Is an off duty officer entitle to stop any crime even if he is not working at the time?

How would an unarmed man stop two armed ones without risking his life? Police Officers often step in to prevent incidents if they can when they are off duty, but they are under no obligation to risk getting themselves killed. My other half is a policeman and he'll always stop a fight or help someone in trouble if he is off duty - its why he joined up in the first place - but he isn't stupid about it. I should add that he is entitled to 'book on' and arrest someone if he needs to.

I should think he's entitled to make a citizen's arrest, as other people can. I believe if he's off duty, he's also entitled to chose not to. Morally, I think he should stop the robbery if he can. Being off duty, he may have been unarmed and by intervening may have put himself in danger.

Technically his is right, he doesn't have to stop the crime. Since in many cities he would not be covered if he was either shot or if one of the criminal were injured. Because our legal systems allows criminals to sue for injuries the cop would be solely responsible not the police department. Also if he had been drinking the cop could have faced charges himself. Sad, but this is how it is in a country so focused on suing people for just doing their job.

I can only answer for the states of Oregon, Utah, Arizona and Texas where I have been an officer. The answer is yes an off dty police officer is required to answer to a felony, even one committed outside his jurisdiction, but within his state. He is prohibited from responding to petty crimes off duty, such as traffic violations. In the case cited it would often be the case not to respond because you mentioned the gunman and cashier. I would have to have been there to determine my response or not. Better to let them have the money and get away than someone shot and possibly die. Now, if the cop actually cited being off duty when this happened he is a fool and incompetent and should be terminated. Police do not have the rights on private citizens. We have the right in every state and jurisdiction to carry concealed weapons are are most often required to do so. All police officers are also known as officers of the court. That means they are off the clock, off the payroll, but never off duty. Once the robbers left though, after the threat was over, the officer had no obligation to persue. I will assume the robbers left in a car. Unless the officers squad was outside he would be prohibited to persue in a private vehicle. No insurance for the chase, no lights, siren or radio the reasons. Of course if his squad was outside, he was lying about being off duty. With squad you remain on duty, but off the clock and payroll until you arrive home. Then you are on duty driving to the station. You should have stated where this occurred. I would have a look into the incident. I carry a Government Colt .45 on duty. 8 shots. I can guarantee I can hit 8 fatally within 50 feet. And it wouldn;t matter if they had bullet proof underware. I shoot directly for the nose. 185 grain round nose at 935 fps does the job. Even at 65 yds I can put a man down with a single shot. 1 or 8, I would take them on if bystanders weren't at risk. And I carry another 4 magizines (32 rounds) to handle more. Only shot I fired at a man as an officer was through the hand of a man about to commit suicide. He was about to squeeze off. My shot detached his tendons and the gun dropped. Viet Nam combat I killed enough I prefer not.

you would hope so..but cops are so "holier than thou" that I don't suppose one would help- unless of course they were black folks robbin' the place,they'd jump all on that-racist pigs!!!!!

its up to the officer, but the way i look at it your a cop its your duty to serve and protect, I am a Marine and I'm a Marine 24-7 it don't matter if I'm off work or not i still act and still maintain the military appearance and obey my orders.my brother is a cop and he has made several arrests while off duty.