Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

View Poll Results: How much would you pay for Law Enforcement Credentials
$0 I don't want them at any price 382 15.34%
$100 309 12.41%
$500 734 29.48%
$1000 514 20.64%
$1500 102 4.10%
$2000 207 8.31%
$5000 127 5.10%
$10000 50 2.01%
$Whatever it takes I'll take out a second mortgage 65 2.61%
Voters: 2490. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:08 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by choprzrul View Post
So, let's start narrowing this down one step at a time beginning with states. The chosen state must allow non-resident LEOs. Based on memory on what AJAX22 previously said, there are two that come to mind, Alaska and Ohio. So here is the acceptable/rejected state list:

Acceptable
1. Alaska
2. Ohio
3. California
4. NC?
5. Alabama
6. Tennessee
7. Arkansas
8. Maryland


Rejected
1. All others until someone verifies that residency is NOT a LEO requirement.
edited
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:14 PM
bigcalidave's Avatar
bigcalidave bigcalidave is offline
Pre-Banned
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. George, UT
Posts: 4,755
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

I don't get this quote from the text of HR218

Quote:
may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).
Why does the firearm carried have to have been shipped or transported in interstate commerce?

And sadly, it also excludes a silencer...
__________________
Contact me about Advertising on Calguns.net
Marketing Director, Calguns.net
Dave Shore
NRA Life Member


Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:25 PM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Alabama might be a possibility

found an interesting anecdote
Quote:
Sheriff Lamar Glover is a first class lawman and a good friend. Prior to the recent reciprocity law, I discussed my problem of concealed carry across-state-lines with him and he wrote me a "Special Deputy Sheriff" identification card. This card states I'm a Honorary Deputy ... of good character and any special or courteous consideration is appreciated. Lamar said this card and my pistol permit "may be honored" across state lines. The key word here is "may" which implies there are no guarantees of any courtesy by out-of-state LEOs.
__________________
Youtube Channel Proto-Ordnance

Subscribe to Proto Ordnance
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:29 PM
bigcalidave's Avatar
bigcalidave bigcalidave is offline
Pre-Banned
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. George, UT
Posts: 4,755
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

What's the year of that quote? Could be before HR218
__________________
Contact me about Advertising on Calguns.net
Marketing Director, Calguns.net
Dave Shore
NRA Life Member


Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:31 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

I wonder if the Blackfeet Nation of Montana (http://97.74.249.201/ ) would be interested in hiring several thousand contracted LEOs? State and Federal laws shouldn't apply?
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:34 PM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

New Mexico apparently has zero requirements for reserves.

Santa Fe is recruiting too....
Quote:
if you are interested in becoming a part time deputy, full time hero, contact Corporal Vanessa Pacheco or Sergeant Ken Johnson at 505-986-2400.
__________________
Youtube Channel Proto-Ordnance

Subscribe to Proto Ordnance
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 11-13-2009, 9:36 PM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcalidave View Post
I don't get this quote from the text of HR218



Why does the firearm carried have to have been shipped or transported in interstate commerce?

And sadly, it also excludes a silencer...
because HR218 draws its authority from the commerce clause.

albeit broadly interpreted and potentially unconstitutional...
__________________
Youtube Channel Proto-Ordnance

Subscribe to Proto Ordnance
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 11-13-2009, 10:05 PM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 8,874
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
New Mexico apparently has zero requirements for reserves.

Santa Fe is recruiting too....
I lived in Santa Fe, and I highly doubt they would be interested in straw reserve peace officers. I also don't see them recruiting reserves anyway. All their positions require New Mexico residency.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 11-13-2009, 11:26 PM
7x57's Avatar
7x57 7x57 is offline
Calguns Addict
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 5,161
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
Anyone have friends/family on a reservations tribal council?
I met someone from one of the California reservations at an NRA event once. Nice guy, but I haven't the faintest idea how this would sound even if somehow he could be found. He cared a lot about gun rights, but agreed most indians don't see it as their issue. But money is a universal language, spoken by tribes and small towns alike.

7x57
__________________


What do you need guns for if you are going to send your children, seven hours a day, 180 days a year to government schools? What do you need the guns for at that point?-- R. C. Sproul, Jr. (unconfirmed)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulgron View Post
I know every chance I get I'm going to accuse 7x57 of being a shill for LCAV. Because I can.

