|
Calguns LEOs LEOs; chat, kibitz and relax. Non-LEOs; have a questions for a cop? Ask it here, in a CIVIL manner. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Out of State LEO
I am an active Deputy Sheriff here in Madison County TN, but my hometown is Los Angeles. I would like to take advantage of the LEOSA act since I am qualified under the provisions. I have some questions for the local LEO’s
1. Since this is the first time I’m bringing my G19, I know I have to talk to the airline. Once I pick up my luggage - I was planning to wear concealed. Should I keep my badge on , or just in my pocket? 2. Magazine capacity - am I subject to the 10 round limit? I also carry an extra mag. Will the local LEO give me a hard time in case they see that I Carry? I tried to call and speak to theAviation police but now got a standard response - I just don’t want to be in the headlines. 3. Other than my badge and ID, are there any other credentials I need to carry? I plan to carry a letter from my Sheriff, stating that I am an active member. Thanks, Peter Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Make sure your LEOSA ID and firearms qual. are in order. NO badge visible (unless you put a target around it). Per the penal code 32400, if you are on "official" agency business you can bring in large cap. mags. Otherwise, you are subject to state laws prohibiting them.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You just spit out some misinformation.. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Your badge means nothing to CA and LEOSA. LEOSA requires that you carry your LE ID assuming that it meets LEOSA criteria: "Individual must carry photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed that identifies the employee as a police officer or law enforcement officer of the agency."
LEOSA qual creds are for persons separated or retired and does not apply to active duty LE. LEOSA currently does not have an exemption for magazine capacity. CA exempts if you are here for "official" purposes, but otherwise you "should" abide by the laws of the state you are planning to enter. Last edited by code_blue; 10-22-2018 at 7:25 PM.. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
i am retired federal leo, all my time was in CA and enforcing CA laws via 18 USC section 13.
what misinfo?? you did not specify? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
It's all up to the agency to issue. Using 18 USC 13 to perform your job functions sounds like your scope of authority was limited. Because each Federal Agency has it's own authority and that can be limited. 18 USC 926 (b)(c) explains everything you need to know. OP is an active duty Deputy so there would be no issuance of a LEOSA identification because he would still possess his current agency ID. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
However, review this from our beloved Attorney General: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/leosiss.pdf ***Can active/retired officers carry large capacity magazines in states that restrict large capacity magazines? It appears that under California law 32310 PC, nobody may import large capacity magazines into California. There does not appear to be an exemption for law enforcement officers from other states. This may all lead somebody to ask whether federal law enforcement officers moving or being relocated into this state are in violation of California law if they bring their large capacity magazines with them, since such officers are in violation of California law and there is no exemption for them. ***I edited the answer from the AG. It had listed 12020(B) PC which is old. The new section is 32310(a) PC https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=32310.
__________________
The race is not won to the swift or the strong, but to the one who endures until the end. Safety Rule #1: 1) Treat all tweakers like they are loaded Last edited by Kevfin; 10-23-2018 at 1:36 AM.. Reason: Added updated information |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
32405. Section 32310 does not apply to the sale to, lending to, transfer to, purchase by, receipt of, possession of, or importation into this state of, a large-capacity magazine by a sworn peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, or sworn federal law enforcement officer, who is authorized to carry a firearm in the course and scope of that officer’s duties. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
The race is not won to the swift or the strong, but to the one who endures until the end. Safety Rule #1: 1) Treat all tweakers like they are loaded Last edited by Kevfin; 10-23-2018 at 8:56 AM.. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I worked in SF county and had MOU letter by Sheriff that granted full peace officer powers. I have read the LEOSA law. Last edited by whatevs09; 11-01-2018 at 5:58 AM.. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Active LE would and does qualify for LEOSA under "Qualified Law Enforcement Officers" while retirees/separated after 10-aggregate service years fall under "Retired Qualified Law Enforcement Officers". Active only needs their LE photo ID while retirees/separated folks need LE retiree/separated photo ID PLUS annual qual card. There are 2 separate categories. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
That may be an accurate statement, however the OP is not an LEO in Ca, and the basis of his question is about a federal law.
