PDA

View Full Version : County Correctional Officers Lose Gun Rights


LockJaw
03-29-2011, 12:41 PM
It seems the new Sheriff of lake County has decided that County Correctional officers are a risk to carry duty guns. The new Sheriff has without negotiation with the PO Association changed their status from Peace Officer to Correctional Officer. This affects their ability to carry guns in certain situations.

http://lakeconews.com/content/view/18965/919/

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – A legal battle is brewing between the county's correctional officers and the new sheriff over peace officer-related status, particularly the ability to carry firearms in certain situations.

"Rivero has changed association members' status to “custodial,” which means that they cannot carry firearms unless transporting prisoners to court, medical treatment or another facility, said association President Mike Silva said.
Previously, correctional officers were able to carry firearms with them while traveling to and from work or in other public situations, Silva said."

While no acts of liability to the county have been alleged, and no financial gain is claimed to be secured to the county by this change, the Sheriff is pushing for this change.
Currently all CO's under go the same firearms training as Sworn officers and have taken the PC 832 Arrest and Firearms course required by the Commission of Police Officer Standards and Training. The CO's had been given Peace Officer status in 2008 by former Sheriff Mitchell under authority given in AB 2215.
The current Sheriff was a Deputy with the Lake County Sheriffs dept. before successfully challenging the incumbent Sheriff Mitchell in a hard fought, bitter battle. In the Sherriff's race the Peace Officers Association endorsed Mitchell over the eventual winner Rivera.
While Lake County has been an almost "shall" issue county under Sheriff Mitchell, it is not clear what current Sheriff Rivera's policy will be for issueing CCW's to the effected CO's.
Lawsuits have been filed and the media battles have begun.


More at link...

cmichini
03-29-2011, 12:45 PM
Not sure if this is good or bad. BUT if more people that currently enjoy 'elevated' status with respect to rights get a tasted of what us unwashed peons endure, it may start a turn towards equal protection and actually upholding the 2A.

SteveH
03-29-2011, 12:59 PM
In Orange county "Sheriff's special officers" sued the OCSD and won. They were allowed to CCW by court order sometime prior to th early 90's. Brad Gates wasnt happy about it either.

InGrAM
03-29-2011, 12:59 PM
Sounds like the unions need to up their game. But +1 to the post above. Maybe this will help the "civilians" like us.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 1:01 PM
Sheriff Rivero ran on and currently is a "shall issue" Sheriff.

If this is the case, it would be my guess that anyone working as a CO and wants to carry to and from work, can apply and probably will get a CCW. I would have to think that their training would be waived since they have already qualified at the range.

The article also states that firearms will be issued in normal CO duties as required. A CO in and about the facilities don't carry around prisoners anyway. CO's are not police or deputies. I am sure there are deputies in and around the prison that will carry.

zinfull
03-29-2011, 1:04 PM
Lake county is an easy county to get permitted. It is shall issue so I do not see why the Sheriff is pissing off the guards.

jerry

stix213
03-29-2011, 1:09 PM
Perhaps this is all an issue of liability? If a correctional officer makes a mistake with their handgun while believing they are acting as a peace officer, then there could be liability on the Sheriff's dept. If a correctional officer in the same situation makes a mistake while acting as a citizen with a CCW, then the liability would be on the individual instead of the dept.

Untamed1972
03-29-2011, 1:09 PM
Not sure if this is good or bad. BUT if more people that currently enjoy 'elevated' status with respect to rights get a tasted of what us unwashed peons endure, it may start a turn towards equal protection and actually upholding the 2A.

Yep...that was my thought. Just had a bunch of folks who lost their hi-cap mag and automatic roster expemtions in addition to their CCW status (nationwide if you include loss of LEO status under federal law). Losing of class status can be a great inducement to support of securing rights for all.

Stonewalker
03-29-2011, 1:31 PM
FYI - It's not a "right" if you have to work a specific job in order to exercise it.

Corbin Dallas
03-29-2011, 1:34 PM
Perhaps this is all an issue of liability? If a correctional officer makes a mistake with their handgun while believing they are acting as a peace officer, then there could be liability on the Sheriff's dept. If a correctional officer in the same situation makes a mistake while acting as a citizen with a CCW, then the liability would be on the individual instead of the dept.

Wait, I thought correctional officers are POST certified?

Are we talking about a RAC?

LockJaw
03-29-2011, 2:23 PM
A couple of questions come to mind when I thought about this.
Did Sheriff Rivera see something when he was a Deputy that made him take this stance?
If you read the whole article you see where PO status gave the CO the ability to help as officers at check points and in emergency situation as well as fill in as Bailiffs in court. Doesn't this leave the potential for HR shortfalls?

Is this policy going to carry over to the Parole Officers? They are Post certified officers. Unless things have changed, Senior PO carry on duty with the Dept heads OK. Their fireams training was the same as the CO's.

Untamed1972
03-29-2011, 2:25 PM
Wait, I thought correctional officers are POST certified?

Are we talking about a RAC?

There are different POST certificates for COs vs. Peace Officers.

dantodd
03-29-2011, 2:27 PM
My guess is such decisions are more often than not budget driven and the firearms aspect is secondary. As others have pointed out the COs effected can get a 12050 permit in Lake county and anywhere the Sheriff wants them to carry on duty he can let them and anywhere he doesn't want them to carry their PO status won't change since he's their employer.

Gray Peterson
03-29-2011, 2:28 PM
Yep...that was my thought. Just had a bunch of folks who lost their hi-cap mag and automatic roster expemtions in addition to their CCW status (nationwide if you include loss of LEO status under federal law). Losing of class status can be a great inducement to support of securing rights for all.

Exactly.

Coded-Dude
03-29-2011, 2:43 PM
damn...that sucks

Legasat
03-29-2011, 3:11 PM
Sucks to be the CO's right about now...

Bummer for them

taperxz
03-29-2011, 3:19 PM
I know this county and i know CO's in this county. IMHO their ability to pack with PO status was a perk.

There is no way Lake county would not be in trouble if an off duty CO shot and killed someone while off duty unless it were the same situation as any other person defending themselves. It would be one more thing they would have to spend money on. Making a CO carry with a ccw would in effect make the person "who was not at work" be responsible just like any other person, which is what they are, "any other person" It has been noted that a person with PO powers is obligated to uphold the law 24/7/365 in the state of CA. A CO does not have that distinction.

MasterYong
03-29-2011, 3:22 PM
Sounds good to me!

The less "more equal than others" people out there, the better! They want their gun rights? They can help us fight.

If only they'd take away the "special rights" from all LEOs, then maybe there'd be a serious uproar about the erosion of our 2A rights in the entire population rather than just avid gun owners.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 3:23 PM
It might even be a good time to send Rivero a message asking him if the CO's are all eligible to get their CCW's like the rest of the citizens who are not prohibited in Lake County!

In fact i think i may make this inquiry.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 3:35 PM
And.... so i did.

My question to the sheriff; Without getting into the lawsuit, would it fair to assume that all CO's would be able to obtain a CCW from your office and be able to carry "off duty" just like any other non prohibited citizen of Lake County?

I will wait for an answer. He has answered me many times in the past.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 3:50 PM
And the good sheriffs reply!


John,

That was offered with no application or cost. Offer is and will remain open.

Frank Rivero

J.D.Allen
03-29-2011, 4:01 PM
I thought this was how it was for CO's in most couties. I know it is in Imperial. Now...they basically get an automatic ccw just by applying, and this in a county which DOES NOT issue to average citizens. But they don't get the LEO exemptions

Hogxtz
03-29-2011, 4:15 PM
And the good sheriffs reply!


John,

That was offered with no application or cost. Offer is and will remain open.

Frank Rivero

Wow thats an awesome offer. The department is paying the cost. In the last 25 years I have been a CO for El Dorado we have always had to pay full price and the application process was always the same as it was for citizens. Still is, even under our new Sheriff.

PsychGuy274
03-29-2011, 4:21 PM
While I hate seeing my fellow man lose rights that they had, however, in this instance, I believe that they shouldn't have had them to begin with if I also didn't have them. The whole 14th Amendment thing.

Hogxtz
03-29-2011, 4:28 PM
County C.O.'s are "custodial" officers by penal code and our training is S.T.C. certified instead of P.O.S.T. It sounds like Lake county did the right thing. The CO's should carry by ccw only, because they are not classified as peace officers. Some counties, although extremely rare, give their C.O.'s peace officer powers. Our union has been looking at this for awhile. The reason for it is because of medical beneifts. heres why: Lets say I meet a deputy at his patrol car to retrieve his arrest from his car and his subject becomes combative. Both the deputy and the C.O. receive blown knees in the fight. The deputy goes off work on 4850 time at full pay with no taxes taken out while he is getting medical care, surgury, up to one year to heal if needed depending on the severity of injury. The CO gets two thirds disability pay and for only 6 months. The problem is we get hurt much more often having to fight out of control inmates and we are not taken care of by the county when we get hurt. Heck, my wife got her ACL blown in a fight and the county denied her claim. In most counties, CO's are the red haired step children. State COs are different. They are 24 hour peace officers by penal code.

I'll bet the Lake county Sheriff dropped the CO's peace officer status to save tax payers money by reducing the on duty injuries costs.

Paul S
03-29-2011, 4:33 PM
Being a retired C/O I can assure you there is more to this story than the sheriff's claim of avoiding liability. Typically those who work behind the wall are looked down upon by street deputies. While they may be granted Peace Officer status the street deps are probably *****ing to the sheriff that they aren't real cops and shouldn't have 24 hour peace officer status because they didn't go the academy. A post approved peace officer academy is not required for C/O's. However, C/O's do have limited peace officer powers while on duty. But when end of shift comes they revert to Joe Citizen.

