PDA

View Full Version : All this talk about POST training for CCW


DDT
04-06-2009, 3:13 PM
Why not just send yourself through the minimal POST training and firearms training and then volunteer as a reserve for your city's PD? They need the help I am sure. Even if you need Level III training it's only one semester of nights and Saturdays. A small price to pay to help out your city and get something valuable out of it for yourself.


Plus, according to to Jerry Brown any reserve officer who is qualified with a handgun can carry off-duty AND qualifies for LEOSA for nationwide carry.

http://www.policemag.com/Forums/From-the-Editor/New-Forum-Features/CALIFORNIA-AG-S-INTERPRETATION-OF-LEOSA/418.aspx

3. Are all active reserve officers authorized to carry?

Yes, if they meet the criteria of the Act (active).

Retired reserves are not likely to qualify - they need to have non-forfeitable

retirement rights. Most don't.

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 3:43 PM
Why not just send yourself through the minimal POST training and firearms training and then volunteer as a reserve for your city's PD? They need the help I am sure. Even if you need Level III training it's only one semester of nights and Saturdays. A small price to pay to help out your city and get something valuable out of it for yourself.


Plus, according to to Jerry Brown any reserve officer who is qualified with a handgun can carry off-duty AND qualifies for LEOSA for nationwide carry.

http://www.policemag.com/Forums/From-the-Editor/New-Forum-Features/CALIFORNIA-AG-S-INTERPRETATION-OF-LEOSA/418.aspx

3. Are all active reserve officers authorized to carry?

Yes, if they meet the criteria of the Act (active).

Retired reserves are not likely to qualify - they need to have non-forfeitable

retirement rights. Most don't.
The POST training that (at most) can be required is the 24 hour PC 832 Firearms course. Of course, a Level III Reserve module includes the PC 832 training. The problem with thinking that a Level III can CCW under the terms of the LEOSA is that their agency has to approve of them carrying firearms on duty, even though the Level III module requires firearms training. The other problem proving that the Level III officer (or for that matter, any person othewise qulified) meets all 7 criteria.
Here they are:


"an employee of a governmental agency";
"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";
has "statutory powers of arrest";
"is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm";
"is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency";
"meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm"; and
"is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm."

The most difficult hurdle for the Level III is #2 above. The same goes for other people that clearly meet 1, and 3-7 above and are authorized to enforce certain laws in the course of their job, but not to perform GENERAL law enforcement. Deciding that depends upon how the phrase "any violation of law" is to be read. Does that mean General Law Enforcement or does that mean simply responsibility for enforcing certain portions of the law? Remember, the LEOSA's only "requirements" are those 7 above. Note that the LEOSA does not mention Full Time, Part Time, Sworn, or Non-Sworn status. You meet the criteria or you do not...

Texas Boy
04-06-2009, 3:44 PM
Even without CCW privileges, I wouldn't mind giving back to my community via the reserve program. Being between jobs at the moment also gives me a little more flexibility. However, a basic internet search for POST Level I training yielded - http://www.theacademy.ca.gov/?p=flyer&c=1473

Meeting from 6-10pm 3x a week and 8-5 every Sunday for six months is a serious commitment for anyone, esp with a family - and not one I'd be able to keep if I started working full time again. Not to mention the $1626 course fee is a serious chunk of change for someone who doesn't have a paycheck.

I understand the need for training - and certainly there is a lot to cover, but looking at the above I can understand why this isn't a practical commitment for most people - myself included.

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 3:52 PM
Don't get me wrong, I truly believe that giving back to the community via being a LEO Reserve, at whatever level, is an excellent thing. There are other ways to do this, but this is probably one of the most visible. If I were to do this, I'd take a Level III and then upgrade to a Level II. A Level II has a lot of flexibility. They can do Level III stuff without supervision and they can do General Law Enforcement when supervised and really no CE requirements like the FT/Level I's are required to have.

leelaw
04-06-2009, 3:52 PM
The most difficult hurdle for the Level III is #2 above.

IIRC, Level III Reserves may transport arrestees (unless otherwise prohibited by individual department policy). Sounds like it fits, since the arrestees that they are responsible for may have been arrested for any crime..

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 3:56 PM
IIRC, Level III Reserves may transport arrestees (unless otherwise prohibited by individual department policy). Sounds like it fits, since the arrestees that they are responsible for may have been arrested for any crime..
That might work for "incarceration"... maybe. If you're a Level III and suddenly you're assigned to some other duty, and you no longer do prisoner transport, what then?

