PDA

View Full Version : LEO's failure to register?


red454
05-03-2009, 4:55 PM
As I understand things an LEO can buy a personal AR for duty use (with no BB)...so anyone know what happens if they fail to register the gun within the 90 day period...just curious if they have a different set of rules to play by? Do they have different paper work from the DOJ, do they even have to register it?

paladin4415
05-03-2009, 7:37 PM
Yes, LEO's have to register the agency approved AR within 90 days. If they don't, their CLEO can send an "my officer was stupid letter to the DOJ" requesting that the officer be allowed to complete the registration late. If they just don't register it, and it's off list, I believe it can be configured like any OLL AR and it will be fine. If it's "on list" or not configured properly, it's an illegal AW.

tyrist
05-03-2009, 9:21 PM
As I understand things an LEO can buy a personal AR for duty use (with no BB)...so anyone know what happens if they fail to register the gun within the 90 day period...just curious if they have a different set of rules to play by? Do they have different paper work from the DOJ, do they even have to register it?

A LEO in California can buy a personal AR for personal use as well...their boss just needs to sign off on it.

jamesob
05-03-2009, 9:24 PM
A LEO in California can buy a personal AR for personal use as well...their boss just needs to sign off on it.

the registration forms say that it is not for personal use, whatever. my dept did not have to approve mine, some may but mine didn't.

sac550
05-04-2009, 8:48 AM
It can be an on list AR. Doesn't matter if you have a letter from COP.

E Pluribus Unum
05-04-2009, 10:26 AM
the registration forms say that it is not for personal use, whatever. my dept did not have to approve mine, some may but mine didn't.

If your department did not approve it, I know of no legal way you could obtain a legal AW. Be very careful. I'd hate to see you throw a career away for a little pistol grip.

I'm not an attorney and I am not a cop, but as far as I know, the only way for a LEO to lawfully obtain an AW is to have written approval on department letterhead. If you do not have this, the FFL that sold you the gun messed up and sold you an illegal AW.

If I am wrong I am sure others will chime in.

nicki
05-04-2009, 11:13 AM
I'm curious, can a LEO get a M16 for duty use?
With a 3 shot burst option, it could slide by.

I know many departments would say no way, but not every department would.

I remember some guy telling me he knew of a deputy in Arizona who was in a department that the sheriff let them get whatever they wanted as long as they qualified.

He told me that at a traffic stop, this cop got into a gun fight. The deputies weapon of choice for traffic stops in remote rural areas, a full auto UZI.

Needless to say, bad guy picked wrong cop to get into gun fight with.:thumbsup:

Nicki

bluestaterebel
05-04-2009, 11:24 AM
I'm curious, can a LEO get a M16 for duty use?
With a 3 shot burst option, it could slide by.

I know many departments would say no way, but not every department would.

I remember some guy telling me he knew of a deputy in Arizona who was in a department that the sheriff let them get whatever they wanted as long as they qualified.

He told me that at a traffic stop, this cop got into a gun fight. The deputies weapon of choice for traffic stops in remote rural areas, a full auto UZI.

Needless to say, bad guy picked wrong cop to get into gun fight with.:thumbsup:

Nicki
yes, but most departments restrict such weapons for SWAT or other specialied units

bwiese
05-04-2009, 11:26 AM
I'm curious, can a LEO get a M16 for duty use?
With a 3 shot burst option, it could slide by.

PDs have FA/SBR/suppressed guns as 'departmental inventory'. Officer could have gun as part of "issued for patrol" item. But it's the dept's gun, not the ossifer's. And the PD is supposedly squared away with ATF for the NFA issues.

I really doubt CA DOJ is giving out MG permits to individual cops for personally-possessed guns.

bwiese
05-04-2009, 11:32 AM
It can be an on list AR. Doesn't matter if you have a letter from COP.

Bzzzzt, wrong.

The LEO AW registration indeed depends on "department letter from the Chief".

AW authorization letters issued by non-chiefs are legally invalid - unless they have signing authority for the Chief). DOJ BoF would have ability to invalidate LEO AW registrations if the letter were not found to be compliant (i.e, not agency chief's signature).

What's fun is that it seems some fraction of cops have forged LEO AW registration letters. But the letter they forged may not have from the chief but from some other supervisor. So they committed multiple felonies for an irrelevancy.

the registration forms say that it is not for personal use, whatever. my dept did not have to
approve mine, some may but mine did not

You are in a weird situation. I am assuming you are not referring to an AW registered back in 1989 (Roberti-Roos) or in 2001 (SB23) and instead registered via LEO AW Registration. If you are saying your dept did not issue an authorization letter signed by your Chief, and the DOJ just gave you an LEO AW reg, you likely have a challengeably invalid AW registration that could be pulled. The "department" really doesn't issue the letter, the Chief does.

