Editor’s Note: The Shelby Star’s Facebook Page is presently full of stories regarding issues related to the Cleveland County Jail, the CC Sheriff’s Office, allegations that Sheriff’s Deputies are lying in Court and that a man, who plead guilty to stabbing a Deputy, was actually innocent. Little do they all know, but there are more stories that have not yet been told until YOU get to the end of this multi-part series of articles.
Issue No 1. A uniformed and armed Sheriff’s Deputy is run out of the Shelby Social Security Administration Office because he was wearing his sidearm.
The following is an exact statement from Sheriff Alan Norman’s personal Facebook Page regarding this incident:
I want you, the citizens of Cleveland County, to know that a situation involving a law enforcement officer occurred recently at the Social Security Office located on Schenck Street in Shelby.
A Cleveland County Sheriff’s Deputy, while working and visibly presenting himself as a law enforcement officer, stopped at the local Social Security Office to conduct business. He was met by an employee just inside the door who told him that he needed to vacate the building due to him having a firearm on his side, explaining that the office manager had given a directive to all employees at the Social Security Office to ask law enforcement officers to leave the building and disarm themselves prior to returning. The Manager also directed his employees to call 911 to report that an officer had entered the building wearing a firearm, however the 911 call was not made.
Following that directive would place a uniformed law enforcement officer in jeopardy and would compromise their safety, especially in the treacherous times we are living in. After speaking to several other Sheriffs throughout the state I have found that this is not the official policy at other local Social Security Offices, in fact many welcome law enforcement officers inside of their buildings. I feel that you, as citizens and taxpayers, need to know how the manager of the Social Security Office in Shelby feels about law enforcement.
In closing, I would like to assure you that regardless of this situation we will provide professional law enforcement services to the staff of the Social Security Office, as well as all the citizens who frequent their building to conduct business if called upon.
(Posted directly from Cleveland County Sheriff Alan Norman’s personal Facebook page.)
However, On the Star’s Facebook Page article regarding this subject, Matt Williams, who states he is a Federal Employee, posted this comment, directly contradicting Sheriff Norman’s statement:
Yeah, I live here in the county, but I work for the federal government (not SSA), and this is not unusual at all. Two things to remember, here: 1) he was not at SSA on official business (he was on duty, but he was there for private business) and so was considered a private citizen, and 2) no private citizen may possess or carry a firearm on federal government property for any reason. The fact that he was in uniform is entirely beside the point. This is a safety issue. How hard would it be for someone to fake a uniform and walk into any federal building with a firearm? That is why we have an across-the-board, universal regulation prohibiting anyone outside of federal forces on official duty (yes, the federal government has our own security forces at our facilities whose job it is to protect the property and all those on that property) from bringing a firearm on federal property. This is not a pro-gun or anti-gun issue at all. This sounds an awful lot more like that deputy didn’t know the laws about federal property (which is concerning in and of itself) and had his ego bruised when he was asked politely to comply. If the tables were turned, and he was asking a private citizen to surrender their firearm or leave it in their car or house rather than brandishing it openly, he would definitely prefer that the citizen do so without issue. Case closed. This is a non-story.
Robert A comments on these conflicting notions:
Both Sheriff Norman and Matt Williams (No relation to Robert A) agree that the Deputy was on duty, in uniform and armed, but was there on personal business.
Robert A believes, in this situation, that a Sheriff’s Office Deputy; in uniform, armed, and away from his home is ALWAYS considered on-duty. Even in a moment of personal business. Period! An Officer that is in uniform and armed is always a deterrent to crime, no matter where he is. Sitting alongside the highway watching traffic, eating lunch, attending a Football Game, or entering a Social Security Administration Office. However, Sheriff Norman should make sure that his officers do not abuse this benefit by spending too much time on personal business as this would give the public negative opinions of the Sheriff’s Office. Also, Robert A has had “official” business at the Social Security Administration Office in Shelby and the Post Office in Fallston and elsewhere on a number of occasions and has NEVER seen a uniformed and armed Federal Security Officer on duty during any of those times.
On the other hand, Robert A also believes that every governmental official, be it the FBI, DOJ, IRS, etc., as well as the Cleveland County Sheriff’s Office, The Cleveland County Commissioners, AND the Cleveland County School Board are trained sufficiently and well understands that they are NOT to violate any persons Constitutional and Human Rights unless an actual crime has been committed. With NO EXCEPTIONS. And ANY and EVERY violation must be severely punished. Including Commissioners and School Boards attempting to silence public citizens who speak up and speak out at legal public meetings with messages that the governmental agency officials and foolish Board Chairmen just don’t want to hear.
Folks, Stay tuned for additional parts of this multi-part series. As well as intelligent commentary, discussion, conclusions, and recommendations. And folks, please note that you always get informed, truthful fair, and balanced accounts on this platform for FREE. And very seldom on the Shelby Star, who seems to only want to charge readers for their often incomplete and one-sided reporting.