These officers will lose carry rights and will have to revert to carrying via CCW.

We need the rest of the story.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 4:34 PM
While I hate seeing my fellow man lose rights that they had, however, in this instance, I believe that they shouldn't have had them to begin with if I also didn't have them. The whole 14th Amendment thing.


In this case there was no "right" as it was issued in accordance with their job and for duties they are not allowed to perform while off duty. With a CCW this right, in this county, will stay with the CO whether that person remains a CO or not. I see no downside to the sheriffs idea. The county assumes no liability for "off duty" happenings, and the taxpayers don't have to pay for weapons or ammunition and up keep or replacement of the firearms that are being used for "off duty" use.

Hogxtz
03-29-2011, 4:37 PM
Being a retired C/O I can assure you there is more to this story than the sheriff's claim of avoiding liability. Typically those who work behind the wall are looked down upon by street deputies. While they may be granted Peace Officer status the street deps are probably *****ing to the sheriff that they aren't real cops and shouldn't have 24 hour peace officer status because they didn't go the academy. A post approved peace officer academy is not required for C/O's. However, C/O's do have limited peace officer powers while on duty. But when end of shift comes they revert to Joe Citizen.

These officers will lose carry rights and will have to revert to carrying via CCW.

We need the rest of the story.

Hit the nail on the head. This is exactly the way it is.

taperxz
03-29-2011, 4:39 PM
Being a retired C/O I can assure you there is more to this story than the sheriff's claim of avoiding liability. Typically those who work behind the wall are looked down upon by street deputies. While they may be granted Peace Officer status the street deps are probably *****ing to the sheriff that they aren't real cops and shouldn't have 24 hour peace officer status because they didn't go the academy. A post approved peace officer academy is not required for C/O's. However, C/O's do have limited peace officer powers while on duty. But when end of shift comes they revert to Joe Citizen.

These officers will lose carry rights and will have to revert to carrying via CCW.

We need the rest of the story.

Whats wrong with carrying with a CCW when a CO has no police powers off duty? Why do you think a CO should be entitled to be able to carry because of his job status as a county worker? Just asking.

nation
03-29-2011, 4:40 PM
taking away the "peace officer" status has way more to do with barganing units. it directly effects pay,cost of living and retirement. now when they go to the table for raises ANY other dept they use for a comparison that still has the PO status can be dropped. its no longer a valid barganing option.

solano county has been dealing with this for over 8 years. they spent a crap load of money putting every CO through the required schooling to receive PO status but the sheriff refuses to sign off. whats REALLY ****ed up is the CO makes up the largest unit for the county and the deal was they support the sheriff for re-election,he signs off. guess what,didnt happen.

as for CCW for a CO,it depends on the county. solano CO's do alot more than man the jails. not only that but their gang unit is well known and teaches other countys and state run facilitys. if a CO can pass all required tests theres no reason he shouldnt be allowed a ccw.

all of this is based on my encounters and personal opinions. every county has their issues and its up to the officers to step up and fix whats wrong. case in point,solano CO's won a multi million dollar lawsuit based on being paid incorrectly. that case alone opened the door for MANY other dpets,countys and bargining units to do the same thing.

BigDogatPlay
03-29-2011, 5:22 PM
Yes... we really do need the rest of the story.

There is a considerable amount of backstory in the Lake County Sheriff's Office, and in the custody division. To say there were / are issues in the department that need addressing would be an understatement. Humbugging IAs on the opposition candidate (who is now sheriff), illegal NFA weapons issues within the department within the past couple of years, deputies who filed EEOC actions subjected to retaliatory IA, and all under the administration of the recently turned out Sheriff Mitchell. Deputies disciplined and terminated for telling the truth. Those are just a few.

From a LEO's point of view, the department was a cesspool in need of cleansing. It looks and feels like that cleansing is starting to happen.

I was informed early on in the campaign by some there that Sheriff Rivero was going to be less friendly toward CCW. That has proven to be, happily for the good folks in Lake County, 100% wrong and those who tried to bum steer me have somehow dropped off my speed dial.

Makes me wonder if some of them aren't somehow wrapped up in this imbroglio.

nation
03-29-2011, 5:27 PM
Yes... we really do need the rest of the story.

There is a considerable amount of backstory in the Lake County Sheriff's Office, and in the custody division. To say there were / are issues in the department that need addressing would be an understatement. Humbugging IAs on the opposition candidate (who is now sheriff), illegal NFA weapons issues within the department within the past couple of years, deputies who filed EEOC actions subjected to retaliatory IA, and all under the administration of the recently turned out Sheriff Mitchell. Deputies disciplined and terminated for telling the truth. Those are just a few.

From a LEO's point of view, the department was a cesspool in need of cleansing. It looks and feels like that cleansing is starting to happen.

I was informed early on in the campaign by some there that Sheriff Rivero was going to be less friendly toward CCW. That has proven to be, happily for the good folks in Lake County, 100% wrong and those who tried to bum steer me have somehow dropped off my speed dial.

Makes me wonder if some of them aren't somehow wrapped up in this imbroglio.

that is a understatment.

Gray Peterson
03-29-2011, 5:58 PM
Yes... we really do need the rest of the story.

There is a considerable amount of backstory in the Lake County Sheriff's Office, and in the custody division. To say there were / are issues in the department that need addressing would be an understatement. Humbugging IAs on the opposition candidate (who is now sheriff), illegal NFA weapons issues within the department within the past couple of years, deputies who filed EEOC actions subjected to retaliatory IA, and all under the administration of the recently turned out Sheriff Mitchell. Deputies disciplined and terminated for telling the truth. Those are just a few.

From a LEO's point of view, the department was a cesspool in need of cleansing. It looks and feels like that cleansing is starting to happen.

I was informed early on in the campaign by some there that Sheriff Rivero was going to be less friendly toward CCW. That has proven to be, happily for the good folks in Lake County, 100% wrong and those who tried to bum steer me have somehow dropped off my speed dial.

Makes me wonder if some of them aren't somehow wrapped up in this imbroglio.

Yes to the above, especially the underlined. Sheriff Mitchell's supporters lied and distorted pretty badly to the point where that he would be a "Sheriff Hennessey" situation involving carry.

Sheriff Rivero, as far as I know, has fixed EVERY unlawful policy and is issuing for self defense. Sheriff Mitchell, however, did not do this.

p_shooter
03-29-2011, 6:01 PM
Yes... we really do need the rest of the story.

There is a considerable amount of backstory in the Lake County Sheriff's Office, and in the custody division. To say there were / are issues in the department that need addressing would be an understatement. Humbugging IAs on the opposition candidate (who is now sheriff), illegal NFA weapons issues within the department within the past couple of years, deputies who filed EEOC actions subjected to retaliatory IA, and all under the administration of the recently turned out Sheriff Mitchell. Deputies disciplined and terminated for telling the truth. Those are just a few.

From a LEO's point of view, the department was a cesspool in need of cleansing. It looks and feels like that cleansing is starting to happen.

I was informed early on in the campaign by some there that Sheriff Rivero was going to be less friendly toward CCW. That has proven to be, happily for the good folks in Lake County, 100% wrong and those who tried to bum steer me have somehow dropped off my speed dial.

Makes me wonder if some of them aren't somehow wrapped up in this imbroglio.

Then there was the whole Russell Perdock (Lake Couty Sherrif's Deputy) who, after he'd been drinking and decided to go for a joy ride on Clear Lake at night, rammed into a sail boat. He killed a woman and then charged another passenger on the boat with DUI.

The whole thing was disgusting and showed that the there were problem with the Sherrif's Office and DA's office in Lake County. :( :BARF:

District Attorney Jon Hopkins needs to go too. He's complicit in this.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/iteam&id=5569012

BigDogatPlay
03-29-2011, 7:59 PM
Then there was the whole Russell Perdock (Lake Couty Sherrif's Deputy) who, after he'd been drinking and decided to go for a joy ride on Clear Lake at night, rammed into a sail boat. He killed a woman and then charged another passenger on the boat with DUI.

I didn't mention that mess on purpose. The malfeasance in that incident is enough to fill a half dozen healthy threads. But at least one deputy was fired behind that case for not wanting to go with the sheriff's "theory of the crime".

For the record, at the time Russ Perdock was chief deputy. He was later demoted and ultimately terminated for reasons not disclosed by Sheriff Mitchell. The woman who was killed was a retired peace officer.The man charged, and later acquitted, of BWI was the owner of the sail boat... which was at anchor at the time of the collision.

The big body of water isn't the only thing that stinks in Lake County.

resonance
03-29-2011, 11:45 PM
Maybe i'm confused...but...
My oldest son is a CO in a prison....He went to the academy and is POST certified...He was sworn in and received a badge...I was at the academy and saw him graduate...have it on tape....His ID says that he is a calif peace officer.....He works in open 100 man dorms, with convicted felons around him all the time....loose...many with shanks..
He carries a can of pepper spray...

I have seen his attitude change over the last three years since the academy...He does not smile as much...He is no longer just a big boy...Does he seriously need a handgun with him off duty?...They tell him to wear a cover shirt to and from the prison...over his uniform...He has a CCW....I insisted...
calif is about to release on to our streets, many of these felons, due to over crowding...

He knows and is recognized by 10 times as many repeat felons...as any street cop....

Does he really need a gun off duty?

RollingCode3
03-30-2011, 12:23 AM
Maybe i'm confused...but...
My oldest son is a CO in a prison....He went to the academy and is POST certified...He was sworn in and received a badge...I was at the academy and saw him graduate...have it on tape....His ID says that he is a calif peace officer.....He works in open 100 man dorms, with convicted felons around him all the time....loose...many with shanks..
He carries a can of pepper spray...