Last edited by 7x57; 11-13-2009 at 11:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 11-13-2009, 11:33 PM
7x57's Avatar
7x57 7x57 is offline
Calguns Addict
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 5,161
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by choprzrul View Post
This would also keep wingnuts from going off the farm on us. The whole authority trip thing that a lot of people seem to have concern with would be negated, unless of course they show up on Indian property and try a power trip. I don't see that happening.
I think you'd find it would be a very temporary problem.

7x57
__________________


What do you need guns for if you are going to send your children, seven hours a day, 180 days a year to government schools? What do you need the guns for at that point?-- R. C. Sproul, Jr. (unconfirmed)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bulgron View Post
I know every chance I get I'm going to accuse 7x57 of being a shill for LCAV. Because I can.
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 11-14-2009, 12:00 AM
hollabillz hollabillz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 313
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
I lived in Santa Fe, and I highly doubt they would be interested in straw reserve peace officers. I also don't see them recruiting reserves anyway. All their positions require New Mexico residency.
You're taking this wayyy too personally. And I don't think anyone here is buying your hearsay. Just sayin...
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 11-14-2009, 12:23 AM
vrand's Avatar
vrand vrand is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 428
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by choprzrul View Post
I wonder if the Blackfeet Nation of Montana (http://97.74.249.201/ ) would be interested in hiring several thousand contracted LEOs? State and Federal laws shouldn't apply?
Interesting idea. Just need to know if Blackfeet Nation LEO's = state LEO's
__________________
Have a great day

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

http://www.state-citizen.org/
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 11-14-2009, 1:15 AM
hollabillz hollabillz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 313
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by choprzrul View Post
ONE THING THAT REALLY CAUGHT MY EYE: Washington state treats Indian Tribes completely different. Perhaps we should be offering to be contracted LEOs for an Indian tribe rather than for a town? Anyone with Indian affairs background or knowledge? Does the federal law that allows for LEO nationwide CCW include tribal LEOs?
Quote:
As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;
`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;
`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;
`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
If the tribal LEA grants us, as reserve officers, statutory powers of arrest, authorizes us to carry a firearm, and the rest, then yes, we would be covered under HR218 as it currently stands.


Oh, and the latest list:

Acceptable

0. Native American Tribes
1. Alaska
2. Ohio
3. California
4. North Carolina (?)
5. Alabama
6. Tennessee
7. Arkansas
8. Maryland
9. New Mexico

Rejected
1. All others until someone verifies that residency is NOT a LEO requirement.
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 11-14-2009, 6:52 AM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,477
iTrader: 46 / 88%
Default reply

I was at a Law Enforcement fundraiser last night with some who will be campaigning for office, and mentioned the thread. Some interesting ideas were batted about:

1) Tribal Police, and a closer inspection of 830.1 and 830.2 of the penal code.

My immediate rebuttal was that the Indian tribes are flush with casino cash and wouldn't be interested, but some brought up that not all tribes have casinos.

2) POST standards are entirely voluntary. Participation by the agency is not mandatory.

One LEO was very specific about pulling over someone with a California Drivers License and credentials from out of state resulting in immediately hooking the individual for "impersonating a police officer". With the prevailing quick trigger attitude mentality that some of our LEO's have, the non-resident issue will be key.

3) some departments issue badges to reserves...without reserve text or designation in them.
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 11-14-2009, 7:11 AM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
short bus driver
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: the 909
Posts: 18,739
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
Tribal LEO would be ideal, I'd love to whip that out of my pocket....

Anyone have friends/family on a reservations tribal council?
AFAIK...
Actual Tribal LEOs are certified through BIA. You need to go through a Fed LE Academy.

"Tribal LEOs" that are not BIA certified are just glorified secruity guards and have no peace powers.

I know of a few incidents (may years ago) where a "Tribal Police" agency in CA got into trouble with different county sheriffs. After which, the "Tribal Police" title went away and it became a Tribal Security department.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 11-14-2009, 7:33 AM
vrand's Avatar
vrand vrand is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 428
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default California recognized tribes as published in November 1996 in the Federal Register.



http://www.kstrom.net/isk/maps/ca/california.html
__________________
Have a great day

"Opposing secession changes the nature of government "from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves."--New York Journal of Commerce 1/12/61

"[I]t is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery!"--Patrick Henry

http://www.state-citizen.org/
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 11-14-2009, 8:09 AM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
short bus driver
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: the 909
Posts: 18,739
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Public Law 280 and Law Enforcement in Indian Country -- Research Priorities
Quote:
December 2005

