On August 15, I walked into the Walmart in East Peoria looking for church shoes for the boys. I found a man playing cop instead.
Just inside the front doors stood a young guy in olive drab pants, uniform boots, and a black T-shirt. Strapped to his thigh was a large GLOCK in an open rig. No badge. No “SECURITY” on the shirt. No name tape. No spare mags. No handcuffs, radio or other typical LEO accoutrements.
He didn’t give off a cop vibe. He gave off the vibe of a man who liked the costume. As if the big gun made him a bigger man.
I asked the obvious question. “Nice rig you got there. You a cop?”
This was in Illinois, of course. Openly carrying firearms is strictly regulated. And seeing it in your neighborhood Walmart from a guy in plain clothes with no indicia is…not normal.
“Yeah, I’m a cop,” he said. Then: “Who are you?”
Wrong answer. When a stranger is carrying a duty pistol on his thigh in an Illinois grocery store, the public doesn’t owe him an autobiography. When asked, he owes the public an identification. That’s just the way it is in Illinois.
If we were in Indiana, this wouldn’t have been an issue. But people don’t just open carry in Illinois. It’s against the law for the most part.
“May I see your badge? Or at least what agency do you work for?” I asked.
“I don’t have to show you a badge. Why you want to know? What’s it to you?”
That’s when the conversation stopped being casual. A man with a gun who refuses to say who pays him isn’t “security.” He’s a problem. I told him so. When I see someone dressed like that, toting a gun like that with no badge, I think I’m looking at someone playing cop.
He didn’t back down. I offered to have the real police come sort it out. He told me to go ahead and call. So I did. 911 is easy to remember.
He was, apparently, real police. That made it worse, not better.
After I bought the shoes I came for, I talked to Walmart management. Their line was remarkable even by corporate standards. Store policy, they said, was that cops working armed security should not display a badge because they weren’t working in their official capacity as police.
I get that. So put them in something that says ‘security,’ I said.
The highest-ranking person I could get—loss prevention—told me that was against store policy, too. Policy against a badge. Policy against looking like security. Policy, apparently, in favor of a silent man with a GLOCK and a combative attitude.
What could possibly go wrong?
While I waited for the manager, the same armed fellow came back. “They” wanted me out, he said. I smiled. “YOU ain’t got the horsepower to trespass me if I’m not shoplifting. You ready to show me that badge yet?”
He muttered something and walked off. That’s what happens when a man is used to winning arguments with a holstered gun instead of a sentence.
I didn’t stay in the parking lot and stew. I used a phone the next day.
Tazewell County’s public information officer listened, then laughed out loud. “He’s not one of ours.” He suggested FOIAing the call info to find out Mr. Thigh Rig’s info if it was in a report.
East Peoria’s PIO, a sergeant, was equally decent and just as jovial. Not one of theirs either, but he didn’t blow me off. The deputy chief of East Peoria saw the 911 call, may have listened to it, and called Walmart’s security people himself.
The conversation, the PIO later said, was “spirited.”
In the end, the deputy chief made the rule simple to avoid future 911 calls about an armed man refusing to identify himself at Walmart: anyone working armed security at that East Peoria Walmart will wear a badge or wear security attire, Walmart policy be damned. The deputy chief put that in writing in an email to his entire department. “I just saw that email this morning,” he said. “So you’re the guy who called?”
We had a great chat and I invited him to have the chief or assistant chief come to one of our Guns Save Life meetings across the river in Peoria.
I still don’t know the gun-toting man’s name or his agency. The store wouldn’t give me either even when I stopped in a few days later to inquire. That part is unfinished business. The part that matters has already changed.
This is the lesson, and it’s not complicated. Bullies come in all walks of life. Some wear a uniform. Some of them even have a shield. Others may have a corporate handbook in the classic verbal judo technique known as “referring to a higher authority.”
At least one of them wears a thigh rig and a chip on his shoulder.
Meeting any of them with violence is how you become the story instead of the citizen who fixed the problem. A phone call works. A calm question works. A follow-up to the people who actually have rank works.