I have seen his attitude change over the last three years since the academy...He does not smile as much...He is no longer just a big boy...Does he seriously need a handgun with him off duty?...They tell him to wear a cover shirt to and from the prison...over his uniform...He has a CCW....I insisted...
calif is about to release on to our streets, many of these felons, due to over crowding...

He knows and is recognized by 10 times as many repeat felons...as any street cop....

Does he really need a gun off duty?

Great post. Correctional Officers receive death threats on a regular basis. They deal with with scumbags 8-16 hours a day (more than any average cop on the street). Do they need a gun off duty? tell to the guy below.


Whats wrong with carrying with a CCW when a CO has no police powers off duty? Why do you think a CO should be entitled to be able to carry because of his job status as a county worker? Just asking.

:rolleyes: Do you even know what is the different between peace officer "authority" and peace officer "status" ?

Why? Go spend a day in jail and come out here and tell me why. :rolleyes:

Anchors
03-30-2011, 2:58 AM
I think carry rights are imperative for correctional officers.
Cops meet some bad people on the streets, but EVERYONE C.O. meet are people already locked up. Many of them are rapists, murderers, gang-bangers, etc.

I definitely wouldn't want to see a guy that just got paroled after being in the hole for six months because I put him there (even if he deserved it). I can definitely see some hostility towards the C.O.

Also, an armed society is a polite society. The more people on the street with guns, the better (in my opinion).

If it helps us get CCW for more people and put more legal guns on the stree - Great!
If not, then I think it is bad because it is taking lawful guns off the street.

Just my two cents.

Wrangler John
03-30-2011, 6:39 AM
County C.O.'s are "custodial" officers by penal code and our training is S.T.C. certified instead of P.O.S.T. It sounds like Lake county did the right thing. The CO's should carry by ccw only, because they are not classified as peace officers. Some counties, although extremely rare, give their C.O.'s peace officer powers. Our union has been looking at this for awhile. The reason for it is because of medical beneifts. heres why: Lets say I meet a deputy at his patrol car to retrieve his arrest from his car and his subject becomes combative. Both the deputy and the C.O. receive blown knees in the fight. The deputy goes off work on 4850 time at full pay with no taxes taken out while he is getting medical care, surgury, up to one year to heal if needed depending on the severity of injury. The CO gets two thirds disability pay and for only 6 months. The problem is we get hurt much more often having to fight out of control inmates and we are not taken care of by the county when we get hurt. Heck, my wife got her ACL blown in a fight and the county denied her claim. In most counties, CO's are the red haired step children. State COs are different. They are 24 hour peace officers by penal code.

I'll bet the Lake county Sheriff dropped the CO's peace officer status to save tax payers money by reducing the on duty injuries costs.

^ This appears to the logical answer. Local governments will go to quite some lengths to prevent "Public Officer" classifications from being recognized as peace officers, public safety or first responders, for the reason above. Training expenses are also lower if they can avoid full POST requirements. In some cases, they also avoid inclusion in safety retirement system with added benefit and lower retirement age. Liability is the overt reason, because they may not want to openly discuss the benefit package available to deputies in this economic climate.

Don29palms
03-30-2011, 6:50 AM
Join the crowd. If you want a CCW apply for it like everyone else. Should a CO have a CCW? Yes we all should.

paul0660
03-30-2011, 7:04 AM
Under Mitchell, Lake County had half the issuance per thousand compared to Mendocino County, with a very similar type of population. For whatever reason, Mitchell did not get the job done regarding CCW, despite the perception that the county was shall issue.

taperxz
03-30-2011, 8:11 AM
Great post. Correctional Officers receive death threats on a regular basis. They deal with with scumbags 8-16 hours a day (more than any average cop on the street). Do they need a gun off duty? tell to the guy below.




:rolleyes: Do you even know what is the different between peace officer "authority" and peace officer "status" ?

Why? Go spend a day in jail and come out here and tell me why. :rolleyes:


Your reading comprehension needs some work!! If a sheriff takes away their county issue handgun, and supposed police powers when off duty, NONE of which is needed when off duty. Then replaces it with a no application, no charge CCW for off duty use. Whats the problem in regards to 2A rights infringements for them? The CO's can STILL PROTECT THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES!!!!!!!!

I don't even care about the other politics going on between the sheriff/county and the CO's union. I mean i do in the sense that i have a stake in this county but for this forum its all about gun rights. Which is what i am focusing my comments towards.

taperxz
03-30-2011, 8:18 AM
Like BigDog mentioned, Lake county had a sheriffs dept that was literally 1800's style. If you were in the dept. and were a good little boy for the sheriff, you could get whatever you wanted in perks. Frank Rivero was not a kiss @$$ and ran for sheriff and won and is now cleaning up what was left behind.

The CO's that i know were scared to death of this change of a new sheriff because of all the FUD in the election. After meeting and dealing with him they like him. He is making some changes now that they may not like however i have also heard the new sheriff has made some other changes that were beneficial to them as well.

At least, thats my editorial on the matter.

Midnightblue 72
03-30-2011, 8:38 AM
County C.O.'s are "custodial" officers by penal code and our training is S.T.C. certified instead of P.O.S.T. It sounds like Lake county did the right thing. The CO's should carry by ccw only, because they are not classified as peace officers. Some counties, although extremely rare, give their C.O.'s peace officer powers. Our union has been looking at this for awhile. The reason for it is because of medical beneifts. heres why: Lets say I meet a deputy at his patrol car to retrieve his arrest from his car and his subject becomes combative. Both the deputy and the C.O. receive blown knees in the fight. The deputy goes off work on 4850 time at full pay with no taxes taken out while he is getting medical care, surgury, up to one year to heal if needed depending on the severity of injury. The CO gets two thirds disability pay and for only 6 months. The problem is we get hurt much more often having to fight out of control inmates and we are not taken care of by the county when we get hurt. Heck, my wife got her ACL blown in a fight and the county denied her claim. In most counties, CO's are the red haired step children. State COs are different. They are 24 hour peace officers by penal code.

I'll bet the Lake county Sheriff dropped the CO's peace officer status to save tax payers money by reducing the on duty injuries costs.

Your title has nothing to do with 4850 benefits, it is a classification issue, you need to fall under the "Safety" classification and have your county recognize it. Here is the problem, I can bet those (now)C.O.s transport, if you have (let's just call them a jailer) get killed who was re-classified and you have a deputy sheriff next to them riding shotgun, the deputy's survivors get the state and federal death benefit protection and the jailer's family gets jack s*it.

I know of one county that this applies to, Riverside. Riverside has "Correctional Deputies" and they have 4850 benefits but are not armed while transporting or on duty, regardless of what 830.1 says. They get the 4850 benefit because of their "Safety" status classification but if they are killed on duty, the family gets nearly nothing but the Deputy next to them gets the $500,000 federal and state death benefit and state college benefit for their children. Same uniform, same patches, same job while in custody.

RollingCode3
03-30-2011, 9:26 AM
Your reading comprehension needs some work!! If a sheriff takes away their county issue handgun, and supposed police powers when off duty, NONE of which is needed when off duty. Then replaces it with a no application, no charge CCW for off duty use. Whats the problem in regards to 2A rights infringements for them? The CO's can STILL PROTECT THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES!!!!!!!!

I don't even care about the other politics going on between the sheriff/county and the CO's union. I mean i do in the sense that i have a stake in this county but for this forum its all about gun rights. Which is what i am focusing my comments towards.

My reading comprehension needs some work? oh really? You used the term "POLICE POWER" at least five or six times in this thread. I asked you a simple question if you know the different between "Peace officer status" and "Peace officer authority."

Correctional officers have peace officer authority while on duty but they do have peace officer status 24/7/365. They are not cop. They do not have peace officer authority while off duty so stop using the term POLICE POWER. What the heck is POLICE POWER?

Peace Officer status give them the legal right to CCW off duty with or without the department approval. Read Attorney Generals Opinion 89-505 and the case law between OCEA vs OCSD. if you get into a shooting situation all liability rests on you. the department will not help you in any way.

Peace officer status gives them a lot more than just CCW off duty. I am not going into details especially in a public forum.

Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Whats wrong with carrying with a CCW when a CO has no police powers off duty? Why do you think a CO should be entitled to be able to carry because of his job status as a county worker? Just asking.

Like I said before, spend a day in jail dealing with all those scumbags and come back here to tell me if they deserve those perks or not.

taperxz
03-30-2011, 9:40 AM
My reading comprehension needs some work? oh really? You used the term "POLICE POWER" at least five or six times in this thread. I asked you a simple question if you know the different between "Peace officer status" and "Peace officer authority."

Correctional officers have peace officer authority while on duty but they do have peace officer status 24/7/365. They are not cop. They do not have peace officer authority while off duty so stop using the term POLICE POWER. What the heck is POLICE POWER?

Peace Officer status give them the legal right to CCW off duty with or without the department approval. Read Attorney Generals Opinion 89-505 and the case law between OCEA vs OCSD. if you get into a shooting situation all liability rests on you. the department will not help you in any way.

Peace officer status gives them a lot more than just CCW off duty. I am not going into details especially in a public forum.

Like i said, i don't care where they work, there perk is to get a paycheck and benefits like any other county worker!!



Like I said before, spend a day in jail dealing with all those scumbags and come back here to tell me if they deserve those perks or not.

Their perk is a paycheck and benefits. They should not be an entitled class of people because THEY CHOSE THEIR LINE OF WORK!!!!

I guess your going to tell me that the only reason to take that line of work is so they could carry without a CCW?? Maybe i should become a banker now so that i can get the benefits of keeping my bonus because the government will bail my bank out of tough economic times:rolleyes:

BigDogatPlay
03-30-2011, 12:46 PM
Maybe i'm confused...but...
My oldest son is a CO in a prison....He went to the academy and is POST certified...He was sworn in and received a badge...I was at the academy and saw him graduate...have it on tape....His ID says that he is a calif peace officer.....