Tallship
04-06-2009, 4:08 PM
Reserves do not automatically get a CCW even though they "qualify". It is still up to the the discretion of the CLEO as to whether or not they get a CCW license. Certain counties do not automatically give reserves a CCW, some might.

Tallship
04-06-2009, 4:10 PM
Don't get me wrong, I truly believe that giving back to the community via being a LEO Reserve, at whatever level, is an excellent thing. There are other ways to do this, but this is probably one of the most visible. If I were to do this, I'd take a Level III and then upgrade to a Level II. A Level II has a lot of flexibility. They can do Level III stuff without supervision and they can do General Law Enforcement when supervised and really no CE requirements like the FT/Level I's are required to have.

Wrong. Reserves have a 24 hour per two years CE requirement in order to keep their sworn status.

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 4:13 PM
Reserves do not automatically get a CCW even though they "qualify". It is still up to the the discretion of the CLEO as to whether or not they get a CCW license. Certain counties do not automatically give reserves a CCW, some might.
Not according to the LEOSA. The Reserve may be in violation of department policy but still be legally able to CCW. On top of that, the LEOSA may override department policy in this area. The California AG thinks that it actually does.

DDT
04-06-2009, 4:19 PM
Wrong. Reserves have a 24 hour per two years CE requirement in order to keep their sworn status.

I suspect when he said "really have no CE" he meant it was nominal. Like 1hr/mo.

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 4:24 PM
Wrong. Reserves have a 24 hour per two years CE requirement in order to keep their sworn status.
Hip Hip Hooray!!! This is an improvement. The last table I'd seen of their training/CE requirements only specified that Level I's were required to have the 24 hours of CE every two years. However, the new table that I just saw does not specify ANY CE requirement for the Level III's. So your assertion of 24 hours of CE for Reserves only applies to Level I and Level II Reserves, and not all Reserve Levels unless that has been recently changed (after July 2008).

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 4:31 PM
I suspect when he said "really have no CE" he meant it was nominal. Like 1hr/mo.
No. I hadn't seen the new summary of Level II training requirements. That was revised in 2008 as I posted above. The previous version that I'd seen didn't have the CE requirement in there. That summary table hadn't been updated in several years, so it was well behind the current state of the CPT requirements. Looking at some portions of the POST website that I'd not seen before, the CPT requirement appears to have been required in 1999 for Level II and above Reserves.

yellowfin
04-06-2009, 5:04 PM
I sure wish my CE courses were taught by Magpul and Blackwater instead of the boring stuff like anti money laundering, annuity regulations, and nursing home care per diems.

Greg-Dawg
04-06-2009, 5:39 PM
If the purpose of getting a CCW is to become a reserve LEO, then you have a twisted mindset.

Just join the force fulltime to help the innocent.

DDT
04-06-2009, 6:26 PM
If the purpose of getting a CCW is to become a reserve LEO, then you have a twisted mindset.

Just join the force fulltime to help the innocent.

Some of us would like to help the innocent without giving up a real job that actually pays a bay area mortgage or we are too old and decrepit to be hired as a new recruit.

Lots of ways to contribute. It would also be nice to have a lot of CalGunners inside the PD, it can only help our cause of getting gun rights restored and properly policed.

BigDogatPlay
04-06-2009, 6:54 PM
Most agencies still employing reserves that I know of apply all the CE requirements to all their reserves. What POST mandates and what the employing LEA requires can be vastly different.That includes all perishable skills training required by POST, every peace officer of every classification has to do their perishable skills classes.

I don't know how many agencies are actually employing Level III reserves. I'd be interested to know if POST actually has numbers on that. Level III reserves are, generally, not allowed to do very much as they are not supposed to get involved in physical arrest situations, so they generally don't make a big value add for any but the largest agencies.

Level I training equals the Basic Academy course, either intensive or extended. 680 hours minimum, IIRC, then field training, all the CE. Not to mention the selection process is required to be identical to that of a regular officer regardless of level.

CCW off duty is not a given at any level in every agency for reserves. The understanding I have of LEOSA is that it does not apply to reserves, and I know that the agencies I worked for that employed reserves gave them standard CCW permits on application, just like you or I would have to do if our local LEA actually issued permits.