Polite objection isn’t weakness. It’s the adult version of force. You document. You ask. You escalate to the next grownup. You don’t let a bully with a gun on his leg train you to look at the floor.
An average person can get results. Don’t let a police impersonator—or a real cop with no people skills—intimidate you from asking reasonable questions.
We can think of multiple incidences of armed security shooting people who didn’t need shooting (1 2 3 4) in Chicago. Or felons pretending to be police while working security. Seeing someone dressed like that in Central Illinois who’s unable or unwilling to produce a badge isn’t the norm. Nor should it be. Not until we all can do that if we so choose on any given day.
Thank you sir for providing a modern day example. Of what happens when a state population has it’s gun civil rights abused by the local government.
Open carry is a 1st and 2nd amendment civil right. A society that can open carry is a polite society. I personally have open carried while talking to street cops. Here in Kentucky. We were both polite to each other in our conversation.
In fact we shook hands.
It’s not good when civilians or government agents who open carry guns, act in a rude mannered way.
See something. Say something, had a real effect. Good. No should be afraid to question anyone in public who is armed.
In fact we shook hands.
Heh. You know the whole shaking hands ritual is actually to show you don’t have a weapon in your hand and to ensure your hand is not ON your weapon? It’s why we shake with the right hand. It’s the epitome of “an armed society is a polite society.” “We can shake and be friends because you know I’m not going to try and kill you right away.”
It’s also why we salute with the right hand (and why you salute with your weapon if it is out and ready when the salute is necessary). And it’s a reason why lefties were considered dastardly and sinister – they could shake hands while still readying to strike.
I spent 22 years in the US Army. I know the historical reasons for rendering a salute.
And the importance of an armed government agent saluting or, shaking the hand of an armed civilian should never be casually dismissed.
How else does armed equality get acknowledged?
The “gun community” has a problem with the 1st amendment of open carry.
That’s even more convenient, shaking the with the right hand, and being a left hand shooter. Just be cordial. I don’t open carry often, but I am carrying where “legal” to do so.
The ‘pretend beard’, its almost like the hair is ashamed to be seen growing on his face and is trying to hide under his chin.
The real moral of the story is apparently nobody actually gives a shit if you’re wandering around even a staunchly anti-2nd area with a visible full size gun in a thigh rig.
Otherwise this fella would’ve triggered a greater reaction sooner.
Good point. Another point is that we shouldn’t need this type of security in a high-trust society. I haven’t seen security personnel at my local Walmart, except for one guy who drives around the parking lot all day. That only began during Covid.
“…staunchly anti-2nd area…”
this was nowhere near cook county.
It appears the bully here was you, Mr. Boch. Why insert yourself into a non-issue and create an issue? The armed man was not causing an issue, except to your inflated sense of entitlement. The ‘man playing cop’ was you, by going out of your way demanding the person acquiesce to your whims that they provide some kind of identification. Had they been subjecting you to an enforcement action you would indeed have been owed a statement of their authority, but you were way out of bounds in your initiation of the encounter merely to satisfy your baiting and demands. You should be ashamed of such behavior, not bragging about your perceived achievements in changing policy.
My thought also. What a busy body.
that seems true until the fact that we are denied lawful open carry here arises.
no identifier for an open carrier is truly weird locally.
i wish it was not the case.
“Yeah, I’m a cop,” he said. Then: “Who are you?”
At that point, there’s some dissonance. Is this actually an officer, or someone playing cop (illegal: see “Impersonating An Officer”). A citizen was concerned – was this someone faking who he was (no badge, no “Security” vest)? “See Something, Say Something.” The idea is to report concerns. Maybe the person is wrong, that guy actually was a cop. But if they’re right, and the guy isn’t a cop but a fly-by-night with a handgun? Without the training police must be given before they actually are armed in public? No training at all? Or worse? There’s been incidents of people being kidnapped and assaulted by folks pretending to be police, even going as far as having fake sirens and lights.