So then your son is employed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, better known as CDCR. Correction officers employed by CDCR are defined by statute, PC 830.5(b) as a peace officer. They have the full power and authority of a peace officer, including carry of firearms off duty, at all times.

Unless a county correctional officer falls into on duty peace officer status devolved from the specific conditions within PC 830.55, which is what I would hunch that Lake County was using, then county correctional officers generally fall into PC 831.5 and are not peace officers, but rather public officers with some peace officer authority while on duty. Neither of those classifications are empowered to carry firearms off duty, and would need to be granted a license under PC 12050 in order to carry off duty.

Does he really need a gun off duty?

He's either a fool (not likely) or a very trusting soul if he doesn't. If I worked for CDCR, I can guarantee you I would. :)

nation
03-30-2011, 12:55 PM
[/B]Their perk is a paycheck and benefits. They should not be an entitled class of people because THEY CHOSE THEIR LINE OF WORK!!!!

I guess your going to tell me that the only reason to take that line of work is so they could carry without a CCW?? Maybe i should become a banker now so that i can get the benefits of keeping my bonus because the government will bail my bank out of tough economic times:rolleyes:

theres two sides to this. if your not getitng death threats your not doing it right:D been there done that. i fully believe that the CCW should be a standard option. unless you do/did the job you have zero rights to comment on what a CO should be entitled to. taking the job, there are things that you know will happen. you will fight,you will get hurt,you will loose sleep and you will ve put in situaitions ON the job that are hard to control. your surrounded by trained officers to help you in a bad situation.

now,people get out of jail and live amoung us. until your shopping at walmart with you kids/wife/girl friend and run into a x-inmate,a inmate who still feels he was wronged and needs to take it out on someone) follows you out to your car,you wont know the NEED, not want for a ccw. i can recall a few times when having my ccw gave me the piece of mind that im keeping my family safe.

as for peace officer status, it means your a peace officer on and off the job. there are more benefits to having it but like i posted before,it has more to do with money. by law there is supposed to be a PO in a facility at all times. different depts have different ways of getting around that fact.

there is so much more to this than most people know. thats why when people comment to talk down about CO's i laugh. i dont give a second thought to someone who slanders a officer but is to scared to do the job themselves. were else can you clear 100k this easy?

Paul S
03-30-2011, 1:13 PM
Whats wrong with carrying with a CCW when a CO has no police powers off duty? Why do you think a CO should be entitled to be able to carry because of his job status as a county worker? Just asking.

Please point out to me where I wrote that there was something wrong with carrying via CCW.

Please point out to me where I wrote or even hinted that a C/O should be ENTITLED to carry. I did not discuss that point.

While you are certainly welcome to prattle on about your views I doubt they would remain the same had you worked behind the wall for 20 years and dealt with the scum bags and loons I dealt with. And I am supremely confident every C/O whether state or county, peace officer or custodial officer feels the same way.

You sir are making way to many unsupported assumptions about posters' positions on this issue.

CEDaytonaRydr
03-30-2011, 1:30 PM
I've always wondered about this. COs aren't really required to carry guns for their job. In fact, they're not allowed to have them inside the jail, so are they really LEOs in the "gun carrying" sense? :confused:

I dunno...

My take on the question as to whether it's good or bad is that it's a bad thing. You're basically removing firearms from law-abiding persons who have had their backgrounds investigated and would (most likely) use their weapons in defense of the public. So, I think it's taking an element of safety out of the community.

Now, do they deserve the right to carry any more than another law-abiding citizen? Nope! Not at all, but that's just my own, personal perpective... ;)

jnojr
03-30-2011, 2:02 PM
Not sure if this is good or bad. BUT if more people that currently enjoy 'elevated' status with respect to rights get a tasted of what us unwashed peons endure, it may start a turn towards equal protection and actually upholding the 2A.

They never have... they'll just push for their union to make some bribes, twist some arms, etc. to regain their special privilege.

How many LEO organizations have had a peep to say (positive) about CCW/CHP since HR218 passed? They have theirs.

nation
03-30-2011, 2:13 PM
I've always wondered about this. COs aren't really required to carry guns for their job. In fact, they're not allowed to have them inside the jail, so are they really LEOs in the "gun carrying" sense? :confused:

I dunno...

My take on the question as to whether it's good or bad is that it's a bad thing. You're basically removing firearms from law-abiding persons who have had their backgrounds investigated and would (most likely) use their weapons in defense of the public. So, I think it's taking an element of safety out of the community.

Now, do they deserve the right to carry any more than another law-abiding citizen? Nope! Not at all, but that's just my own, personal perpective... ;)

no "firearms" are allowed to be carried inside the jail. FN,tazer and other less lethals are but only by jail co/sgt. no outside agencys are allowed to but this often a overlooked rule.

i cant speak for other counties but solano has a cert(custody emergency response team) thats made up of CO staff only. that team alone has peace office status. the idea was make a small group to help with transfer and medical watch. then the rest were placed through pc832 a and some put themselves through b

Hunt
03-30-2011, 2:57 PM
Lake county is an easy county to get permitted. It is shall issue so I do not see why the Sheriff is pissing off the guards.

jerry

maybe they are trying to force this avenue for the Corrections people, why? for revenue?

dantodd
03-30-2011, 3:20 PM
theres two sides to this. if your not getitng death threats your not doing it right:D been there done that. i fully believe that the CCW should be a standard option. unless you do/did the job you have zero rights to comment on what a CO should be entitled to.

That is a really ignorant attitude. You cannot reasonably expect people to not form opinions on the job that people do simply because they've never done those jobs. It is like saying no one has the right to decide how much a billionaire pays in taxes unless they, too, are billionaires. Or no one can have a say in abortion rights discussion unless they have either had a baby or an abortion. The examples go on forever on the ridiculousness of such an assertion.

cruising7388
03-30-2011, 3:21 PM
Lake county is an easy county to get permitted. It is shall issue so I do not see why the Sheriff is pissing off the guards.

jerry


Have you considered that it might be the guards that are pissing off the Sheriff?

cruising7388
03-30-2011, 3:48 PM
The big body of water isn't the only thing that stinks in Lake County.

LOL! I don't know why anyone would ever swim in that lake. You come out smelling like rotten vegetables.

mag360
03-30-2011, 4:07 PM
good discussion. I think ALL LEO's should have to get CCW's for carrying. Only when they have clocked in for work would they get to carry otherwise.

Shadowdrop
03-30-2011, 4:55 PM
mag360, police officers are on duty 24/7.

CEDaytonaRydr
03-30-2011, 5:36 PM
mag360, police officers are on duty 24/7.

In theory...

...but when you need one, they're only 6 minutes away. Despite what Charlie Beck says in this article, I think the budget cuts will increase response times... :rolleyes:

http://ourweekly.com/los-angeles/los-angeles-police-departments-response-time-emergencies

RollingCode3
03-30-2011, 5:54 PM
good discussion. I think ALL LEO's should have to get CCW's for carrying. Only when they have clocked in for work would they get to carry otherwise.

:rolleyes: Really? wow.. just wow. So they only allow to carry while on the clock? Why are some people so ignorant? You know they are cops 24/7 right? You know bad guys do recognize them off duty while not in uniform too right? :rolleyes: You do know that even off duty, they are held to a different standard than everyone else, right?

Some of you have the mentality of "If i can't CCW, no one can." :rolleyes: Put your anger toward the state because they are the one that restricted your rights... not these Correctional Officers. Cops deal with bad and good people. Correctional Officers deal with scum bags 100% of the time. Very scary considering what they do and who they deal with. God bless any officer (correction, probation, parole) that works with our "gems of society" unarmed!!! The bottom line is this... if they commit a crime, assault someone, beat up their wives/gf/chilren, I am sure as hell they won't hesitate to assault or kill a peace officer. But wait.. What do I know...I am not a internet commando that hiding behind a keyboard and act all tough.

taperxz
03-30-2011, 6:58 PM
Please point out to me where I wrote that there was something wrong with carrying via CCW.

Please point out to me where I wrote or even hinted that a C/O should be ENTITLED to carry. I did not discuss that point.

While you are certainly welcome to prattle on about your views I doubt they would remain the same had you worked behind the wall for 20 years and dealt with the scum bags and loons I dealt with. And I am supremely confident every C/O whether state or county, peace officer or custodial officer feels the same way.

You sir are making way to many unsupported assumptions about posters' positions on this issue.

I can't because i think i quoted the wrong person:D

taperxz
03-30-2011, 7:06 PM
:rolleyes: Really? wow.. just wow. So they only allow to carry while on the clock? Why are some people so ignorant? You know they are cops 24/7 right? You know bad guys do recognize them off duty while not in uniform too right? :rolleyes: You do know that even off duty, they are held to a different standard than everyone else, right?

Some of you have the mentality of "If i can't CCW, no one can." :rolleyes: Put your anger toward the state because they are the one that restricted your rights... not these Correctional Officers. Cops deal with bad and good people. Correctional Officers deal with scum bags 100% of the time. Very scary considering what they do and who they deal with. God bless any officer (correction, probation, parole) that works with our "gems of society" unarmed!!! The bottom line is this... if they commit a crime, assault someone, beat up their wives/gf/chilren, I am sure as hell they won't hesitate to assault or kill a peace officer. But wait.. What do I know...I am not a internet commando that hiding behind a keyboard and act all tough.