DDT
04-06-2009, 6:59 PM
CCW off duty is not a given at any level in every agency for reserves. The understanding I have of LEOSA is that it does not apply to reserves,

Your understanding of LEOSA is lacking. Please read the first post and the linked article.

ryang
04-06-2009, 8:31 PM
Meeting from 6-10pm 3x a week and 8-5 every Sunday for six months is a serious commitment.
I don't have the syllabus but that sounds like just the Level I class. I don't think it includes Level III and II training.

Since you're in San Jose you may find Evergreen College is closer. Check out their Administration of Justice course listings for Level III and Level II classes.

Level IIIs can do prisoner transport, traffic control and parades.
Level IIs have full LEO powers but must be under direct supervision of a Level I or full-time LEO. Note some departments have interpreted "direct supervison" to mean radio contact while others mean immedate physical area.

Level Is have full LEO powers and don't require direct supervision.

CSDGuy
04-06-2009, 8:54 PM
CCW off duty is not a given at any level in every agency for reserves. The understanding I have of LEOSA is that it does not apply to reserves, and I know that the agencies I worked for that employed reserves gave them standard CCW permits on application, just like you or I would have to do if our local LEA actually issued permits.
The LEOSA does apply to the Reserves, in fact, it doesn't "care" whether you're a Full-Time, Reserve, Sworn or Unsworn. In my first post in this thread, I pasted the requirements to be a "Qualified Law Enforcement Officer" as far as the LEOSA is concerned. The California Attorney General has a memo out that has the AG office's position on the LEOSA and the Reserves.

Here's a link to their .PDF which contains the summary about it: Click Me for the PDF (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/leosasummary.pdf)

There also is a theory that when a Federal law starts off with: "Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any
State or any political subdivision thereof..." that means that it overrides any law or policy that has the effect of law upon someone. IIRC there's a court case that says that very thing. In this case, it would mean that it would theoretically override agency policy and the AG's memo says as much.

So, if you're a QLEO and your agency says you can't CCW off duty but you're a QLEO because you meet all the requirements, you could CCW but be in violation of agency policy. If the agency decided to punish you, you'd have to basically sue them on the grounds that the punishment is in direct violation of the LEOSA. I've not heard of very many, if any, cases that pursue this specific point.

BigDogatPlay
04-06-2009, 11:22 PM
Your understanding of LEOSA is lacking. Please read the first post and the linked article.

I did read it... perhaps it would be better to say that LEOSA does not provide a blanket authority for reserves. The first sentence from the earlier extract:

"an employee of a governmental agency";

An argument can be made that a reserve is not an employee, but rather is a volunteer. An employee would be considered to be drawing pay There are rules and case law around reserves drawing pay and benefits as I recall, and that could be searched up easily enough given Westlaw access.

I would also note that the word "reserve" does not appear anywhere in the CADOJ memo linked above.

I think that an assumption is being made that LEOSA covers a reserve regardless and I think that is an incorrect assumption. First off, Level II and III reserves have no peace officer authority other than when acting on their assingment, meaning "on duty". Level I reserves are a bit less limited, but still are more limited than a regular full time LEO. And all are subject to the rules and regs of the agency they volunteer to.

The argument is also based on the notion that the reserve is authorized the use and carry of a firearm by his agency off duty. Use and carry on duty does not equate to use and carry off duty. And there are some agencies I've been familiar with who won't let their full timers carry or act as a LEO off duty outside the county where the city is located. Departments can set any policy they want, pretty much.

Without peace officer authority off duty for the reserve, I believe, the agency would be a little hard pressed to afford peace officer off duty carry, so the reserve would need a regular CCW like any of us might try to get, to carry off duty. And in my experience I've worked with reserves who maintained CCW permits so that they could carry off duty. LEOSA would not apply to a CCW permit, and California has no reciprocity with any other state.

Now having said all that, if I ran across a guy with an agency badge and ID from out of state and his ID said he was authorized to carry a firearm, I'd probably not give it another thought.

But it does make an interesting argument.

ETA: Department policy can and does supercede the law in some cases. See Peterson v. Long Beach for just one example. If, for instance, your agency forbids you to shoot fleeing felons, you can't do it even though the law says you can. Asserting that department policy is superceded by LEOSA is fallacious. If you violate department policy with your firearm and get caught doing it, you will likely get fired, especially as a reserve with no real employee protections. If you sue the agency because they termed you for violating department policy, and you were in violation, you won't get very far with your suit.