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Are you sure you read the LEOSA?
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Considering your lack of reading comprehension, I will take that with a grain of salt.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Second question, if you were “federal” LE, how were you enforcing Ca STATE laws? It sounds interesting, I’m just intrigued as to which federal agency it is where you enforced state laws.
__________________
It`s funny to me to see how angry an atheist is over a God they don`t believe in.` -Jack Hibbs -ΙΧΘΥΣ <>< |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
You say you have MOU letter with the Sheriff granting you full peace officer power. Interesting considering that the Chief LEO of San Francisco is San Francisco Police Chief. The Sheriff can't grant you full peace officer powers because you don't posses the full training required. You only need CA PC 832. Also the penal code stipulates what level of authority you have because you fall under CA PC 830.8 Federal Officers which are not peace officers unless you are on property adjacent to the federal property. You have to have nexus in order to exercise any "full peace officer" powers and only if there is an MOU with the lead LE agency. The lead agency in San Francisco is SFPD. If you understand how LEOSA operates then you should know that there are differences between active LEO's and retired LEO's As for the LEOSA card you referred to, Those are only available to retired individuals. You need that card plus the qual card. I'd really like to know what agency you worked for just as Trailerpark Trash asked. Last edited by Rogue187; 10-26-2018 at 9:19 AM.. Reason: correction |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
We started the same discussion about MOU's back in this thread but never seemed to have gotten to a conclusion: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...&highlight=mou
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
CA Penal Code § 830.8 (2017)
(a) Federal criminal investigators and law enforcement officers are not California peace officers, but may exercise the powers of arrest of a peace officer in any of the following circumstances: (1) Any circumstances specified in Section 836 of this code or Section 5150 of the Welfare and Institutions Code for violations of state or local laws. (2) When these investigators and law enforcement officers are engaged in the enforcement of federal criminal laws and exercise the arrest powers only incidental to the performance of these duties. (3) When requested by a California law enforcement agency to be involved in a joint task force or criminal investigation. (4) When probable cause exists to believe that a public offense that involves immediate danger to persons or property has just occurred or is being committed. In all of these instances, the provisions of Section 847 shall apply. These investigators and law enforcement officers, prior to the exercise of these arrest powers, shall have been certified by their agency heads as having satisfied the training requirements of Section 832, or the equivalent thereof. This subdivision does not apply to federal officers of the Bureau of Land Management or the United States Forest Service. These officers have no authority to enforce California statutes without the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of police in whose jurisdiction they are assigned. (b) Duly authorized federal employees who comply with the training requirements set forth in Section 832 are peace officers when they are engaged in enforcing applicable state or local laws on property owned or possessed by the United States government, or on any street, sidewalk, or property adjacent thereto, and with the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of police, respectively, in whose jurisdiction the property is situated. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
It`s funny to me to see how angry an atheist is over a God they don`t believe in.` -Jack Hibbs -ΙΧΘΥΣ <>< Last edited by TrailerparkTrash; 10-26-2018 at 10:30 AM.. |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
In a nutshell, no California Sheriff has legal authority to issue a letter "granting full peace officer powers." If a California Sheriff actually did such a thing, I'd really like to see the legal reasoning for it. A Sheriff does have the ability to appoint folks as deputies, which would permit the state to recognize them as peace officers, but not until they meet state POST training requirements (Refer to PC 832.3(a)). I did serve as a director of a task force that had federal agents assigned to it. PC 830.8 was the closest thing that we had to provide those agents with state powers, and even at that, PC 830.8 is clear that it does not communicate peace officer status. On the other hand, the feds made it quite easy for our state officers to be designated as federal agents. There is a colorable claim that U.S. Marshals and Deputy Marshals may claim California peace officer status. Under 28 USC 564 they "may exercise the same powers which a sheriff of the State may exercise in executing the laws thereof." Since the Sheriff of a California County does possess peace officer powers, this section would provide a basis for a U.S. Marshal or Deputy Marshal to claim the same. I'm not aware of any case law on the point.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
How about just naming the agency that worked for and your job title?
