CALLING ALL LEGAL BEAGLES!!!!! LEO Carry Laws

[HighSpeedDreams]

Gents,

Sorry for the (somewhat) off-topic question but I know there is a wealth of knowledge on this site, and I need your help winning an argument.

I have been having this argument with my co-worker for the last two days. Although I love everyone's opinion, I am looking for a link to a website providing me with hard proof (USC Code, Fed Regs, etc....).

Here is the argument.

My co-worker is working under the assumptiong that Federal LEO's (who have been granted nation-wide carry priveleges) are protected, under their credentials, to carry whatever weapon they wish. He agrees that yes it violates our agencies firearms policy to carry a non-approved (in the commission of our duties) weapon but that it is not a "chargable" offense if we are carrying a personally owned weapon on our time without a CCW.

Here's a scenario.

I am off duty and carrying at the mall. I am carrying my XD instead of my agency issued weapon and a local P.O. notices me printing. That P.O. approaches me and asks me if I am carrying. I say yes and identify myself as a LEO. Now, in most cases the blue line would end that encounter with the flash of a badge/credentials, but lets say this particular P.O. is incredible thorough and asks me to follow him to his vehicle so he run a check and speak with me in private, again completley hypothetical. So, I comply and once outside he asks me to show him my weapon. Let's say he is very well informed when it comes to firearms and he makes a statement in regards to my weapon being a personally owned weapon and not an issue sidearm, at which time he asks to see my state issued CCW applying to that personally owned weapon. Under my co-workers argument, I never applied for a state issued CCW permit because I was under the assumption that my credentials covered the carry of all weapons in my collection.

My co-worker claims that the only way, in that scenario, that I could be charged with anything is in a civil suit if the weapon was used in the commission of a crime and/or used in the commision of LEO duties.

I believe him to be horribly mistaken, but I need hard proof and this is where you come in.

Anyone have definitive knowledge on the topic and a link to a site that could help me in winning this argument?

If you're a LEO with knowledge in this area, please PM me.

Thanks in advance for any help!

HSD

[Henchman]

Your friend would be correct that the tin covers him carrying a weapon no matter if it is issued or personally owned. Anyone who would charge him for not carrying the correct weapon if at all possible would just be a freaking communist. I'm just thankful that the guy is willing to step up and carry when off duty.

[Buck]

HR 218 PCS

Calendar No. 599

108th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 218

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

--------------------------------------------------

AN ACT
To amend title 18, United States Code, to exempt qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed handguns.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004'.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926A the following:

`Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers

`(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--

`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

`(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;

`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

`(d) The identification required by this subsection is the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.

`(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--

`(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);

`(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and

`(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926A the following:

`926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers.'.

SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is further amended by inserting after section 926B the following:

`Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers

`(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

`(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--

`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

`(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified retired law enforcement officer' means an individual who--

`(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability;

`(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;

`(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or

`(B) retired from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;

`(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the retirement plan of the agency;

`(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the State's standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms;

`(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

`(d) The identification required by this subsection is--

`(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual retired from service as a law enforcement officer that indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the standards established by the agency for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or

`(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual retired from service as a law enforcement officer; and

`(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides that indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State to meet the standards established by the State for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.

`(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--

`(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);

`(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and

`(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is further amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926B the following:

`926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers.'

Passed the House of Representatives June 23, 2004.

Attest:
JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 599


108th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 218

[HighSpeedDreams]

The guy never carries off-duty and failed to qualify twice last quarter on our less than elementary qual course. He doesn't know the first thing about firearms. That's why it's of interest to me to find out who is right in this discussion.

BUCK

Although the above is great, is it applicable to off-duty carry of a non-agency weapon? Maybe I read it wrong?

[Renegade]

Well I cannot speak for all 50 states, but in Texas, this is the law that says you cannot carry a handgun:

§ 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his person a handgun, illegal knife, or club.

And this is the law that exempts Texas Peace Officers and Feds (Special Investigators).

§ 46.15. NONAPPLICABILITY. (a) Sections 46.02 and 46.03 do not apply to:
(1) peace officers or special investigators under Article 2.122, Code of Criminal Procedure, and neither section prohibits a peace officer or special investigator from carrying a weapon in this state, including in an establishment in this state serving the public, regardless of whether the peace officer or special investigator is engaged in the actual discharge of the officer's or investigator's duties while carrying the weapon;

So it seems pretty obvious who the actual owner of the handgun is is irrelevant (note it also specifically covers you when off-duty). You co-worker is correct for Texas.

[Buck]

I’m sorry… I thought that was already said… Your friend is right… The law states “ Firearm” and does not specify which one… HOWEVER, I am sure that the agency that he works for would have a very serious problem with anyone carrying an unauthorized firearm, or unauthorized ammunition in an authorized firearm.