And if you were outside of department policy and someone gets hurt, the agency and the city, county or whatever, can walk away clean and you will be on your own for the damages.

leelaw
04-06-2009, 11:30 PM
That might work for "incarceration"... maybe. If you're a Level III and suddenly you're assigned to some other duty, and you no longer do prisoner transport, what then?

They're still authorized by LAW to make the transport, regardless if they're primarily stationed elsewhere, which is exactly what your #2 requirement entails.

Tallship
04-07-2009, 8:51 AM
Let me clear up some misconceptions about Level III reserves. Most departments don't recruit "regular" LIII reserves. They are mostly in specialized units such as search and rescue, and dive and water teams. The LIII designation is used to give sworn powers to reserves who are performing a non-LE function, but may by necessity and being in a remote location have to arrest someone. Traffic control is now handled mainly by the OFP volunteers, and the LIIIs who are transporting prisoners are usually S&R guys who have gotten too old or injured to perform their regular duties (at least in our department).

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 8:54 AM
Why not just send yourself through the minimal POST training and firearms training and then volunteer as a reserve for your city's PD? They need the help I am sure. Even if you need Level III training it's only one semester of nights and Saturdays. A small price to pay to help out your city and get something valuable out of it for yourself.


Plus, according to to Jerry Brown any reserve officer who is qualified with a handgun can carry off-duty AND qualifies for LEOSA for nationwide carry.

http://www.policemag.com/Forums/From-the-Editor/New-Forum-Features/CALIFORNIA-AG-S-INTERPRETATION-OF-LEOSA/418.aspx

3. Are all active reserve officers authorized to carry?

Yes, if they meet the criteria of the Act (active).

Retired reserves are not likely to qualify - they need to have non-forfeitable

retirement rights. Most don't.

Cuz there is alot more to becoming a reserve officer than just going to training, and most PDs at least ones in the south aren't interested in anything less than a level 1 reserve. If you're gonna go that far you might as well get paid for it. Why do all that for free?

Editted to add: You don't just "volunteer" to be a reserve.....it's not like enlisting in the military. You still hafta go thru all of the same hiring process (interviews, background checks, polygraph, psych eval, blah,blah,blah) that a full time paid officer goes thru. Not to mention being a reserve still costs the dept. money, so in times of tight budgets they may not even be accepting reserves.

38 other states have shall issue.....shall issue is the answer.....not spending months of your life to try and become a reserve just so you can have the right to protect yourself.

Knauga
04-07-2009, 8:58 AM
Why not just send yourself through the minimal POST training and firearms training and then volunteer as a reserve for your city's PD? They need the help I am sure. Even if you need Level III training it's only one semester of nights and Saturdays. A small price to pay to help out your city and get something valuable out of it for yourself.
.

What does one have to do with the other. Why should somebody have to be a reserve to get a CCW? Ideas like this do more harm than good. It reinforces the idea that only LEO's should carry.

*IF I CHOOSE* to be a reserve, that is all well and good, but that should never be a requirement for CCW.

Santa Cruz Armory
04-07-2009, 9:31 AM
I have my level III,II,I but it's been a long time... I've worked in a FD doing investigations, etc. and have been a Chief Officer for almost 9 yrs. but don't arrest, etc. through my agency. Would I have to take the PC 832 again, or is it still valid?

Also, I was under the impression that to be a reserve LEO in CA you have to go through the full standard police academy. When I went through it was a reserve academy, but you got your III, II, & I out of it.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 9:42 AM
I have my level III,II,I but it's been a long time... I've worked in a FD doing investigations, etc. and have been a Chief Officer for almost 9 yrs. but don't arrest, etc. through my agency. Would I have to take the PC 832 again, or is it still valid?

Also, I was under the impression that to be a reserve LEO in CA you have to go through the full standard police academy. When I went through it was a reserve academy, but you got your III, II, & I out of it.

If you're not a sworn LEO then your academy cert expires after 3 yrs. They have short term "refresher" acedemy courses in come places. A level 1 reserve is the same thing as a regular POST basic academy certificate. There are not many agencies that take level 2 & 3 reserves anymore so there are not many places that even offer those courses anymore. It's pretty much full basic academy (864 hrs training or something like that) or nothing.

1911su16b870
04-07-2009, 10:33 AM
If you're not a sworn LEO then your academy cert expires after 3 yrs. They have short term "refresher" acedemy courses in come places.