Passed in 1953, Public Law 280 (PL 280) gave jurisdiction over criminal offenses involving Indians in Indian Country to certain States and allowed other States to assume jurisdiction. Subsequent legislation allowed States to retrocede jurisdiction, which has occurred in some areas. Some PL 280 reservations have experienced jurisdictional confusion, tribal discontent, and litigation, compounded by the lack of data on crime rates and law enforcement response. This NIJ Research in Brief summarizes the current status of PL 280 jurisdiction, identifies the key issues, and lists areas for further research and action.
Tribal reservations in California, Minnesota (except the Red Lake Nation), Nebraska, Oregon (except the Warm Springs Reservation), Wisconsin (except later the Menominee Reservation), Alaska, Nevada, South Dakota, Washington, Florida, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, Arizona, Iowa, and Utah are under Public Law 280.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 11-14-2009, 9:39 AM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

A caveat: we must find a Tribal entity that does not receive federal money for LE or align itself with BIA's LE regulations. Here is the Federal CFR citation:

Title 25: Indians
PART 12—INDIAN COUNTRY LAW ENFORCEMENT
Subpart B—Policies and Standards

Browse Next
§ 12.11 Do I have to follow these regulations?

You must follow the minimum standards outlined in the regulations in this part if you are part of a BIA or tribal law enforcement program receiving Federal funding or operating under a BIA law enforcement commission.

Emphasis is mine. If the Tribe does infact fall under these parameters, then they must follow:

Title 25: Indians
PART 12—INDIAN COUNTRY LAW ENFORCEMENT
Subpart B—Policies and Standards

Browse Previous
§ 12.14 Where can I find specific policies and standards for law enforcement functions in Indian country?

BIA will ensure that all Indian country law enforcement programs are provided a copy of the most current policy manuals and handbooks. Every Indian country law enforcement program covered by the regulations in this part must maintain an effective and efficient law enforcement program meeting minimal qualitative standards and procedures specified in chapter 68 Bureau of Indian Affairs Manual (BIAM) and the Law Enforcement Handbook.

Which leads me to chapter 68 which was superceded:

1.3 Cross Reference. The regulations in 25 CFR Parts 10 and 12 contain references to chapters
68 and 69 of the Bureau of Indian Affairs Manual (BIAM). Chapter 69 was never issued and chapter
68 is superseded by the issuance of this Part 40 of the Indian Affairs Manual.

which states in general:

F. All Law Enforcement Personnel:
(1) Conduct themselves in a professional and ethical manner;
(2) Adhere to the law enforcement code of conduct;
(3) Maintain physical fitness, and proficiency in the use of weapons and vehicles;
(4) Report incidences of possible officer misconduct to the immediate supervisor or
directly to the internal affairs unit;
(5) Act within the limits of assigned jurisdiction and authority; and
(6) Maintain harmonious working relationships and communication with other law
enforcement agencies, U.S. Attorneys and other prosecutors, and all other criminal justice agencies.

BIA mandates completion of a 16 week BIA LEO course in New Mexico. Since none of us stand a chance of being selected and sent to this training, we will have to find a small tribe that does not fall under the above guidelines.
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 11-14-2009, 8:47 PM
dobek's Avatar
dobek dobek is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 507
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default Interesting Prospect

Thinking outside of the box is exactly what is needed - and I think $1000 would be jumped on without a second thought. Keep me in the loop if this goes forward.

Steve
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 11-15-2009, 12:55 AM
thefinger's Avatar
thefinger thefinger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacto.
Posts: 1,604
iTrader: 45 / 100%
Default

I've read this whole thread and its a GREAT idea. I put down that I'd pay $2k for the LE credentials. It would be a financial stretch, but its a one-time pay-out. It would be worth it since the fees associated with CCW permits are so high, and I can't even get one of those where I'm at.

Keep pressing on, AJAX!!
__________________
كافر INFIDEL
SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 11-15-2009, 3:09 AM
bigcalidave's Avatar
bigcalidave bigcalidave is offline
Pre-Banned
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. George, UT
Posts: 4,755
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Can we drop the tribal idea? Too much interpretation and too many issues. Stick to the small town sheriff or buying a town ideas. I personally don't want to support another tribe that skirts the laws the rest of us have to follow...
__________________
Contact me about Advertising on Calguns.net
Marketing Director, Calguns.net
Dave Shore
NRA Life Member


Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 11-15-2009, 10:35 AM
hollabillz hollabillz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 313
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Out of all the gun rights most of the country has that a regular Californian does not (CCW, Handgun Roster, 10 round magazine limit, 1 handgun in 30 days, 10 day waiting period, and on and on), CCW is the most fundamental (arguably protected by "bear arms" in the US Constitution itself) and one of the easiest for people to just start doing. The problem comes in that 1 out of 100 times when you get "had", or found out.