And here it is, today, the 25th anniversary of 3,000 people being murdered in one of the largest terrorist attacks on US. Not counting the ongoing deaths from illnesses caused directly by the debris. Wasn’t it recently that there was a story of a person seeing one of the 9/11 hijackers doing something extremely suspicious? But that person said nothing at the time, because they afraid it would be profiling an Arab / Muslim. “Better dead than rude,” as that quote goes. And dead there were.
So, in a place where open carry is generally illegal, you see someone wearing openly, in a tactical holster (not some semi-discreet OWB or IWB), and you think everyone should just mind their own business? I’m a big fan of being polite and leaving others alone. But this guy is visibly asserting authority (outside of the law – he’s not on duty) while not wearing anything that would inform people whose authority he is asserting. Heck, he could wear a blue WalMart vest, at least. This is the issue. And it’s partly an issue because cops who do this sort of thing are usually the cops who have a chip on their shoulder (in my experience).
Agreed. Boch went full Karen.
As far as I can remember, I have always been on the same page as Mr. Boch (the author of this story). This time I differ.
I recognize that it was very disconcerting for Mr. Boch to see a man with a handgun in a visible holster where the state has arbitrarily declared that illegal. What was so disconcerting, though? Was it the fact that the situation was “abnormal”? Was it the fact that being armed is “abnormal”? Was it the fact that open carry in Illinois is “illegal”?
The problem is that a “yes” answer to any of those questions totally undermines our inherent human dignity and inalienable right to effective self-defense. And those “objections” are also the very same arguments that civilian disarmament proponents use against us.
Any time that a mob (51% or more of society) can arbitrarily declare that something is “abnormal” or “illegal”–and thus forbidden–is a GIANT problem. That enables the mob to rob us of our inherent human dignity. The only behavior that should be forbidden is behavior that harms someone. Most of us have heard someone say, “Even though I do not like your speech I will defend your right to say it.” That should be our guiding principle. The situation in this story is no different and a much more constructive response is, “Even though I don’t like (because it is arbitrarily “abnormal” or “illegal”) your open carry, I will defend your right to do it.”
I will add another dimension to this situation. It seems like Mr. Boch also thought that this man somehow posed a significant risk to the employees and patrons in the store–apparently based solely on the man’s choice of dress and open carry status. Pro-tip: we should determine whether or not someone poses a significant risk to us based on their behavior toward us, not their outward appearance. Was the man standing with relaxed body posture and participating in a discussion? Then he wasn’t a threat. Was the man slinking around, sizing up people, and/or exhibiting pre-assault indicators? Then he was a potential threat. Remember, everyone could be a violent criminal carrying a hidden (concealed) firearm or knife: thus we ascertain their threat level base upon their overt actions toward others, not their choice of clothing or open carry status.
Outward appearances shouldn’t be ignored, either. In the animal kingdom, bright colors often serve as warnings, and appearance can communicate something meaningful. Clothing, symbols, and the way someone carries themselves can provide context as well. They shouldn’t determine our judgment by themselves, but they’re still one factor, along with behavior, body language, and the overall situation.
Dude,
Someone’s outward appearance would have to be quite spectacularly problematic to be at all significant.
In this case, the guy in the photo is wearing sturdy shoes (that are not even tied), green pants, and a black t-shirt. (I happen to have a lot of black t-shirts although I have no idea why.) That ensemble does not rise to the level of, “this guy is a threat.” Rather, his demeanor and interaction with other people should provide 99% of the information that we use to assess his threat level.
What was his demeanor? He looks reasonably pleasant in his photo. No one else around him seems to be concerned or alarmed. His biggest “red flag” was not identifying himself to a stranger who was not law enforcement in uniform. In my world that is not a red flag at all because I, too, refuse to identify myself to any stranger who approaches me and asks.
Actually, some guy standing around dressed like that says he is trying to be “tacticool” in general. At a gun range I wouldn’t give him a glance. At WalMart it says “I’m someone you should pay attention to” ESPECIALLY with the thigh holster on prominent display. If he’s not wearing anything that identifies his authority to wear that gun (in a state where that is not generally allowed) my FIRST thought was “wannabe tough guy” and my second would be “he’s going to be a problem if anything actually happens, or even if something marginal happens.” Because he’s obviously “flexing.”