AFAIK if your cert expires, you have to go through the academy again.


A level 1 reserve is the same thing as a regular POST basic academy certificate.

True

There are not many agencies that take level 2 & 3 reserves anymore so there are not many places that even offer those courses anymore. It's pretty much full basic academy (864 hrs training or something like that) or nothing

There are agencies in So Cal that will take level III and II reserves and there are places in So Cal Reserve Academies that graduate cadets to those levels.

DDT
04-07-2009, 11:20 AM
I have my level III,II,I but it's been a long time... I've worked in a FD doing investigations, etc. and have been a Chief Officer for almost 9 yrs. but don't arrest, etc. through my agency. Would I have to take the PC 832 again, or is it still valid?

Also, I was under the impression that to be a reserve LEO in CA you have to go through the full standard police academy. When I went through it was a reserve academy, but you got your III, II, & I out of it.

If your current position is one which has arrest rights then I'm fairly certain you are a "sworn peace officer" as far as the law goes. My reading of the article is that the CA AG considers anyone who is "sworn" to be covered by LEOSA.

If you aren't a sworn officer you can take a "requalification" course: http://www.post.ca.gov/training/bt_bureau/pc832.asp if it's been more than 3 years since you last worked as a sworn officer. If less than 3 years your certificate is still good.


You are correct that Level I reserve is the same academy as POST Basic Certification. There are certain positions where we can help out our local PD with only Level II or III certification as well.

DDT
04-07-2009, 11:22 AM
What does one have to do with the other. Why should somebody have to be a reserve to get a CCW? Ideas like this do more harm than good. It reinforces the idea that only LEO's should carry.

*IF I CHOOSE* to be a reserve, that is all well and good, but that should never be a requirement for CCW.

IF YOU CHOOSE to read my original post you will note that I wasn't suggesting volunteering simply for the right to carry a gun only that it was a pleasant side effect of doing something good for your community.

DDT
04-07-2009, 11:27 AM
Cuz there is alot more to becoming a reserve officer than just going to training, and most PDs at least ones in the south aren't interested in anything less than a level 1 reserve. If you're gonna go that far you might as well get paid for it. Why do all that for free?

I realize that to some people it is a foreign concept to do something for the good of society. I'm sorry you feel that way. There are level II and III positions with many police departments. So you don't have to go all the way to help out.


Editted to add: You don't just "volunteer" to be a reserve.....it's not like enlisting in the military. You still hafta go thru all of the same hiring process (interviews, background checks, polygraph, psych eval, blah,blah,blah) that a full time paid officer goes thru. Not to mention being a reserve still costs the dept. money, so in times of tight budgets they may not even be accepting reserves.


My Local PD does have a "volunteer" to be a reserve document up on their website with contact info and all. If you can't pass or aren't willing to take the polygraph, background checks et. al. I really don't want you being given arrest rights anyway so a filtering process is important.


38 other states have shall issue.....shall issue is the answer.....not spending months of your life to try and become a reserve just so you can have the right to protect yourself.

boy, you really don't get it do you. As I said in my first post. This is a pleasant side effect of doing something good for your community. If you have no interest in doing something for your community like this then fine. Don't even bother posting in the thread if it is something you are not interested in doing. I think if you are looking for someone to argue with you regarding "shall issue" you've come to the wrong forum.

Knauga
04-07-2009, 1:05 PM
IF YOU CHOOSE to read my original post you will note that I wasn't suggesting volunteering simply for the right to carry a gun only that it was a pleasant side effect of doing something good for your community.

I read your post fully. Even considering that something like this MIGHT be an acceptable of obtaining a CCW is dangerous. I understand wanting to give back to your community, there are many ways to do so.

All this talk about POST training for CCW :

Why not just send yourself through the minimal POST training and firearms training and then volunteer as a reserve for your city's PD? They need the help I am sure. Even if you need Level III training it's only one semester of nights and Saturdays. A small price to pay to help out your city and get something valuable out of it for yourself.

There should be no price to pay for self defense. My complaint that this is discussed in the context of CCW. If you want to be a reserve, more power to you. If you want to have a discussion about becoming a reserve and all of the great rewards involved with being a reserve, awesome. If you want to put something like this in a conversation tying it to CCW and even implying that it's "OK" it isn't. We (law abiding gun owners) have been WAY to accommodating over the years, it is time to stop being so "reasonable". It is how we lost loaded open carry, CCW, got saddled with the approved list, and the AWB.