I agree with you about LEO's carrying when they need to on or off duty 100%. However you are taking the thread out of context. The topic at hand is about county correctional officers and not state correctional officers. You seem to want to lump them all into the same category. My opinion on this thread is about Lake county CO's. The sheriff of this county is willing to issue CCW's free of charge with no application. The rest of the politics involves tax payer and county fiscal protection. This is a small county with little money. If what Rivero is doing protects the county from errant shooting from a CO off duty, i am for it. If the county correctional officers don't like the policy they can leave and get another job with another agency or accept the CCW that is free of charge and continue to work at the job they applied for.

dantodd
03-30-2011, 8:11 PM
mag360, police officers are on duty 24/7.

I've always disliked this attitude. Vos should not have to be "on" 24/7. I know plenty who drink when "off duty." If they are drinking should they be "on?"

Shadowdrop
03-30-2011, 8:37 PM
If an officer is drunk, will the parolee that recognizes him give him a free pass? I think not. I don't drink alcohol, so I'll never be in that situation, thankfully. taperxz, you seem to think that county correctional officers don't deal with dangerous people. As a former county CO, I can tell you that you're 100% wrong. All the murderers and rapists rotting in prisons get locked up in county until sentencing and they are no less dangerous during that time.

InGrAM
03-30-2011, 8:41 PM
[/B]Their perk is a paycheck and benefits. They should not be an entitled class of people because THEY CHOSE THEIR LINE OF WORK!!!!

I guess your going to tell me that the only reason to take that line of work is so they could carry without a CCW?? Maybe i should become a banker now so that i can get the benefits of keeping my bonus because the government will bail my bank out of tough economic times:rolleyes:

Jealous much?

dantodd
03-30-2011, 9:31 PM
If an officer is drunk, will the parolee that recognizes him give him a free pass?

You appear to have missed my point. I was not saying an officer should not be armed. I presume an officer is not preempted to drink on duty and was pointing out that many (most?) Officers do not treat their down time as being "on duty."

As a CO, you have zero job duties when you clock out. As such, the only need you have for self-defense for personal reasons. This is what a CCW is for.

InGrAM
03-30-2011, 9:44 PM
You appear to have missed my point. I was not saying an officer should not be armed. I presume an officer is not preempted to drink on duty and was pointing out that many (most?) Officers do not treat their down time as being "on duty."

As a CO, you have zero job duties when you clock out. As such, the only need you have for self-defense for personal reasons. This is what a CCW is for.

CO's use firearms at work and qualify regularly with them and their off duty guns. (do you?) (do you deal with the scum of the earth on a daily bases?) (are you worried that you are going to get stabbed on a daily bases?) If a CO having the right to carry a gun concealed off duty helps them sleep better at night then let them do what they wont.
is it hurting you in any way?

I am not saying that they or police should have an elite status in society but to feel that they somehow should not have a right to carry a firearm just because you cant is BS IMO.

dantodd
03-30-2011, 10:42 PM
CO's use firearms at work and qualify regularly with them and their off duty guns. (do you?) (do you deal with the scum of the earth on a daily bases?) (are you worried that you are going to get stabbed on a daily bases?)

I understand the dangers and perils a CO chooses when they take the job. However; it doesn't have anything to do with this discussion. If a sheriff was denying CO's CCWs I can see the problem.

If a CO having the right to carry a gun concealed off duty helps them sleep better at night then let them do what they wont.
is it hurting you in any way?

A CO is welcome to get a ccw like any other non-leo do that they can "sleep better." Please don't call it a right, in CA it is still a privilege.
I am not saying that they or police should have an elite status in society but to feel that they somehow should not have a right to carry a firearm just because you cant is BS IMO.

Who has said that CO's shouldn't be permitted to carry a firearm when not working?

resonance
03-30-2011, 11:26 PM
...Now for some truth.....

There are rifles in every tower.....every three months, my son has to qualify with those very same rifles, because there are shifts when he is in a tower...

When transporting felons to hospitals or other prisons...both CO's are armed with rifles and handguns...He has to qualify with the same handgun every three months...
There are no guns around the felons, unless they riot...which they do, when one gang disrespects another gang...

It happened during the first 6 months of his tour...and in his dorm...while he was the "only" man in there...(one man per 100 man dorm)...two gangs decided to kill each other (45 men) while the third gang watched...

My son hit the alarms and was joined by two other CO's from the dorms on either side of his dorm...shanks were out and many wounded and bleeding men were down....The CO's went for their pepper spray....more men went down...The spray makes them throw up...it burns their skin...and they cant breath....it seals their eyes shut....
Within 2 mins...the riot was over and the riot team came in with major weapons.... over spray was blown back into my sons face from overhead fans ....He could not see...His eyes were swollen shut..... He was sick and his skin burned....They pulled him out.....

Now, they have issued gas masks......

And some of you would deny him a few perks?

taperxz
03-31-2011, 6:46 AM
Jealous much?

LOL!! AH, NO!

taperxz
03-31-2011, 6:59 AM
...Now for some truth.....

There are rifles in every tower.....every three months, my son has to qualify with those very same rifles, because there are shifts when he is in a tower...

When transporting felons to hospitals or other prisons...both CO's are armed with rifles and handguns...He has to qualify with the same handgun every three months...
There are no guns around the felons, unless they riot...which they do, when one gang disrespects another gang...

It happened during the first 6 months of his tour...and in his dorm...while he was the "only" man in there...(one man per 100 man dorm)...two gangs decided to kill each other (45 men) while the third gang watched...

My son hit the alarms and was joined by two other CO's from the dorms on either side of his dorm...shanks were out and many wounded and bleeding men were down....The CO's went for their pepper spray....more men went down...The spray makes them throw up...it burns their skin...and they cant breath....it seals their eyes shut....
Within 2 mins...the riot was over and the riot team came in with major weapons.... over spray was blown back into my sons face from overhead fans ....He could not see...His eyes were swollen shut..... He was sick and his skin burned....They pulled him out.....

Now, they have issued gas masks......

And some of you would deny him a few perks?

Please reference to me where Sheriff Rivero has taken any perks away from any CO in this county. Regardless of the union v county politics the sheriff is still issuing CCW's free of charge and with no application to all of his CO's.

Your poor son had all that happen to him in the jail and bad things happened.
What kind of job did he think he was getting into???

Its like joining the military, Some folks KNOW they may go to war others are there for the college tuition benefits and if a war starts up they cry foul. Its the nature of the job.

I just love the boo hoo poor me attitude of "but look what we do for a living" and of course you took this job because, what?, you flunked out of Med school, right? :rolleyes:

M1A1TankerTom
03-31-2011, 9:09 AM
Penal Code 830.1(C):

(c) Any deputy sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and any
deputy sheriff of the Counties of Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn,
Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa,
Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San Diego, San Luis Obispo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma,
Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, and Tuolumne who is employed to
perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial
assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of
county custodial facilities, including the custody, care,
supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a
peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only
while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her
respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary
function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments,
or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or
her employing agency during a local state of emergency.

By state law the C.O.'s of the counties listed above are considered correctional Deputies and are peace officers. I dont think a sheriff of a county has the right or the power to change a state law without taking the proper steps. Stripping these officers of their status does nothing to help the county but hurts the officers in more ways than just carrying firearms, it will negatively effect their medical benies and bargaining power as well. C.O.'s walk the toughest beats in America, why is this sheriff dumping on them?

mag360
03-31-2011, 10:07 AM
I have close friends that are CO's and Police. They (CO's) probably have a bigger reason to carry off duty than the cops in terms of personal safety. If you get arrested you see that guy once, when you're in the slammer you see the CO's all day long.

Off duty means off duty. I'd like to see more cops embrace the meaning of off-duty. No more David Uhler BS jumping out of his car whipping out his duty gun because a guy was speeding on a motorcycle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK5bMSyJCsg

Midnightblue 72
03-31-2011, 11:02 AM
Penal Code 830.1(C):

(c) Any deputy sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and any
deputy sheriff of the Counties of Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn,
Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa,
Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San Diego, San Luis Obispo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma,
Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, and Tuolumne who is employed to
perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial
assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of
county custodial facilities, including the custody, care,
supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a
peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only
while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her
respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary
function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments,
or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or
her employing agency during a local state of emergency.

By state law the C.O.'s of the counties listed above are considered correctional Deputies and are peace officers. I dont think a sheriff of a county has the right or the power to change a state law without taking the proper steps. Stripping these officers of their status does nothing to help the county but hurts the officers in more ways than just carrying firearms, it will negatively effect their medical benies and bargaining power as well. C.O.'s walk the toughest beats in America, why is this sheriff dumping on them?

You need to think of the penal code sections like this as, the maximum allowable limit. The sheriff has the ability to reduce those powers or increase up to what the penal code describes in this section.

Skter505
03-31-2011, 11:17 AM
Some of you should hang out with scumbags behind bars then meet them or their friends in the mall somewhere and see if you wish you were protected.

dantodd
03-31-2011, 11:40 AM
Some of you should hang out with scumbags behind bars then meet them or their friends in the mall somewhere and see if you wish you were protected.

Once again. No one has suggested that CO's shouldn't be permitted to defend themselves.

dfletcher
03-31-2011, 12:05 PM
Isn't it more like "County Correctional Officers lose their "Special Status"? It seems they're now stuck with the same "rights" the rest of us have regarding guns in CA.

Hogxtz
03-31-2011, 12:31 PM
Isn't it more like "County Correctional Officers lose their "Special Status"? It seems they're now stuck with the same "rights" the rest of us have regarding guns in CA.

With the exception that their Sheriff recognizes their increased risk and is willing to give them a CCW without question and paying for it. They dont have to "show good cause". Their job meets that.

I only wish our dept. would pay for our CCW's. But than again, I would never expect it during such horrible budget times.