Assuming valid LEO credentials, that 1 time becomes less of a problem, but maybe 1 out of 10 times that you're "had", you're false arrested, etc. Would you really want a local DA to get the call that you were carrying a weapon concealed with credentials of Special Honorary Reserve Deputy of the Southern Tubatulabal Tribe? Would you want to stand in front of a federal judge with that as your defense?

I'm with bigcalidave on this one, personally. I'd rather apply to be a deputy of Holy City, CA. From a PR perspective, it sounds a whole lot less sketchy. Even though Holy City (as an example) has a population of 1.

All that being said, if we can be assured of the legitimacy of a tribal LEA, forget what I think.

Last edited by hollabillz; 11-15-2009 at 4:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 11-15-2009, 12:01 PM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 8,874
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

There are many counties - mostly rural - in CA that issue CCWs to law-abiding citizens that are not convicted felons, that can provide references and/or take a special training.

I personally think all this money would be better spent either through a donation to the CGF, or by supporting sherif and DA candidates that support CCW issuance.

Right now anyway this whole idea needs to go through a team of attorneys who have to check on its validity and long-term viability.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 11-15-2009, 6:21 PM
hollabillz hollabillz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 313
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
There are many counties - mostly rural - in CA that issue CCWs to law-abiding citizens that are not convicted felons, that can provide references and/or take a special training.

I personally think all this money would be better spent either through a donation to the CGF, or by supporting sherif and DA candidates that support CCW issuance.

Right now anyway this whole idea needs to go through a team of attorneys who have to check on its validity and long-term viability.
Sounds good. Congrats on living in a CCW-friendly county

Unfortunately, more than 4 in 5 people in California currently live in counties that are not known to issue to your average, law-abiding citizen. (Sources: CA CCW by County and US Census Bureau) For many of them, myself included, moving is simply not an option.

It would be great to have lawyers involved once there's more clarity on what's going to be done!
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 11-15-2009, 9:40 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Thank you all for the great comments. Very thought provoking and helpful. Although I would really like to find a town outside of CA to work with, I can see where having credentials and dmv records from different states is going to create a lot of problems with LE encounters. For this reason, I think that it makes a lot of sense to be looking for a small town in CA.

If we look at really small towns, they will be unincorporated and at the mercy of the county board of supervisors. Incorporated towns are autonomous and can make their own rules within the boundries of the law, but they are larger and probably won't be as eager to jump on board with us. With that, I searched out the smallest incorporated town in CA and came up with Amador City: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amador_City,_California , http://www.amador-city.com/

What say you AJAX22 & legal eagles? Is this going to go anywhere or are we just dreaming?
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 11-15-2009, 9:51 PM
PutTogether's Avatar
PutTogether PutTogether is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 2,375
iTrader: 41 / 100%
Default

What about California City, California?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 11-15-2009, 10:01 PM
bigcalidave's Avatar
bigcalidave bigcalidave is offline
Pre-Banned
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. George, UT
Posts: 4,755
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Wow that amador city is only .3 square miles! That sounds great, 15,000 deputies for 213 people :P
__________________
Contact me about Advertising on Calguns.net
Marketing Director, Calguns.net
Dave Shore
NRA Life Member


Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 11-15-2009, 10:02 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PutTogether View Post
What about California City, California?
I am open to whatever offers the path of least resistance. If we can get the city fathers of a town with 12,500 people to help us out, I'm all for it. I was just thinking that a town of 213 would be more eager to accept the influx of $$ that we will generate. Remember, 10,000 CalGun'rs paying a $1,000 admin fee, will yield Ten Million ($10,000,000.00) dollars of revenue minus expenses. That fixes a lot of sewers and streets in a town of 213. It also would make them the best protected town in America at roughly 50 reserve police officers per citizen.
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 11-15-2009, 10:34 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

I went looking for California's Reserve Peace Officer requirements. The California Code of Regulations outlines it:

BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
TITLE 11. LAW
DIVISION 2. COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL
This database is current through 10/30/09 Register 2009, No. 44 § 1005. Minimum Standards for Training (Reference Regulation 1007 and Commission Procedure H for reserve peace officer training standards.)