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Well truth be told I though about asking, but I've got a pretty good idea who it is, U.S. Park police. Outside of the Federal Reserve police I can't think of another federal LE agency working in SF that would be enforcing state law. There are USFS ranger's but I've never seen any armed inside the city.
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Keep going. Maybe it’ll work or they’ll forget about you. Us cops are a simple bunch, you know. Squirrel! |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/...ue-non-federal Of course, even though that authority notes "non-federal fugitives" and "marshal’s derivative state sheriff powers", it also specifically states "pursuant to a special apprehension program approved by the Attorney General" which the RTF program is. I don't think the intent was for DUSM's to run around enforcing local statutes outside of their normal functions, corroborating with what you alluded to with "colorable". Last edited by code_blue; 10-31-2018 at 1:30 AM.. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
One of the sergeant's I worked with went to NASA at Moffett, after he retired. He said they never left the base grounds when he tried to get me to go down there. I don't think a memo from the SF sheriff, would do them much good, since Moffett is in Santa Clara county. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
As a retired ATF agent, I have no retired peace officer standing in CA. We did do the 832 classes required for our SAC to certify us, but we had no independent peace officer status. If we came across a state violation (felony, or misdemeanor in our presence) while we were conducting a federal investigation we could exercise peace officer powers - rarely, rarely, rarely. Better to call a real policeman/woman and let them handle it.
Unfortunately ATF wont do the yearly retired LEOSA qualification in the Bay Area so I have a CCW. I agree that a letter from any Sheriff to me, even when working as an ATF agent, giving me full peace officer powers is questionable both legally and practically. |
#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
They didn't grant you a retiree ID with carry authority? You don't have to do you annual qual with your agency, only with an individual or entity authorized to qual other LE in the state i.e. a CA POST certified instructor. There are several private instructors who will do this let alone participating PD's or SO's. Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"They didn't grant you a retiree ID with carry authority? "
They can't. California law speaks of retired peace officers. I have a retired "Law Enforcement Officer" ID with the ATF logo, etc. But ATF can't grant retired carry authority. Have to go through the PC 25650 process. We did one qualification when LEOSA was implemented (HR218) and that was it. I have a cute Certificate of Training reflecting that. On my wall! Haven't really checked into SJPD or Santa Clara SO if their basic course will work, but its easier for me to shoot a very basic qualification course once every 2 years. I know we're going off topic. Apologies to mods. |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
Jess B. that's what you need along with a qual card from a local agency or POST firearms instructor. Your initial qualification was sufficient and you had 50 state carry until 1-year had lapsed.
I should've clarified that by "carry authority" I meant under the context of LEOSA meaning nothing restricting your ability like a negative separation or 5150 type prevention. I don't think this is OT since we're clarifying LEOSA questions. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
I'll check into it. I am a DOJ Firearms instructor. Just being lazy I guess. But it would be useful when traveling. Thanks.
Did we ever find out which agency whatevs09 worked for. Probably not any of my business - just curious. |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
I am curious if typical LEOs have something printed on their IDs stating they can conceal carry without producing a CCW permit which is redundant or does LEOSA cover every active qualified officer?
__________________
< The apocalypse is here!
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Yes on the back of my police ID it states "The identified police officer is authorized to carry a concealed or loaded firearm pursuant to section 12027 and 12031 of the CA penal code and also complies with sections 830.1 and 830.2 of the CA penal code."
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Did "whatevs09" go missing from this thread???
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life. |
#39
|
||||
|
||||
Yup, he’s “Fake News.” He can’t even answer a simple question from the adults. Very telling.
__________________
It`s funny to me to see how angry an atheist is over a God they don`t believe in.` -Jack Hibbs -ΙΧΘΥΣ <>< |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|