PDA

View Full Version : Off Duty Cops Carry Restrictions?



garyb
01-25-2011, 07:31 PM
Recently in Florida, an "off duty cop" attempted to carry his service handgun into a city hall meeting and was escorted out and asked to secure his piece in his car. He returned without his gun. It was detected when he passed through the security screening, metal detector. Remember he was off duty and attempting to carry through the metal detector. There was already an on-duty officer carrying a weapon in the meeting to enforce safety and security.

Should he be permitted to carry a service gun when off duty and worse yet, in a restricted location? Do you feel that cops should be exceptions to the law, as they are here to serve and protect? OR Do you feel that Cops should be restricted in areas that the general public is restricted?

The world is changing and just like we put Marshals on planes, perhaps we should allow law enforcement to be an exception. On the other hand, if they are not on duty, why should cops be afforded the opportunity to break the rules (on carry of service weapons) and in restricted areas?

Personally, I understand both sides of the issue...but I'm not a cop and I don't break the law.

CS534
01-25-2011, 07:43 PM
To the best of my knowledge, and in my experience as a current LEO, under the LEOSA (law enforcement officers safety act) off duty police can carry their gun anywhere in the country off-duty. The exceptions are that they must not be consuming alcohol, and the literature states "concealed" . Also you must be qualified through your department with whatever weapon you choose to carry. Some departments regulate what caliber to be used. This is to the best of my knowledge, but I always keep my gun concealed while off-duty and have never had an issue. The literature is bit "legal mumbo jumbo" and clear as mud. It also should be noted that retired Officers are entitled to carry under leosa

garyb
01-25-2011, 07:51 PM
It is important to note: The off duty cop was stopped at the metal detector, where everyone is screened. He was asked to remove his weapon at that point and escorted out to his car by another officer who was on duty and permitted to carry at the city hall meeting. The off duty officer was known to have filed grievances against the city and that was in part the reason he was attending the meeting.

ltxi
01-25-2011, 07:56 PM
Plus the additional exception that if off duty/not on official business you also have to comply with most local civilian restrictions. Such as...no >10 round, high cap mags when visiting California. Wonderfully stupid that particular bit is.

CS534
01-25-2011, 08:14 PM
There must be more to the story, an officer would normally not do that to another officer

Bawanna
01-25-2011, 08:17 PM
Good cops are never off duty. They should most assuredly be allowed to carry everywhere all the time. They interact with people that sometimes does not create friendships and more often than not creates extremely irate folks who would love to catch an off duty officer napping especially without his gun.
Civilian employee's such as myself I believe should be allowed to carry within the dept. We are not. I often times have to deal with irate people who an officer ticked off but I'm the nearest thing to lash out at.
Never been a problem so far but the day will come. I lock my side arm in a safe at my desk and don't mention the PM45 on my ankle and all is good.
I don't support anything that hinders officers abilities to protect themselves anywhere anytime.
I say if they have credentials good to go on planes, trains and cruise ships anywhere anytime.

ltxi
01-25-2011, 08:38 PM
I agree with you Bawanna. At least we now have LEOSA. It used to be worse.

Longitude Zero
01-25-2011, 09:43 PM
My departments policy is simple, anywhere you are allowed to carry a weapon on duty you can carry off duty.

mr surveyor
01-25-2011, 10:22 PM
Law Enforcement Officers are "civilians"..... I am a "civilian" ... I see absolutely NO difference.

No insult intended to any of our guys in blue (or whatever color for the day). I'm glad I live in Texas where governmental meetings are "off limits" only when posted with the proper signage... especially since I am part of a county governmental entity. There are a few places that I have to disarm whereas LEO's, on or off duty do not have to, and I really resent that. My rights to self defense are no different in my opinion.

That's my answer and I'm sticking to it.


surv

earle8888
01-25-2011, 10:44 PM
Some interpretation, not judicial, claim that the Concealed Carry Law/Ordinance, as passed in Ohio prescribes the same limit and privileges to Off duty as CCW Holders. On duty is all together different.
Not up to date with current laws, But, once upon a time, 1970's, Civilian LEO or government Agent COULD NOT CARRY IN NYC without a special written permission, even on official duty. The only exceptions I am aware of at that time was Secret Service Agents currently with the President. This was a very sore point with a lot of LEO's, FBI's, IRS's, etc. Any LEO's from the 70's remember this?

jlottmc
01-26-2011, 07:37 AM
Law Enforcement Officers are "civilians"..... I am a "civilian" ... I see absolutely NO difference.

No insult intended to any of our guys in blue (or whatever color for the day). I'm glad I live in Texas where governmental meetings are "off limits" only when posted with the proper signage... especially since I am part of a county governmental entity. There are a few places that I have to disarm whereas LEO's, on or off duty do not have to, and I really resent that. My rights to self defense are no different in my opinion.