CO's definatley have an increased risk. Every single time I go grocery shopping I will run into atleast one past inmate, sometimes they are in packs. In the last 25 years I can not count how many times I have been told that I will be killed if they ever see me on streets.

To this day in 25 years the only problem I have had is a former inmate, one I remebered from maximum security due to violence, saw me and kicked my car door caving the door in.

I still feel that all citizens should have the same rights to CCW as one life is not more important than another.

The CO's in Lake county will be just fine in regards to their ability to provide protection for themselves and their families. Loosing their 24 hour peace officer status might suck for them personally as far as moral might go, I don't know, but it will not place them in harms way anymore than they already are.

dantodd
03-31-2011, 12:36 PM
Thanks for the most reasoned and rational post so far in this thread.

With the exception that their Sheriff recognizes their increased risk and is willing to give them a CCW without question and paying for it. They dont have to "show good cause". Their job meets that.

I only wish our dept. would pay for our CCW's. But than again, I would never expect it during such horrible budget times.

CO's definatley have an increased risk. Every single time I go grocery shopping I will run into atleast one past inmate, sometimes they are in packs. In the last 25 years I can not count how many times I have been told that I will be killed if they ever see me on streets.

To this day in 25 years the only problem I have had is a former inmate, one I remebered from maximum security due to violence, saw me and kicked my car door caving the door in.

I still feel that all citizens should have the same rights to CCW as one life is not more important than another.

The CO's in Lake county will be just fine in regards to their ability to provide protection for themselves and their families. Loosing their 24 hour peace officer status might suck for them personally as far as moral might go, I don't know, but it will not place them in harms way anymore than they already are.

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 1:22 PM
I understand the dangers and perils a CO chooses when they take the job. However; it doesn't have anything to do with this discussion. If a sheriff was denying CO's CCWs I can see the problem.



A CO is welcome to get a ccw like any other non-leo do that they can "sleep better." Please don't call it a right, in CA it is still a privilege.


Who has said that CO's shouldn't be permitted to carry a firearm when not working?

It is still taking away their rights and giving this sheriff a power trip. If we take away CO's peace officer status when off duty we should do the same to cops then. No one should have a RIGHT to carry. Just CCW in KALIFORNIA.

That is YOUR feeling on the matter, is it not?

So because YOU have to pay for a CCW, CO's should too?

Sounds kind of like a child that can not get what he wants. So, no one else can have want he wants.

SJgunguy24
03-31-2011, 1:28 PM
I've always disliked this attitude. Vos should not have to be "on" 24/7. I know plenty who drink when "off duty." If they are drinking should they be "on?"

I remember a case where a LEO was off duty and having a beer with some friends and there was some incident and he stepped in and flashed the badge. He ended up losing his job, even though he was off the clock the moment he pulled the badge he was now "on duty" and having consumer an alcoholic beverage means he was drinking on the job. Leave the badge if one consumes alcohol.

Lake county is pretty small as a population and since there are only a couple of places to get food and supplies in any large quantity (unless you drive to Ukiah or Santa Rosa). A C.O.'s chances of running into a former inmate is greatly increased. Also with it being such a small community (population wise) and if someone grew up there, most people know where each other live.

M1A1TankerTom
03-31-2011, 2:07 PM
I think too many of you are caught up on the whole "if I have to get a CCW they should too". Bottom line is the state legislature says they are peace officers and their sheriff is not just limiting what they can do but he is trying to say they are not peace officers. Guess we will have to see how this plays out in court but I think I would be taking it before a judge as well.

dantodd
03-31-2011, 2:22 PM
Sounds kind of like a child that can not get what he wants. So, no one else can have want he wants.

All I want is for people to be treated equally. If someone is NOT performing the duties of a peace officer they are not entitled to the privileges associated with those duties.

In the future please skip the name cashing and stick to trying to make your point. Name calling is the last refuge of a losing argument.

dantodd
03-31-2011, 2:29 PM
I think too many of you are caught up on the whole "if I have to get a CCW they should too". Bottom line is the state legislature says they are peace officers and their sheriff is not just limiting what they can do but he is trying to say they are not peace officers. Guess we will have to see how this plays out in court but I think I would be taking it before a judge as well.

The citation you provided is for sworn deputies. You are assuming, without supporting that assumption, that CO's are deputies.

RollingCode3
03-31-2011, 3:02 PM
All I want is for people to be treated equally. If someone is NOT performing the duties of a peace officer they are not entitled to the privileges associated with those duties.

In the future please skip the name cashing and stick to trying to make your point. Name calling is the last refuge of a losing argument.

Do i have to explain the different between "peace officer authority" and "peace officer status" again? Even though they have no peace officer authority off duty, they are held to a higher standard than a normal average citizen. There are ton of rules and polices they have to follow even off duty.

So you want people to be treated equally? They deal with drug users, rapist, murderers, hardcore gang members, etc... Who do you deal with? Do you make enemies while on the job? Do you receive death threats? Do you have gang member threaten to kill your family or rape your wife?

Here is something most people dont understand. If they carry with the CCW permit and get into a shooting situation... all liability rests on them. The department will not help them in any way. If they authorized us, then they would have to provide legal protection if I was involved in an off duty situation. If some scum bag recognizes me off duty and get involved in a shooting.... that is WORK RELATED. If the department doesn't provide any legal protection... I'm f**ked.

CavTrooper
03-31-2011, 4:07 PM
...

Using all your rational for why a LEO or CO should be allowed to carry "off duty", how do you feel about members of the Military having the same privilege?

Skter505
03-31-2011, 6:11 PM
Military is a different animal. They aren't walking the streets with their "enemies" I'm all for right to carry without restrictions, but a CO has the need to carry and they should be encouraged to do so.

M1A1TankerTom
03-31-2011, 6:40 PM
(c) Any deputy sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and any
deputy sheriff of the Counties of Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn,
Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa,
Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San Diego, San Luis Obispo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma,
Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, and Tuolumne who is employed to
perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial
assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of
county custodial facilities, including the custody, care,
supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a
peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only
while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her
respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary
function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments,
or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or
her employing agency during a local state of emergency.

The whole purpose of the citation I listed is to make certain C.O.'s of certain counties have peace officer status. Lake county is on that list. The past sheriff fought to get them included on that list. It is now a state law that Lake County C.O.'s are in fact peace officers. Like it or not they ARE. The new sheriff can not just walk in and personally abolish that state law. This is more than just a case of people upset they can no longer carry guns off duty. I would think guys that have been effected by unlawful local laws trying to trump state and federal laws would agree with this lawsuit.

Ubermcoupe
03-31-2011, 7:51 PM
(c) Any deputy sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and any
deputy sheriff of the Counties of Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn,
Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa,
Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San Diego, San Luis Obispo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma,
Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, and Tuolumne who is employed to
perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial
assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of
county custodial facilities, including the custody, care,
supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a
peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only
while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her
respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary
function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments,
or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or
her employing agency during a local state of emergency.

...

This applies to Deputies (i.e. the deputies @ the jail or those that do transport/court security/etc), NOT the Correctional Officers in question. C.Os are listed further on in the 830.x series in the blue book. I would cite particulars but i'm on my couching watching Sharks > Stars.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 7:53 PM
(c) Any deputy sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and any
deputy sheriff of the Counties of Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn,
Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa,
Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San Diego, San Luis Obispo,
Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma,
Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, and Tuolumne who is employed to
perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial
assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of
county custodial facilities, including the custody, care,
supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a
peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only
while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her
respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary
function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments,
or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or
her employing agency during a local state of emergency.

The whole purpose of the citation I listed is to make certain C.O.'s of certain counties have peace officer status. Lake county is on that list. The past sheriff fought to get them included on that list. It is now a state law that Lake County C.O.'s are in fact peace officers. Like it or not they ARE. The new sheriff can not just walk in and personally abolish that state law. This is more than just a case of people upset they can no longer carry guns off duty. I would think guys that have been effected by unlawful local laws trying to trump state and federal laws would agree with this lawsuit.

Read the YOUR first line. Then read the article where it says that this has been to court in Santa Clara and the Sheriff won in court.

You know what!! This whole thing just blows me away!! This is why our country is going to crap. More and more people expecting entitlement! If you want to be a cop then become a cop!! You want to sit in a jail and pretend to be a cop then do that.(BTW a CO is a tough job but still not a LEO) Please don't expect the taxpayers to take on the liability of a CO pretending to play COP in a bad situation off duty. As it is LEO's have a hard enough time knowing all the laws out there. Now we want to give CO's LEO responsibilities when they are off duty and have the taxpayers be liable for it?? God Help Us!

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 8:09 PM
Read the YOUR first line. Then read the article where it says that this has been to court in Santa Clara and the Sheriff won in court.

You know what!! This whole thing just blows me away!! This is why our country is going to crap. More and more people expecting entitlement! If you want to be a cop then become a cop!! You want to sit in a jail and pretend to be a cop then do that.(BTW a CO is a tough job but still not a LEO) Please don't expect the taxpayers to take on the liability of a CO pretending to play COP in a bad situation off duty. As it is LEO's have a hard enough time knowing all the laws out there. Now we want to give CO's LEO responsibilities when they are off duty and have the taxpayers be liable for it?? God Help Us!

No one is "giving" CO's police responsibilities.... Letting them carry a firearm for self defense is not "police" responsibilities.

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 8:15 PM
All I want is for people to be treated equally. If someone is NOT performing the duties of a peace officer they are not entitled to the privileges associated with those duties.

In the future please skip the name cashing and stick to trying to make your point. Name calling is the last refuge of a losing argument.

I am just stating the obvious. And by 'treated equally" you mean if YOU can not have a "right" to carry no one should.. Ok I get it.