Heck, I live in an open-carry state, and that look would make me give him the hairy eyeball. (And we have uniformed cops at most of the WalMarts here, at least part-time.)
The comment wasn’t specific to this situation. It’s a general comment that appearances shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand.
if you are in an open carry state i can see how this tortured reading of the situation might seem correct to you.
a kid walking around open carrying does not occur around here.
Wonderful story, Mr. Boch. I’m a former deputy sheriff and current legally armed citizen–what you did was perfect.
It’s outside the baseline of normalcy. He asked about ID or badge & sounds like the guy evaded. What’s to hide? Boch’s seen what happens when places hire “security” that is sketchy. That guy looks a little sketch.
If the guy had nothing to hide, then why would he not produce an I D or shield and merely answer simple questions relative to his employer?
The guy made a big deal out of little to nothing as if answering simple easy to understand questions was somehow a major undertaking.
If somebody with that demanding attitude came up to you, would you comply, or tell him off?
Drew: I don’t see that Mr Boch was demanding, e.g.,
“May I see your badge? Or at least what agency do you work for?” I asked.
“I don’t have to show you a badge. Why you want to know? What’s it to you?”
The response given by Barney, as Kevin suggested, was rather crude, rude and socially unacceptable.
If I’m a private citizen acting in my capacity as a private citizen, sure. If I’m a cop getting special privileges like being able to open carry where it’s otherwise illegal to, absolutely not. That “cop” shouldn’t have a badge if he can’t act professionally.
“If somebody with that demanding attitude came up to you, would you comply, or tell him off?”
But this is not just ‘somebody’ in this case, it was a citizen that made a legitimate and lawful inquiry. Nor was there an attitude in the request by Boch. A citizen has a legal right to ask a person claiming (or acting) to be a police officer to produce ‘identification’ of such status, something that substantiates that claim of being a police officer, and a police officer has a legal responsibility to provide that. The guy is in very casual attire with no marking or indications indicating an ‘official capacity’ as either a cop or store security.
There wasn’t any ‘attitude’ on the part of Boch.
Boch: “Nice rig you got there. You a cop?”
(This is a reasonable inquiry. This guy was in very casual civilian attire, no badge or official makings, open carrying a firearm in a jurisdiction where such action is generally prohibited (strictly regulated). It made him stand out and attract attention.)
Cop: “Yeah, I’m a cop, … Who are you?”
(This was the wrong question for him to ask. By simply saying he is a cop does not give him any authority to ask someone who they are. He is required to substantiate that he is a cop before he can conduct an inquiry of a persons identity under color of lawful authority and he has tried to invoke that lawful authority by saying he is a cop.)
Boch: “May I see your badge? Or at least what agency do you work for?”
(This is a citizens legal right. The guy said he was a cop, Boch was just asking nicely for him to substantiate that which the cop was legally required to do now that he has claimed to be a police officer, thus invoking a lawful authority, and made an identity inquiry under that lawful authority as a cop as to who Boch is.)
Cop: “I don’t have to show you a badge. Why you want to know? What’s it to you?”
(This is ‘attitude’, the attitude of the cop trying to intimidate and bully. Yes a$$hole you did have to show ‘a badge’, you were legally required to show/provide something that substantiated your claim of being a cop.)
Great article, very educational for those who might not stand up and say something. I look for ward to hearing the rest of the story.
Carnac viewed the digital image with the drop holster and predicted …
His name is Barney.
Why are you living in a state that doesn’t allow open carry?
Additionally, who made you the neighborhood Karen?
You acted like a moron, please stay in Illinois, we don’t want you in our free state.
Why? 7.5 year old twin boys, that’s why. As for not wanting me in your free state? So long as you’re not KY, TN, IN, MO, AR or GA, you probably won’t have to see me in 11.5 years. Next question?
I’m a fan of open carry states. It brings a smile to my face to see open carriers when travelling.
miss soles, i haven’t seen you since stripes!
thankyou for the enlightened commentary.
Could you be a little more confronting? The attitude and your questions resulted in the response.
