Can the police department legally refuse a bar from having a detail?

I work at a bar in Massachusetts and the chief of police has advised us that he will not allow us to have a police officer in our bar, even though we have requested one. Is it legal for them to refuse a detail to a business, considering that the business itself pays for it?

rob2681 said:

I work at a bar in Massachusetts and the chief of police has advised us that he will not allow us to have a police officer in our bar, even though we have requested one. Is it legal for them to refuse a detail to a business, considering that the business itself pays for it?

Click to expand...

Yep. You have no legal 'right' to employ an off-duty officer and the department can restrict an officers 'off duty' work.
Hire a private security guard.

the reasoning behind his refusal was that we put his officers in danger

rob2681 said:

the reasoning behind his refusal was that we put his officers in danger

Click to expand...

Okay???????

rob2681 said:

the reasoning behind his refusal was that we put his officers in danger

Click to expand...

Your place isn't a Sunday School now is it?
Don't you hire bouncers to eject roudy drunks?
Duhhhh, that put's their officers in danger in addition to a number of other implied risks.

okay so police should basically just stay away from any potential danger?

i dont know it just seems to be funny to me that we are basically denied protection from the police department. I guess you can only take the phrase to serve and protect so far.

rob2681 said:

okay so police should basically just stay away from any potential danger?

Click to expand...

Honey, you simply do NOT get 'it', do you??
Police officers face ACTUAL (not just 'potential') danger every day of their lives.... however, they do not have to accept those risks, or any other, as private security for you.

i dont know it just seems to be funny to me that we are basically denied protection from the police department.

Click to expand...

You are NOT being denied 'protection'. As stated before, the police department has the right to set limits on what their officers can do on, or off, duty.

I guess you can only take the phrase to serve and protect so far.

Click to expand...

Maybe you think the police should put "Protection for Private Hire" on the side of their car. Or maybe, "To protect and serve... those who can afford it". Or maybe, "Give us your money and we will provide 'special' services for you".

rob2681 said:

the reasoning behind his refusal was that we put his officers in danger

Click to expand...

He doesn't need "reasoning." You don't have some kind of right to hire an off-duty police officer for security.

You're not being denied protection...you're getting the same protection as everyone else.

If you have any problems and need the police then dial '911'.

Otherwise, as JETX suggested, hire your own security guard.

rob2681 said:

i dont know it just seems to be funny to me that we are basically denied protection from the police department. I guess you can only take the phrase to serve and protect so far.

Click to expand...

When a private business hires an off duty police officer, the employing agency adopts liability for that officer's actions whether they want to or not. If the officer detains someone, injures someone, or - God forbid - has to shoot or otherwise take someone down, the employing agency WILL get sued along with the bar.

So, the police department has a vested interest in deciding where and under what circumstances their employees will work when not on duty.

And as has been pointed out by others, you are NOT being denied protection. You are only being denied the opportunity to hire a local police officer to do your bidding. However, maybe you can hire an off-duty cop from a neighboring community to do it.

- Carl