We have screwed ourselves in this state for decades, it is time to unscrew ourselves.

This: "All this talk about POST training for CCW " should have been followed by: "is completely assinine".

DDT
04-07-2009, 1:14 PM
I read your post fully. Even considering that something like this MIGHT be an acceptable of obtaining a CCW is dangerous. I understand wanting to give back to your community, there are many ways to do so.



There should be no price to pay for self defense. My complaint that this is discussed in the context of CCW. If you want to be a reserve, more power to you. If you want to have a discussion about becoming a reserve and all of the great rewards involved with being a reserve, awesome. If you want to put something like this in a conversation tying it to CCW and even implying that it's "OK" it isn't. We (law abiding gun owners) have been WAY to accommodating over the years, it is time to stop being so "reasonable". It is how we lost loaded open carry, CCW, got saddled with the approved list, and the AWB.

We have screwed ourselves in this state for decades, it is time to unscrew ourselves.


I guess we simply disagree with just what incentives are acceptable to help get people to give back to their community. If your only point was that you think "playing along" with the way the rules are written is unacceptable, you've made it. I will also disagree that working the system as currently implemented is unacceptable.



This: "All this talk about POST training for CCW " should have been followed by: "is completely assinine".

You seem to have misread my title. I was referring to "All this talk about POST training for CCW" that was going on in the AB357 thread where they were discussing the fact that the statute specifically identifies POST firearms training as a viable requirement to place on applicants.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 1:18 PM
My point DDT was that your OP made "volunteering as a reserve" sound like a much simpler prospect than it really is. It is actually quite a lengthy and involved and costly process. If someone wants to take that on as a service to their community that's great. Reality is that only 1% of all applicants actually get hired into LE. That's a pretty costly gamble to take. I know of no SoCal dept that will look at anything less than a level 1 reserve. There might be a couple of small cities that do that I am not aware of, but generally speaking level 1 is it down here.

leitung
04-07-2009, 1:28 PM
I am a Level III reserve.. I have a valid certificate.

Level III will not get you much as far as CCW is concerned, you need a CCW to carry off duty (provided you are hired)
If you are not hired, it wont do you much good. Now some sheriffs might take that as "good cause" infact I know one Level III who is not hired who has a CCW in a friendly county. If you don't live in a friendly county (i.e. Sacramento, SF, e.t.c) you are SOL, you can cry till the cows com home, but unless you get hired as a reserve (something I don't have the time for) kiss your CCW dreams good by.
Unless you plan on becoming a cop, or even want to be a reserve to be a reserve, don't take the class. It's a serious comittment, dont just do it so you can carry. I want to carry as much as the next guy, but it is what it is. Lets keep up the good fight here and pray for a passage of AB357.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 1:37 PM
I am a Level III reserve.. I have a valid certificate.

Level III will not get you much as far as CCW is concerned, you need a CCW to carry off duty (provided you are hired)
If you are not hired, it wont do you much good. Now some sheriffs might take that as "good cause" infact I know one Level III who is not hired who has a CCW in a friendly county. If you don't live in a friendly county (i.e. Sacramento, SF, e.t.c) you are SOL, you can cry till the cows com home, but unless you get hired as a reserve (something I don't have the time for) kiss your CCW dreams good by.
Unless you plan on becoming a cop, or even want to be a reserve to be a reserve, don't take the class. It's a serious comittment, dont just do it so you can carry. I want to carry as much as the next guy, but it is what it is. Lets keep up the good fight here and pray for a passage of AB357.

I am actually of the opinion that attempting to get hired into LE (whether full-time or reserve) and being rejected will count against you more then if you never tired at all. That's just my personal opinion though. Take it for what you like.

DDT
04-07-2009, 1:48 PM
My point DDT was that your OP made "volunteering as a reserve" sound like a much simpler prospect than it really is. It is actually quite a lengthy and involved and costly process. If someone wants to take that on as a service to their community that's great. Reality is that only 1% of all applicants actually get hired into LE. That's a pretty costly gamble to take. I know of no SoCal dept that will look at anything less than a level 1 reserve. There might be a couple of small cities that do that I am not aware of, but generally speaking level 1 is it down here.