(a) Minimum Entry-Level Training Standards (Required).
(1) Basic Course Requirement: Every peace officer, except Reserve Levels II and III, those peace officers listed in Regulation 1005(a)(3) [peace officers whose primary duties are investigative], and 1005(a)(4) [coroners or deputy coroners], shall complete the Regular Basic Course before being assigned duties which include the exercise of peace officer powers. Requirements for the Regular Basic Course are set forth in PAM, section D-1-3.

(A) Field Training Program Requirement: Every peace officer, except Reserve Levels II and III and those officers described in sections (B)1-5 (below), following completion of the Regular Basic Course and before being assigned to perform general law enforcement uniformed patrol duties without direct and immediate supervision, shall complete a POST-approved Field Training Program as set forth in PAM section D-13.


My emphasis. So, I went looking for Reserve Levels II and III:


The Legislature has established three levels of reserve peace officer to provide flexibility to law enforcement agencies. The duties of the different levels of reserve officer are described below:

Level III Penal Code sections 830.6(a)(1) and 832.6(a)(2)
Level III reserve officers may perform specified limited support duties, and other duties that are not likely to result in physical arrests, while supervised in the accessible vicinity by a Level I reserve officer or a full-time regular officer. Additionally, Level III reserve officers may transport prisoners without immediate supervision.

Level II Penal Code sections 830.6(a)(1) and 832.6(a)(2)
Level II reserve officers may perform general law enforcement assignments while under the immediate supervision of a peace officer who has completed the Regular Basic Course. These officers may also work assignments authorized for Level III reserve officers without immediate supervision.

Level I Penal Code sections 830.6(a)(1) and 832.6(a)(1)
Level I reserve officers may work alone and perform the same duties as full-time regular officers.


So, it looks to me like the town can hire independent contractors for the purpose of transporting prisoners or backing up county or state LEOs when they are in the town of Amador City. The contractors would be required to be armed during transport or other duties and be expected to maintain proficiency with firearms while in the employ of the town. Contractors will also be required to carry concealed while off duty and while on administrative leave. The town will provide a photo ID and a badge.
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman

Last edited by choprzrul; 11-15-2009 at 10:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 11-16-2009, 7:21 AM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Interesting...... Ca Leo credentials would do away with a lot of other issues...

The problem ( if any) would come from the ca legislature who could simply create more stringent requirements.

I think it may be a good idea to pursue both in state and out of state options

Idealy we would make this a national movement instead of just a ca thing.
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 11-16-2009, 7:24 AM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Also I believe title 1983 liability would be more easily avoided with "honorary" or auxilary reserve non resident credentials
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 11-16-2009, 7:27 AM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Still a great idea.... Ca Leo credentials would get us all manner of high cap mags.... Off roster handguns and other toys
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 11-16-2009, 9:03 AM
383green's Avatar
383green 383green is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 4,320
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

While I'm still not personally on board with the idea, I'm continuing to watch this discussion to see what comes of it.

It seems to me that the discussion is focused on this idea primarily as something of benefit and interest to Californians. However, if this was made to work it would be of national interest. Folks in other non-shall-issue states would be equally interested, and even folks who already have CCW permits may be interested in what's effectively a national carry license that bypasses reciprocity.

Even though most of us in this forum are Californians, and thus we naturally tend to think of things in California-centric terms, I think it'd make more sense to think of this in national terms both for selection of candidate towns and estimation of the number of participants (and thus the amount of cash that could be put into play).

Just my two cents as an observer on the fringes of the debate.
__________________
Mark J. Blair, NF6X
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 11-16-2009, 10:19 AM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,855
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 383green View Post
Even though most of us in this forum are Californians, and thus we naturally tend to think of things in California-centric terms, I think it'd make more sense to think of this in national terms both for selection of candidate towns and estimation of the number of participants (and thus the amount of cash that could be put into play).
383green makes a very valid point here. The end goal here should be federal shall issue mandate for all states and nationwide carry. To move forward with a nationwide mindset, should we identify a town in either Vermont or Alaska? My thought process here is we should encounter minimal resistance to CCW in states where CCW is already universally allowed. I also agree with a previous poster who recommended auxillary or honorary status.

I do, however, continue to worry about instances where CA LE starts asking questions about a CA drivers license and an out of state LE credential. Perhaps a LEO can answer if having a contact phone number from the issuing agency would be enough to ward off an impersonating a law enforcement officer charge?