Great way to find out whether “the armed man” is dangerous, get in his face, and try to piss him off.
Not much for self preservation, huh? Maybe your one of them quick draw guys.
Sound like a real Christian, shopping for “church” shoes.
I’m in AZ we open carry, hell we legally concealed carry, but NO ONE comes up and demands anything.
Yeah, because that’s normal there. It isn’t “normal” here in the gun control utopia of IL. Two seconds (show badge or mention department) and it would’ve been a nothingburger. He chose to deflect and get nasty, as if I should know my place in the pecking order. Then he tried to run me out of the place five minutes later. He’s a thug.
this makes me think folks from open carry places might not notice it as unusual in a concealed carry place.
and your “normal” comment is trueeven more so in this county.
Same, in Arizona this would be considered normal.
But then again I know of only one Walmart that has security in our area and that is deep in Maryville, one of the crime pits of Phoenix.
Since I don’t live in a state that hates firearms like Illinois, I can’t really say for sure this was the right action.
But I also have to note that the author sounds like a someone who bucks authority in some ways.
I would love to get the other side of the story, what was really said.
There was a reason the author was asked to leave, and I am betting that is related to the other side of the story we did not hear.
Not sure in Illinois, but in Arizona any private property agent (owner, security, employee) can trespass you for a lot of things, including mouthing off to the help.
Anyways.
“…bucks authority…”
carveouts for cops can make a man salty, he’s making a difference but denied rights gets old.
Perhaps this is a case of not “what” you say; but rather “how” others take what you said.
The true moral of the story is do not frequent a Walmart that feels the need to have armed security. Such is the result of previous, often several and recurring, instances of violence. Ditto gas stations, etc. If the business has reluctantly opted for armed security, that is a place you don’t want to patronize deliberately.
they allow customers to carry so…
i don’t think you can conclude that a business interested in keeping their clientele safe necessarily means “…several and recurring…” violent episodes.
All these responses have merit. My question is how many people just casually walk on by because they don’t want to be involved in something that doesn’t seem right. Try standing around as this man is in New York or California with a firearm , plenty of people do the same, just ignore and don’t get involved. Then that evening see that a shooting happened in that area they were just in that day. (See something/say something)? Oh sorry, too late now. People and cops can be civil and have a conversation, maybe, maybe not, like this situation. That could have been the end of the issue right there.
valid.
I just gave someone a speech (not 30 minutes ago) about taking effective action instead of reacting in anger or actions that just escalate. It’s heartening to read the same thing here.
The communist state of Illinois led by the criminal city of Chicago, America’s anus
On a related side note —
I see a lot of folks on my side of the aisle protesting against flock cameras, and while I sympathize with their position I’m not all the way there yet. Stories like this are why. Yes, flock cameras have been subject to abuse by law enforcement. But so have tasers, speed cameras, night sticks, handcuffs, and of course guns. The problem with police abusing the tools at their disposal — including flock cameras — isn’t the tool itself but the person wielding it. So long as there are no consequences for abusing authority people will continue to abuse authority, and the tools that come with that authority. The ultimate problem is the person, not the tool.
Assuming this account is accurate, the police officer in this case should have been fired and prevented from ever working law enforcement again. An e-mail sent to him and his fellow officers is almost certainly not enough to correct the fundamental issue that led to this confrontation. He will probably continue to abuse his badge and the tools that come with it for as long as he is in uniform.
I don’t think this guy worked for East Peoria PD. My guess is small town. Fired? Not from his department. Counseled on providing ID or showing a badge when asked? You betcha.
And the Walmart “Policy”? Sounds like BS. I guarantee you someone at Walmart Corp is reading this story today. Probably a lot of someones. And I’m guessing that store’s manager and loss prevention manager are also having busy days on their phones. You want to employ a thug to intimidate customers, expect blowback.
The problem with Flock cameras and the data they collect is that it makes abuse SO much easier. A nightstick is wielded by one officer (or a few). A taser is wielded by one cop. Flock allows a single cop to abuse a LOT of power all at once, or to easily have others abuse it right along with him. And it’s overwhelming because it is so ubiquitous.