Or you may be confusing LEO AW registration with a separate Dangerous Weapon Permit that you might have, dunno.

LEO AW registration can be for whatever the reason they're allowed to exist by the dept. Some small depts are cool and figure it's a benefit they can offer their cops. Other agencies may figure, "AR15s are expensive and we don't have the budget: let's let our guys buy it out of their own pocket".

There is no CA restriction on personal use once LEO AW registration is issued. Also the cop gets to retain it for life, even if he were fired the day after the registratin went thru: it's issued to the cop at the time he was a cop, for being a cop, and is not further dependent, once issued, on cop status [unless convicted of a crime] as it's a Registered AW. I'm fairly confident if the dept letter authorizing DOJ LEO AW registration restricts use to duty use, that is not a restriction enforceable by law and is instead an employment-based restriction (i.e, reprimand/firing, etc. but not criminal charges).

trinydex
05-04-2009, 11:41 AM
^ are these cases known to the public? did they get caught as soon as ca doj read the bogus letters?

bwiese
05-04-2009, 11:43 AM
^ are these cases known to the public? did they get caught as soon as ca doj read the bogus letters?

I believe the DOJ is letting 'sleeping dogs lie' and not investigating.

trinydex
05-04-2009, 11:45 AM
speshul treatment....

jamesob
05-04-2009, 11:50 AM
If your department did not approve it, I know of no legal way you could obtain a legal AW. Be very careful. I'd hate to see you throw a career away for a little pistol grip.

I'm not an attorney and I am not a cop, but as far as I know, the only way for a LEO to lawfully obtain an AW is to have written approval on department letterhead. If you do not have this, the FFL that sold you the gun messed up and sold you an illegal AW.

If I am wrong I am sure others will chime in. my chief gave me permission to have one and register it, he didn't care what it was. i thought we were talking about a dept approved weapon not permissin to have one.

sac550
05-04-2009, 3:33 PM
Bzzzzt, wrong.

The LEO AW registration indeed depends on "department letter from the Chief".

AW authorization letters issued by non-chiefs are legally invalid - unless they have signing authority for the Chief). DOJ BoF would have ability to invalidate LEO AW registrations if the letter were not found to be compliant (i.e, not agency chief's signature).

What's fun is that it seems some fraction of cops have forged LEO AW registration letters. But the letter they forged may not have from the chief but from some other supervisor. So they committed multiple felonies for an irrelevancy.



You are in a weird situation. I am assuming you are not referring to an AW registered back in 1989 (Roberti-Roos) or in 2001 (SB23) and instead registered via LEO AW Registration. If you are saying your dept did not issue an authorization letter signed by your Chief, and the DOJ just gave you an LEO AW reg, you likely have a challengeably invalid AW registration that could be pulled. The "department" really doesn't issue the letter, the Chief does.

Or you may be confusing LEO AW registration with a separate Dangerous Weapon Permit that you might have, dunno.

LEO AW registration can be for whatever the reason they're allowed to exist by the dept. Some small depts are cool and figure it's a benefit they can offer their cops. Other agencies may figure, "AR15s are expensive and we don't have the budget: let's let our guys buy it out of their own pocket".

There is no CA restriction on personal use once LEO AW registration is issued. Also the cop gets to retain it for life, even if he were fired the day after the registratin went thru: it's issued to the cop at the time he was a cop, for being a cop, and is not further dependent, once issued, on cop status [unless convicted of a crime] as it's a Registered AW. I'm fairly confident if the dept letter authorizing DOJ LEO AW registration restricts use to duty use, that is not a restriction enforceable by law and is instead an employment-based restriction (i.e, reprimand/firing, etc. but not criminal charges).



We agree. I wrote my comment poorly. I mean it doesn't matter if the AR you want is OLL or a named weapon. With a letter from your COP you can buy either one.

CCWFacts
05-04-2009, 3:40 PM
I believe the DOJ is letting 'sleeping dogs lie' and not investigating.

More like sleeping fire-breathing dragons. Every time one of these criminals takes his AR to / from the range, it's a felony all by itself. Some of these guys could have dozens or hundreds of felony charges. I'm not sure how sentencing would work in such a case, but it would be a lot worse than just career-ending.

DDT
05-04-2009, 4:10 PM
More like sleeping fire-breathing dragons. Every time one of these criminals takes his AR to / from the range, it's a felony all by itself. Some of these guys could have dozens or hundreds of felony charges. I'm not sure how sentencing would work in such a case, but it would be a lot worse than just career-ending.

I'll believe that when I see it. Much more likely to be involved in a CGF lawsuit than having a DA prosecute them.