I believe that we are at a point in time where this can really work for us. There are a lot of cities really hurting and looking for revenue streams. Once this is up and going, I think that we will see municipalities starting to compete for the associated administration dollars that go with a program like this.
__________________
"Send money. We have lawyers and guns." -- Gene Hoffman
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 11-16-2009, 10:46 AM
Window_Seat's Avatar
Window_Seat Window_Seat is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,528
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

And for me, upon further review of this thread, I would put down $1000.00, but that would need to be very much protected from revocation by anyone in any kind of power position just because they feel like it and can fabricate an excuse to revoke it. For example, a "new Sheriff" can't just decide that he is going to revoke my CHL because he is the new Sheriff, and it's h/er "policy" to not allow CHL by citizens who disagreed with h/er. Someone asked if this could be possible. I say anything is when there is a convenient reason. Judges do it all the time.

Erik.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 11-16-2009, 10:55 AM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Window_Seat View Post
And for me, upon further review of this thread, I would put down $1000.00, but that would need to be very much protected from revocation by anyone in any kind of power position just because they feel like it and can fabricate an excuse to revoke it. For example, a "new Sheriff" can't just decide that he is going to revoke my CHL because he is the new Sheriff, and it's h/er "policy" to not allow CHL by citizens who disagreed with h/er. Someone asked if this could be possible. I say anything is when there is a convenient reason. Judges do it all the time.

Erik.
I think there would be a case for a class action wrongful termination suit if all reserve LEO's were 'fired' without cause.

There would have to be a very specific and inclusive list of actions and conditions for which your credentials could be revoked and for which your 'employment' could be terminated.
__________________
Youtube Channel Proto-Ordnance

Subscribe to Proto Ordnance
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:49 AM
USAFTS's Avatar
USAFTS USAFTS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 246
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by choprzrul View Post
383green makes a very valid point here. The end goal here should be federal shall issue mandate for all states and nationwide carry. To move forward with a nationwide mindset, should we identify a town in either Vermont or Alaska? My thought process here is we should encounter minimal resistance to CCW in states where CCW is already universally allowed. I also agree with a previous poster who recommended auxillary or honorary status.

I do, however, continue to worry about instances where CA LE starts asking questions about a CA drivers license and an out of state LE credential. Perhaps a LEO can answer if having a contact phone number from the issuing agency would be enough to ward off an impersonating a law enforcement officer charge?

I believe that we are at a point in time where this can really work for us. There are a lot of cities really hurting and looking for revenue streams. Once this is up and going, I think that we will see municipalities starting to compete for the associated administration dollars that go with a program like this.
I'm happy that we can even entertain this idea. I am not a nay-sayer but rather a realistic, life-long resident of california. While it may be an actual possibility in some states, I truly don't see california receiving this as valid as they ("Government") would stand behind the need for detailed training and registration. Whether we do this in a small california town or in another gun-friendly state, it will simply be legislated away or at the very least, held in a permanent legislative limbo. There would likely be many unlawful detentions and arrests during this limbo period...and those that were being used as examples would now find themselves inelligible for CCW due to existing law. A huge, unfair and vicious circle that works against us.

I would love to see this work for several reasons but I fear we may be spinning our wheels. I wonder if our time, energy and money would be better used in the fight for a shall-issue California and an eventual national shall-issue CCW.

As I said before...If this was able to be designed as a solidly legal and lasting option for us...I would be quite interested.
__________________
• “A fear-based approach to regulation will always infringe.”
• “Chance favors the prepared mind.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Meg won. Life sucks. Elections have consequences.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 11-16-2009, 1:44 PM
AJAX22 AJAX22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,725
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

It's likely that the powers that be would hand us national shall issue ccw with receprocity to make this go away
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 11-16-2009, 1:45 PM
USAFTS's Avatar
USAFTS USAFTS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 246
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJAX22 View Post
It's likely that the powers that be would hand us national shall issue ccw with receprocity to make this go away
Man wouldn't THAT be something?!
__________________
• “A fear-based approach to regulation will always infringe.”
• “Chance favors the prepared mind.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Meg won. Life sucks. Elections have consequences.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 11-16-2009, 1:46 PM
IrishPirate's Avatar
IrishPirate IrishPirate is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Roseville, PRK
Posts: 6,401
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Peter Venkman View Post
Those are to be earned, not bought.
+1,000

you want the badge, get the job.
__________________

Most civilization is based on cowardice. It's so easy to civilize by teaching cowardice. You water down the standards which would lead to bravery. You restrain the will. You regulate the appetites. You fence in the horizons. You make a law for every movement. You deny the existence of chaos. You teach even the children to breathe slowly. You tame.
People Should Not Be Afraid Of Their Governments, Governments Should Be Afraid Of Their People

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:19 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.