter.
And that brings us back to the topic of our story. The poster in the Paramus theater was unlike all the others identified in the articles. This one singled out law enforcement based on the socio-economic demographics of the theater patronage.
Harmless prank? Or deeper commentary on someone’s hatred for cops?
We have been chronicling the stories of officers being discriminated against in fast food chains, coffee shops and other retail spaces. But it isn’t just consumer goods creating the issues. It goes well beyond that.
As crime in the state continues to rise well above national averages, the state legislature is taking aim at the law enforcement community.
The first example is New Jersey’s attack on the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA).
LEOSA is a federal law, enacted in 2004, which allows two classes of people — the “qualified Law Enforcement officer” and the “qualified retired or separated Law Enforcement officer” — to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States or United States Territories, regardless of state or local laws, with certain exceptions. The exceptions are that a state can restrict carry authority on private property (bars, amusement parks, etc.); a state can restrict carry on state property (courts, state office buildings, etc.); and on school grounds.
Officials amended the law in 2010 and 2013; in both cases LEOSA authority was expanded and enhanced.
LEOSA was enacted to ensure active and retired officers were protected from a patchwork of state concealed carry laws. It was also enacted to ensure that law enforcement officers — on or off duty — could be a force multiplier in the event something happens, and an off duty or retired law enforcement officer is nearby to help, even if they are outside their jurisdiction.
Enter New Jersey law makers.
Since inception, New Jersey has tried to restrict, place hurdles and impede an officer’s LEOSA authorities. How?
For starters, an officer must obtain a New Jersey permit to purchase and carry a firearm.
They are also not allowed to carry uniformly standard law enforcement hollow point ammunition; but instead must carry full metal jacket.
If they want to carry across state lines, they must qualify at the same level as active officers.
These regulations essentially turn retired law enforcement officers into criminals if they comply with federal law but dare not comply with New Jersey’s overly restrictive regulations. Essentially New Jersey says, “LEOSA means nothing. You must get a separate permit (which involves a fee) and follow our rules.”
New Jersey is also trying to use its buying power to impact gun control. Democratic governor, Phil Murphy, signed an executive order Tuesday that leverages the state’s purchasing power to coerce gun retailers, manufacturers, and financial institutions to comply with a more stringent gun-control regime.
Murphy’s order states that gun violence is a crisis with nearly 100,000 gun-related incidents in the US, and over 2,000 shootings each year in New Jersey. It goes on to break down the numbers for the Garden State:
280 homicides, 184 suicides, 764 non-fatal interpersonal and 599 accidental shootings per year.
This totals 1,874, which is slightly less than the ‘over 2,000’ indicated in Murphy’s order.
Under the executive order, the state, which purchases an estimated $70 million in firearms and related equipment annually, will refuse to do business with gun manufacturers and retailers that lack policies that deny guns to people with a history of mental illness or domestic abuse.
Retailers that wish to keep the state’s business will be required to prevent, detect and screen for the transfer of firearms to straw purchasers or firearm traffickers.
Murphy’s order will also deny the roughly $1 billion in financial-transaction fees the state pays annually to banks that have relationships with gun manufacturers and retailers that adhere to permissive policies.
New Jersey already has strict gun-control laws in place that require retailers to perform background checks, but the new policy will apply to out-of-state companies that are not bound by New Jersey laws.
Many of New Jersey’s elected officials are doing everything they can to handcuff officers from safely being able to do their jobs.
If they state’s politicians are going after cops, why should Joe Q. Public have to be better? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to post a flier as a joke?
Plain and simple: there is an all-out assault on our law enforcement community. There is nothing funny about going after a cop…even for the sake of humor.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.