Hogxtz
03-31-2011, 8:31 PM
You want to sit in a jail and pretend to be a cop then do that.(BTW a CO is a tough job but still not a LEO) Please don't expect the taxpayers to take on the liability of a CO pretending to play COP in a bad situation off duty. As it is LEO's have a hard enough time knowing all the laws out there. Now we want to give CO's LEO responsibilities when they are off duty and have the taxpayers be liable for it?? God Help Us!

Actually the liability argument doesn't fly. More law suits come out of jails than anywhere else. Within the jails, the concentration of suits come from the medical care.

CO's that have peace officer status are trained as such by P.O.S.T. I highly doubt that any dept. would assign CO's to "enforce laws" when off duty and outside the the detention system because they have peace officer status. State CO's are 24 hour peace officers. How many times have you seen in the news of State CO's trying to be cops and enforce laws in the private sector? Doesn't happen.

Santa Clara county detention sued several years ago to seperate from the Sheriff. They became the Santa Clara county Dept. of Corrections. They are similiar to state CO's in that CO's that pass required training which is POST certified can be armed and complete all detention functions which require being armed.

There always has been, and always will be "cops" that feel threatened by CO's that have the authority to be armed.

I don't sit in jail and pretend to be a cop. I chose my profession and am dam proud of the service I have given my community through out my entire career. There are not too many cops that could walk my beat for 25 years, or have enough heart to do it.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 10:04 PM
No one is "giving" CO's police responsibilities.... Letting them carry a firearm for self defense is not "police" responsibilities.

Thats right! Thats why they need a ccw like the rest of us. I should also make it clear that all CO's should be granted a ccw by their employers. Just like any other non prohibited person who can legally buy a firearm. This actually benefits a CO. If they decide to change their line of work, a CCW stays with the person where as a right to carry because of employment would be taken away.

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 10:07 PM
Actually the liability argument doesn't fly. More law suits come out of jails than anywhere else. Within the jails, the concentration of suits come from the medical care.

CO's that have peace officer status are trained as such by P.O.S.T. I highly doubt that any dept. would assign CO's to "enforce laws" when off duty and outside the the detention system because they have peace officer status. State CO's are 24 hour peace officers. How many times have you seen in the news of State CO's trying to be cops and enforce laws in the private sector? Doesn't happen.

Santa Clara county detention sued several years ago to seperate from the Sheriff. They became the Santa Clara county Dept. of Corrections. They are similiar to state CO's in that CO's that pass required training which is POST certified can be armed and complete all detention functions which require being armed.

There always has been, and always will be "cops" that feel threatened by CO's that have the authority to be armed.

I don't sit in jail and pretend to be a cop. I chose my profession and am dam proud of the service I have given my community through out my entire career. There are not too many cops that could walk my beat for 25 years, or have enough heart to do it.


Thank you, for choosing to protect all of us from the scum of the earth. I appreciate it.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 10:13 PM
Actually the liability argument doesn't fly. More law suits come out of jails than anywhere else. Within the jails, the concentration of suits come from the medical care.

CO's that have peace officer status are trained as such by P.O.S.T. I highly doubt that any dept. would assign CO's to "enforce laws" when off duty and outside the the detention system because they have peace officer status. State CO's are 24 hour peace officers. How many times have you seen in the news of State CO's trying to be cops and enforce laws in the private sector? Doesn't happen.

Santa Clara county detention sued several years ago to seperate from the Sheriff. They became the Santa Clara county Dept. of Corrections. They are similiar to state CO's in that CO's that pass required training which is POST certified can be armed and complete all detention functions which require being armed.

There always has been, and always will be "cops" that feel threatened by CO's that have the authority to be armed.

I don't sit in jail and pretend to be a cop. I chose my profession and am dam proud of the service I have given my community through out my entire career. There are not too many cops that could walk my beat for 25 years, or have enough heart to do it.

All the more reason to not need to be entitled to a county weapon to protect yourselves "off duty" Where as a ccw belongs to YOU and not the entity you work for.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 10:14 PM
Thank you, for choosing to protect all of us from the scum of the earth. I appreciate it.

I can see why you chose your profession.

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 10:16 PM
Thats right! Thats why they need a ccw like the rest of us. I should also make it clear that all CO's should be granted a ccw by their employers. Just like any other non prohibited person who can legally buy a firearm. This actually benefits a CO. If they decide to change their line of work, a CCW stays with the person where as a right to carry because of employment would be taken away.

So because YOU do not have the "RIGHT" to carry concealed without a CCW you feel that CO's should not have that right..... this "if we cant have it, no one should have it" attitude is getting old.

What is so wrong with CO's having the right to carry concealed? The only answer I am seeing is "it's not fair."

Well heads up... life is not fair. Get over it.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 10:29 PM
So because YOU do not have the "RIGHT" to carry concealed without a CCW you feel that CO's should not have that right..... this "if we cant have it, no one should have it" attitude is getting old.

What is so wrong with CO's having the right to carry concealed? The only answer I am seeing is "it's not fair."

Well heads up... life is not fair. Get over it.

Thats not the case at all. Since you brought it up though, why don't you explain to everyone in this forum why a CO should have the right to carry concealed because of his job and not have to get a CCW like the rest of the citizens. Remember a CCW stays with you, with or without employment as a CO.

taperxz
03-31-2011, 10:30 PM
Oh and by the way, life is not fair so get over it ;)

KylaGWolf
03-31-2011, 10:52 PM
I think he did it due to the fact that while on duty in the jail/prison it is really easy for them to lose their gun to the prisoner and something really ugly to happen. While yes they are sworn officers correctional officers will usually not carry much more than pepper spray and maybe a CCW but usually outside of the facility. While I may be in the minority I understand why LEO's get an easier time to get a CCW. They deal with the fact that the bad guy has no qualms in finding them away from their job. Now that doesn't mean the rest of us shouldn't have any problem I am all for every law abiding citizen being able to get a CCW just because they want one and can show they have some brains in their head to not do something totally bone headed. Now before you bash me on that last comment we all know someone in our lives that doesn't have a lick of common sense and you would rather not see them with a gun or even get behind the wheel of a car. Or handle sharp objects...you get the idea.

Connor P Price
03-31-2011, 11:37 PM
I'm in full agreement with those who say that the CO's need for ccw is no more legitimate than the rest of ours. I fully recognize that by the nature of their job, they are probably more likely to be targeted than many of the rest of us. However that doesn't make their right to armed self defense any more legitimate than anyone else, it just means they're more likely to have to use it.

To try to boil it all down to "the average person has a 5% chance of being attacked and CO's have a 10% chance so they need ccws more" doesn't make any sense (the numbers are of course made up). Regardless of it being more likely their lives are not worth more, and they aren't more worthy of protecting. All men were created equal right?

All of that is beside the point and we don't need to start an internet mudslinging match amongst ourselves. The "if I cant have mine neither should they" argument might seem tempting since they certainly have no more of a right than the rest but instead we should take a more pragmatic approach. There's no reason anyone here should utter a word about trying to strip them of their arms, so I propose a different idea.

If they can have theirs, then so should we.

(Its got a better ring to it, and its what we all want anyway right?)

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 11:40 PM
I can see why you chose your profession.

I am not a CO. And what exactly is this statement supposed to mean?

You are sounding more and more like the anti's with every comment you leave.

InGrAM
03-31-2011, 11:43 PM
I'm in full agreement with those who say that the CO's need for ccw is no more legitimate than the rest of ours. I fully recognize that by the nature of their job, they are probably more likely to be targeted than many of the rest of us. However that doesn't make their right to armed self defense any more legitimate than anyone else, it just means they're more likely to have to use it.

To try to boil it all down to "the average person has a 5% chance of being attacked and CO's have a 10% chance so they need ccws more" doesn't make any sense (the numbers are of course made up). Regardless of it being more likely their lives are not worth more, and they aren't more worthy of protecting. All men were created equal right?

All of that is beside the point and we don't need to start an internet mudslinging match amongst ourselves. The "if I cant have mine neither should they" argument might seem tempting since they certainly have no more of a right than the rest but instead we should take a more pragmatic approach. There's no reason anyone here should utter a word about trying to strip them of their arms, so I propose a different idea.

If they can have theirs, then so should we.

(Its got a better ring to it, and its what we all want anyway right?)

+1. Great idea. A few people came off a little jealous to me and in their jealousy would like to see CO's stripped of their rights. This is a much better approach to this topic. Thanks

CavTrooper
04-01-2011, 12:55 AM
Military is a different animal. They aren't walking the streets with their "enemies"

So there are no terrorists or terrorist sympathizers inside the US?

There are no anti-government types who view anyone who works for the FED as an enemy?

Have there not been attacks and murders of US Servicemembers based on their affiliation with the Military and their participation in conflicts?

Yes sir, we walk among our enemies everyday.

Connor P Price
04-01-2011, 8:47 AM
So there are no terrorists or terrorist sympathizers inside the US?

There are no anti-government types who view anyone who works for the FED as an enemy?

Have there not been attacks and murders of US Servicemembers based on their affiliation with the Military and their participation in conflicts?

Yes sir, we walk among our enemies everyday.



Just like women walk among rapists, children walk among predators, minorities walk among bigots, and Joe Schmo walks among gang bangers. Stop trying to create more protected classes, we don't need more, we need less.

CavTrooper
04-01-2011, 9:48 AM
Just like women walk among rapists, children walk among predators, minorities walk among bigots, and Joe Schmo walks among gang bangers. Stop trying to create more protected classes, we don't need more, we need less.

Jump to conclusions much? Maybe your poor vcitim mentality is effecting your rational thinking and comperhension skills, no one said a damn thing about creating new protected classes. In fact, I'm laying out the argument that the reasoning these elitist LEOs use for wanting to retain their special privileges is not unique to the LEO profession. We all face dangers and I'm willing to bet that by percentage, more non-LEO civilians are killed or assaulted everyday than are civilian LEOs.