I will challenge you to defend that 1% number. As for the cost, it's less than $1000 to get to Level II via community college. It's a small price to pay to contribute back to the community. I understand your points as they relate to Level I reserves, I'm not looking to go out on patrol just a good way to give back. My local PD has an open recruiting page for level II reserves.

mej16489
04-07-2009, 1:51 PM
My point DDT was that your OP I know of no SoCal dept that will look at anything less than a level 1 reserve. There might be a couple of small cities that do that I am not aware of, but generally speaking level 1 is it down here.

I know dozens of Level II reserves with LA County SD - and a few Level IIIs. I only know a couple of Level I. As anecdotal as my information is, the fact remains LASD actively uses all three levels of reserves.

DDT
04-07-2009, 1:52 PM
I am a Level III reserve.. I have a valid certificate.


According to the AG you are qualified to carry concealed with no CCW as long as you are a sworn officer and are firearms qualified. Even if it is against department policy. This is his interpretation of the LEOSA federal law, read the article in the first post of this thread.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 1:55 PM
I will challenge you to defend that 1% number.

I am quoting the words of a couple of LE recruiters for a large SoCal LEA.

Like I said....in other more north parts of the state I can't speak to hiring policies....here in the south...level 1 only. They do have other volunteer positions but nothing that would be considered a "reserve officer" requiring acedemy training.

sierratangofoxtrotunion
04-07-2009, 2:07 PM
Reserves do not automatically get a CCW even though they "qualify". It is still up to the the discretion of the CLEO as to whether or not they get a CCW license. Certain counties do not automatically give reserves a CCW, some might.

In the county I live, the sheriff won't even give CCW to cops.

DDT
04-07-2009, 2:12 PM
In the county I live, the sheriff won't even give CCW to cops.

I don't think cops actually need CCWs. They can carry anywhere in the US.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 2:43 PM
I don't think cops actually need CCWs. They can carry anywhere in the US.

Yes....legally they could.....but if Dept policy is no CCW w/o permission they could get fired for violation for dept policy.

DDT
04-07-2009, 2:49 PM
Yes....legally they could.....but if Dept policy is no CCW w/o permission they could get fired for violation for dept policy.

that is my understanding.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 2:50 PM
that is my understanding.

Most LEOs who get fired, get fired for violation of dept. policy, not for breaking the law.

CSDGuy
04-07-2009, 2:55 PM
Yes....legally they could.....but if Dept policy is no CCW w/o permission they could get fired for violation for dept policy.

that is my understanding.
And if someone is fired for this and they believe the LEOSA overrides agency policy... that sets up the lawsuit that would determine whether or not the LEOSA's "Notwithstanding..." language really does override agency policy.

Remember the Utah cop that slowed a gunman in a mall outside of his jurisdiction? He was off-duty, and carrying against agency policy, on the LEOSA. His department didn't discipline him as far as I know. If they did in any way connected to his off duty CCW, they'd have invited that lawsuit.

CSDGuy
04-07-2009, 2:57 PM
Most LEOs who get fired, get fired for violation of dept. policy, not for breaking the law.
If agency policy has the effect of law upon the members of that agency...

You're probably right about the firings due to agency policy thing though.

Untamed1972
04-07-2009, 2:59 PM
And if someone is fired for this and they believe the LEOSA overrides agency policy... that sets up the lawsuit that would determine whether or not the LEOSA's "Notwithstanding..." language really does override agency policy.

Remember the Utah cop that slowed a gunman in a mall outside of his jurisdiction? He was off-duty, and carrying against agency policy, on the LEOSA. His department didn't discipline him as far as I know. If they did in any way connected to his off duty CCW, they'd have invited that lawsuit.

Thumbing one's nose at agency policy is the surest way to end up on the *****list. Maybe they won't fire you for that to avoid a suit, but the next little slip-up that might otherwise be overlooked, you're out the door!

An agency does have the power by means of agency policy to restrict activity that is otherwise legal under the law. I remember years ago there was uproar with LAPD I think it was about using the "choke hold" because a suspect died from it's use. It's a perfectly legal hold to use if such force is justified, but agency policy said it was not to be used. Therefore a LEO with that agency could go out on a limb and do it anyway, and couldn't be charged criminally for it, but he could still get fired for violation of agency policy.

I would think if your agency says no CCW w/o permission then you'd be takin' a big gamble by doing it anyway. Legal yes.....but are you willing to risk your career over it?