I’m not even worried about the police abusing the camera data. Flock is a private company that can keep that data. They could sell certain data, or they could sell the entire company to google or something.
Let’s not overlook the fact that cities/towns that are cancelling Flock contracts are being approached by Axon to have even more intrusive gear installed. Axon’s latest equipment look like municipal streetlights and aren’t at all recognizable, and therefore wouldn’t be so prone to public outcry. This issue will only get worse.
Also, many are reporting that Flock is not removing their cameras in those cities/towns that have canceled. They leave them up and continue to keep them active in many cases. Very disturbing.
This is the line that sticks with me. ” You don’t let a bully with a gun on his leg train you to look at the floor.”
Amen, Mr. Boch!
Then they should NOT be allowed the privileges of police! They are not on duty if they are being compensated by a company or individual for their time. (At least they shouldn’t be.) Because this makes them something other than your average citizen. This makes them a special class of nobility. And that guy knew it and demonstrated it.
THIS is why we have trouble with certain police officers abusing their authority. THIS is why so many say stuff like “ACAB!” (And, no, not all cops are bad. Not by a long shot.)
(BTW, I also disagree with every single gun control law that privileges off-duty and even retired police. Veterans, too. If it doesn’t relate directly to training, familiarity, and competency then it shouldn’t be allowed. Cops get hunted by bad guys? Well, tough noogies. So do civilians – it’s why some civilians carry. They can qualify under the exact same rules as everyone else.)
Our Walmart here in N Central AZ has both Security and Loss Prevention vests. These are slipped on by employees doing that job. That Walmart policy, as stated, sounds truly AFU. I agree! No badge, no security vest, you just another citizen, but with a gun. In a no carry restricted State no less. Yes, he looks young. Problem only going to get worse unless corrected now.
The heart of the problem is the fundamental reality that most cops are sociopaths. It’s a job that draws sociopaths and a job that normal rational people avoid. Thus when you Interact with one the odds are extremely high that you are dealing with someone with a pathological personality. And this puts you at risk.
“… a job that normal rational people avoid.”
In 46 years of service I’ve met several “normal rational people” scattered throughout the service and society.
I also quickly learned that dealing with people is not an exact science.
I found people often placed themselves at risk due to the reactions of their own ignorance, laziness, evilness, narcissism, education beyond their understanding, youthful exuberance or deliberate indifference.
But, in a lot of cases, it just boiled down to what Butch Cassidy said, “What we have here is a failure to communicate.”
The fundamental reality is that people are people.
That said, I do not condone the behavior of individual in the image. Obviously, management did not think this manner of operation through before implementation. Both of which can be corrected prior to any further turmoil or damage.
I found this story interesting because I live about 15 miles from the location and have shopped there in the past. I may have approached the situation differently but I can’t say that either party was really too far out of bounds. East Peoria is right across the river from the south end of Peoria, which crime statistics will identify as highest crime area within 50 miles. Retail theft is a problem and there have been incidents of unsocial behavior in the parking lot in the past. I have not shopped there in the last ten years for those reasons. Security is needed at this location and I am glad that they are employing local officers to do it. That said, this particular officer would have been well advised to reassure the customer with a polite answer to his question and presented his police credentials when requested. I have several friends who are retired cops and most of them are really nice guys. A couple of them are less than pleasant when challenged in any way. Difference in people and I deal with it. I have been out with some of them and they open carry without any badge visible. I have never witnessed anyone challenging their authority to carry, ever. I carry concealed because that is all that I am allowed to legally do in Illinois. I didn’t work as a cop for thirty years and I am happy to quietly carry and leave the open carry to the professionals. Perhaps the gentleman should have asked the store management for clarification first before doing anything else.
. . .multiple INSTANCES. . .
Morton Walmart is better. EP has too many issues there. Morton may be smaller, but the clientele is a bit more civilized.
I wonder if that guy is from Pekin or Marquette Heights, his attitude fits.
Me thinks the real issue is that Mr Toughguy has a problem with the size of his dick 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Tut, tut. I remember when Walmart had a friendly greeter.
Interesting article, Mr. Boch.