Depending on the circumstances I believe they would take very severe administrative action, up to and including several days in the penalty box, or removal from office.

[HighSpeedDreams]

We both work for the same agency and we both agree that we would be in violation of our firearms policy. What we are debating is whether or not we could be charged with anything, be it a state or fed violation of regs. That is our only dispute.

[Renegade]

We both work for the same agency and we both agree that we would be in violation of our firearms policy. What we are debating is whether or not we could be charged with anything, be it a state or fed violation of regs. That is our only dispute.

No problems if you live in South Texas, assuming you meet the Texas definition of a Special Investigator.

[cathellsk]

I don't have any links to prove your friend is right....but he is.

I've read alot on this issue (LEOSA) and never once has it been an issue. I work for the BOP and we don't have take home guns, yet we are covered by LEOSA. If you were right then we wouldn't be able to carry even though we're covered. That would suck! ;)

What I have read is that if your agency lets you carry 24/7 (ATF, FBI, DEA, etc.) then your carrying in the capacity of that agency and they'll have your back in case of an offduty shooting. If you carry your own firearm, like us, then your on your own in an offduty shooting.

EDIT: Just saw your last post. I think you need to talk to someone in your agency to verify this. But if there are no restrictions with them, just what I said above about them having your back in an offduty shooting, your not going to get into trouble if you carry something else. Besides, who would know except someone in your agency anyway?

[DirtDiver71]

not to be sarcastic... but... isnt this the kinda' thing they (should)teach at whatever academy or school you had to go through to be issued whatever credintials you were?

Having learned what I did in the JOKE of a CCW class I was required to go through.. I can't imagine this didnt come up somewhere along the line in training or classroom..

[HighSpeedDreams]

Although I agree with you to the tenth degree, I believe that there are many misconceptions about most LEO's interest in anything firearms related. My interest in firearms as a hobby has me now labeled as the "gun-nut".

Most of the guys I work with can't tell you a single thing about CCW laws and/or Fed regulations regarding firearms and our agency is only authorized/willing to tell us about our agency firearms policy. We have been, however, instructed that our off-duty carry abilities only apply to service weapon. I have never put much stock in that because our FI's are brainwashed for legal reasons.

[Buck]

What we are debating is whether or not we could be charged with anything, be it a state or fed violation of regs. That is our only dispute.


NO!!!! YOU ARE WRONG AND YOUR FRIEND IS RIGHT!!!!!

[HighSpeedDreams]

Yeah yeah yeah. I got it. I have to go in there tommorrow and shove my foot in my mouth.

Thanks.

[DirtDiver71]

I wouldnt take the "gun nut" thing personally.. just be sure to let'm know it aint yer ass theyre gonna be hidin' behind when the lead starts flyin'...

Having a few friends who are Sheriff's Deputies here I get what you're saying though..

[cathellsk]

Yeah yeah yeah. I got it. I have to go in there tommorrow and shove my foot in my mouth.

Thanks.

Yeah that sucks. But I'd be asking someone in your agency just what the hell their policy is for you guys off duty. They can't restrict you from carrying offduty now that LEOSA is law. Like I said above, from the many topics everywhere I've read about this, your agency sounds like they've got you offduty as long as your carrying their issued gun. But I guarentee your probably allowed to carry your own gun, just then they won't touch or help you if your involved in an offduty shooting. Your definitely not breaking any laws, just maybe department policy and we can't answer that for you.

[Patrick Aherne]

Dude,

If you showed valid FED LEO credentials, I could give two shiezas what you are carrying. I don't know what your agency policies are and don't care to. I might call your office and verify you work there, if you are a dirtbag looking narc, or something. Otherwise, you will get the wave and a suggestion to buy a better holster.

You realize this thread reinforces lots of local cops' opinions about some FED LEOs, don't you? I'm just sayin'... No disrespect meant, but c'mon.

[11B101ABN]

The guy never carries off-duty and failed to qualify twice last quarter on our less than elementary qual course. He doesn't know the first thing about firearms. That's why it's of interest to me to find out who is right in this discussion.

BUCK

Although the above is great, is it applicable to off-duty carry of a non-agency weapon? Maybe I read it wrong?


Tell your freind to say, in a loud and thunderous fashion: BAAAAA.

[Submariner]

Although the above is great, is it applicable to off-duty carry of a non-agency weapon? Maybe I read it wrong?

Write a letter to your State Attorney General asking your question instead of seeking an answer on the errornet.

Free legal advice is worth EXACTLY what you pay for it.

[HighSpeedDreams]

Needless to say, today was a humbling experience.