That's my answer and I'm sticking to it.


surv


Let me go one farther, as a CJ student and aspiring Lawman, why would I be any different from any one else? There is that whole bit in the law about a "protected class" (roots in the 14th amendment), why is LE more important than me, and for that matter why are the people we elected more important?

johnh
01-26-2011, 08:03 AM
I suspect the court staff were not aware of the law in this case. My understanding is that the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act” allows active duty or retired police officers to carry anywhere not prohibited by federal law. It trumps all state and local laws. I had a conversation about this just the other night with an LEO friend, as we worked on curriculum for some CCW courses. He was mentioning how his agency changed their off duty firearms type allowed and qualification so as to better support officers carrying under the provisions of this law. His agency was forward thinking enough to allow officers to qualify with any handgun for off duty use, so that they may meet the "qualification" requirement of the new law with any sidearm they may want to carry concealed under its provisions. Quite nice of them in my opinion, and just being practical.

mad1ben2
01-26-2011, 08:38 AM
I think off duty LEO should be able to carry anywhere. I think I (plain-jane civilian) should be able to carry anywhere with my ccw. However, I do think there is a difference between me and an off-duty LEO and if the law gives him/her more freedom in where they are allowed to carry, I'm cool with that. I'd rather the law give me the right to carry in those special locations too, but if it does not, that doesn't mean I feel off duty LEO's rights should be restricted to the same level my carry rights are.

CS534
01-26-2011, 08:48 AM
I'm about to opt out if this convo, I'm not gonna get into an arguement over who should be alowed to carry their guns where and when. Its plain and simple, an LEO has more training, knowledge of the laws, and responsibilities than others. Before becoming an officer I took a ccw course. We shot at 25 feet and were "qualified". Some of the students had never fired a gun before that. I'm not gonna say that all ccw courses throughout the country are set up the same way, but police training far surpasses most of those courses. If you can't carry your gun somewhere because of a sign, or a law, sorry, but at least there may be an leo there with their gun ready to take action if needed. I would feel better about that than knowing there are absolutely no guns allowed in an area.

garyb
01-26-2011, 08:59 AM
I suspect the court staff were not aware of the law in this case. My understanding is that the “Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act” allows active duty or retired police officers to carry anywhere not prohibited by federal law. It trumps all state and local laws.


JohnH, I think you may be correct about this. The news report stated that this particular police officer had filed grievances with the city and won previously. I believe he knows the law and continues to build a case, as he claims that he is being singled out. I also believe the city officials were concerned about this particular police officer attending the meeting with his weapon, due to the prior issues with him. The city officials are scared. This was never stated in the news report, but I am reading between the lines because I also feel there is more to the situation than meets the eye.

Not trying to stir up anything. This situation was real and is interesting enough to deserve a friendly general discussion.

jlottmc
01-26-2011, 11:30 AM
I think off duty LEO should be able to carry anywhere. I think I (plain-jane civilian) should be able to carry anywhere with my ccw. However, I do think there is a difference between me and an off-duty LEO and if the law gives him/her more freedom in where they are allowed to carry, I'm cool with that. I'd rather the law give me the right to carry in those special locations too, but if it does not, that doesn't mean I feel off duty LEO's rights should be restricted to the same level my carry rights are.


That is were I was going, but if LE is restricted like we are, then they may make enough stink to get that restriction lifted for all of us. Dirty Pool yes, but sometimes that's what it takes.

On another note, there are many less than trained individuals that think their CCW/CHL/what ever you call it is, covers the spectrum. Fine, and yes the police sit through more training, than these new guys. There are also officers that have no business with a weapon as well. Then there is also the fact that a lot of prior military has one of these permissions, and their training doesn't just go away. What about us, and to continue that thought, the tactics may be older, but they still work. Just my 2.

ltxi
01-26-2011, 08:29 PM
Some interpretation, not judicial, claim that the Concealed Carry Law/Ordinance, as passed in Ohio prescribes the same limit and privileges to Off duty as CCW Holders. On duty is all together different.
Not up to date with current laws, But, once upon a time, 1970's, Civilian LEO or government Agent COULD NOT CARRY IN NYC without a special written permission, even on official duty. The only exceptions I am aware of at that time was Secret Service Agents currently with the President. This was a very sore point with a lot of LEO's, FBI's, IRS's, etc. Any LEO's from the 70's remember this?

Yes...although and of course NYC took it in the shorts on this one.

You obviously have a good, informed understanding of the issue in this thread. Sorry to disagree with you JohnH, but as much as I think that it probably should, LEOSA does not provide blanket exemption from all non-federal laws.