BigDogatPlay
04-01-2011, 10:03 AM
Penal Code 830.1(C):

(c) Any deputy sheriff... Lake.....

By state law the C.O.'s of the counties listed above are considered correctional Deputies and are peace officers.

I disagree. Starting the section with "any deputy sheriff" is the key. A county correctional or custodial officer is not a deputy sheriff by default. A deputy sheriff who happens to work in custody is still a deputy sheriff with all the powers of a peace officer, is what 830.1 says, in my opinion.

The CO's in Lake County were hired as CO's, not as deputy sheriffs to my understanding. The conditions for empowering a county CO as a peace officer is covered in 830.55. 830.1 does not automatically confer the CO as a deputy sheriff / peace officer .

RollingCode3
04-01-2011, 11:32 AM
Read the YOUR first line. Then read the article where it says that this has been to court in Santa Clara and the Sheriff won in court.

You know what!! This whole thing just blows me away!! This is why our country is going to crap. More and more people expecting entitlement! If you want to be a cop then become a cop!! You want to sit in a jail and pretend to be a cop then do that.(BTW a CO is a tough job but still not a LEO) Please don't expect the taxpayers to take on the liability of a CO pretending to play COP in a bad situation off duty. As it is LEO's have a hard enough time knowing all the laws out there. Now we want to give CO's LEO responsibilities when they are off duty and have the taxpayers be liable for it?? God Help Us!

Sir, First you said that Correctional Officers have "POLICE POWER." I asked you a simple question to explain to me what the heck is "POLICE POWER." You totally ignored my question. Now you said that we give CO's LEO responsibilities. What ficken "LEO responsibilities" are you talking about? Are you kidding me? Where do come up with these craps? Stop making craps up as you go. CO's sit and jail and pretend to play cop? seriously bro... STOP TROLLING. It is not even funny anymore. :rolleyes: For the last time, this article is about "PEACE OFFICER STATUS"... ... I REPEAT... IT IS NOT ABOUT PEACE OFFICER AUTHORITY.

You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, but flaunting your ignorance of the subject is certainly going to make them susceptible to criticisms. See, there's a reason I don't tell you how to do your job. I know nothing about it. So, I keep my pie-hole shut about things I know nothing about. And, just because you own some guns, and may or may not be a good shot, know a few CO’s or COPS, take some law class in high school doesn't mean you know JACK about LE/Correction work or what they are entitled to.

Connor P Price
04-01-2011, 8:18 PM
Jump to conclusions much? Maybe your poor vcitim mentality is effecting your rational thinking and comperhension skills, no one said a damn thing about creating new protected classes. In fact, I'm laying out the argument that the reasoning these elitist LEOs use for wanting to retain their special privileges is not unique to the LEO profession. We all face dangers and I'm willing to bet that by percentage, more non-LEO civilians are killed or assaulted everyday than are civilian LEOs.

That may be what you meant, but all you mentioned was military. It would appear to any rational reader that you were asserting that military deserves the same special protections. Please excuse my misunderstanding. My only desire is for people to quit with the"certain people deserve special protections" idea and recognize that we all deserve the same rights.

Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

PosseComitatus77
06-07-2011, 2:07 PM
Lake County correctional officers are in fact peace officers and we really do need them. What kind of Sheriff would suggest decreasing the number of peace officers in his county? Seriously! Think about it. It has been memed here that this new Sheriff is a "Shall Issue" Sheriff and that is completely untrue. He has gone so far as to take away the coffee in the jail from the correctional officer staff in the same childish manner he wants to take away their gun rights. (because they dont support him dismantling the department) Tangentially, Rivero during his campaign he said that he wanted to clean house by firing the officers we have and hire "minorities" in their place. [B] For additional legislation see PC 836.5.

Bizcuits
06-07-2011, 4:59 PM
I feel for the Officers, but as others have mentioned if no one else can have one, then they shouldn't either. Goose, gandy and all that...

taperxz
06-07-2011, 7:43 PM
Lake County correctional officers are in fact peace officers and we really do need them. What kind of Sheriff would suggest decreasing the number of peace officers in his county? Seriously! Think about it. It has been memed here that this new Sheriff is a "Shall Issue" Sheriff and that is completely untrue. He has gone so far as to take away the coffee in the jail from the correctional officer staff in the same childish manner he wants to take away their gun rights. (because they dont support him dismantling the department) Tangentially, Rivero during his campaign he said that he wanted to clean house by firing the officers we have and hire "minorities" in their place. [B] For additional legislation see PC 836.5.
Wrong!! Rivero wants to take away their county issued powers while off duty because thet are not LEOs! He is willing to issue these COs a CCW free of charge and free of background checks and qualifying requirements.

Sorry about the free coffee:rolleyes: Can you afford a thermos? Or do the tax payers need to buy you coffee? Lake is not exactly the richest county in the state.

LockJaw
06-07-2011, 8:09 PM
Wrong!! Rivero wants to take away their county issued powers while off duty because thet are not LEOs! He is willing to issue these COs a CCW free of charge and free of background checks and qualifying requirements.

Sorry about the free coffee:rolleyes: Can you afford a thermos? Or do the tax payers need to buy you coffee? Lake is not exactly the richest county in the state.

When you take the free coffee away from all other county depts including the Sheriff's Office then your statement is valid. Until then it is only the actions of a vindictive tyrant playing payback politics. .
Lots more of news stories about the new Sheriff over the last 60 days. Not many are flattering.
It's too bad the field of candidates was so thin that voters had so real other choice to ousting former Sheriff Mitchell. It has pretty much been the scenario that many predicted.
Still happy to see Mitchell gone however.

taperxz
06-07-2011, 8:17 PM
When you take the free coffee away from all other county depts including the Sheriff's Office then your statement is valid. Until then it is only the actions of a vindictive tyrant playing payback politics. .
Lots more of news stories about the new Sheriff over the last 60 days. Not many are flattering.
It's too bad the field of candidates was so thin that voters had so real other choice to ousting former Sheriff Mitchell. It has pretty much been the scenario that many predicted.
Still happy to see Mitchell gone however.

Only the leaders of each dept. Can decide on how to cut back! Rivero has a lot to clean up and yes, his decisions won't be popular. Like I said though our county isn't the richest around and Mitchel was a free ride for his employees JMO

taperxz
06-07-2011, 8:30 PM
Lock, I have never had public employee job so I'll yell ya what, when a law is passed that all californians should have their coffee fix supplied by their employer I will then agree with you.

taperxz
06-07-2011, 8:32 PM
Perhaps all coffee should be supplied by the government!! Ya, coffee welfare!!

LockJaw
06-07-2011, 10:03 PM
Only the leaders of each dept. Can decide on how to cut back! Rivero has a lot to clean up and yes, his decisions won't be popular. Like I said though our county isn't the richest around and Mitchel was a free ride for his employees JMO

My understanding the Sheriffs Office still has their coffee supplied for free it is only the jail that got cut off. Am I wrong?
Coffee made in a coffee pot is not that expensive. An office could easily pass the hat and get enough to buy the coffee. However is the coffee pot still allowed regardless of who pays for the coffee?
Lets face it this is a petty ego driven decision to pull the coffee pot out of the jail. I think other cost cutting would be more effective in saving money.

By the way Lake county is one of the few counties in the state living within their means, not running a huge deficit, and not looking to make massive cuts. I believe the county still has emergency reserves in place.

Disclaimer: I am not a coffee drinker and have never been. I'm a self employed Pepsi drinker. :D

PosseComitatus77
06-08-2011, 10:20 PM
Wrong!! Rivero wants to take away their county issued powers while off duty because thet are not LEOs! He is willing to issue these COs a CCW free of charge and free of background checks and qualifying requirements.

Sorry about the free coffee:rolleyes: Can you afford a thermos? Or do the tax payers need to buy you coffee? Lake is not exactly the richest county in the state.

Dude are you dense or something? Let me share the legislation with you because both you and the Cuban born Francisco Jose Rivero are wrong about the law.

Rivero claims that they are not peace officers in defiance of the 830.1(c) legislation which states:

“Any deputy sheriff of the County of . . . Lake, . . . who is employed to perform duties exclusively or initially relating to custodial assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the operations of county custodial facilities, including the custody, care, supervision, security, movement, and transportation of inmates, is a peace officer whose authority extends to any place in the state only while engaged in the performance of the duties of his or her respective employment and for the purpose of carrying out the primary function of employment relating to his or her custodial assignments, or when performing other law enforcement duties directed by his or her employing agency during a local state of emergency.”

Do you get it yet?
(ps, Jose Retardo couldn't even pass the sergeants test)

Paul S
06-08-2011, 10:40 PM
Posse:

Remember the sheriff could very easily have hired employees as Correctional Officers. If that is the case they indeed ARE NOT peace officers. They are public officers with limited peace officer powers ONLY while on duty. This type employee is treated as a regular citizen when it comes to carrying a weapon when not on duty. Often times as a courtesy C/O's are granted CCW's. Usually they must qualify regularly as required by department policy.

Deputies assigned to the jail...of course they are peace officers. No argument
on that issue.
The question is...concerning the employees being discussed...are they C/O's or are they Deputies? That makes a lot of difference. I can tell you by experience C/O's are generally the red headed step children of the department.

E Pluribus Unum
06-08-2011, 11:32 PM
Whether or not they are peace officers would not matter if the "elite class" mentality were curbed. Most officers have an elitist mentality in every day life, even when off of the clock. Plain and simply, when that cop clocks out, he should have no more or less rights or powers than any other non LEO.

jgraham7897
06-09-2011, 12:58 AM
Pretty sure all CO's fall under LEOSA.