LEOSA plus a CCW?

[kwest10]

This is the only thing I could find regarding my question. And the below conversation seemed more about retirement and LEOSA.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=21017714&highlight=CCw#respuesta

[CBR_rider]

What? That makes no sense to me...

[Spaffo]

If you are active LEO, your department will always get sued right along with you for an off duty shooting. Deep pockets.

[sfpcservice]

I'm not a cop, but I would think having the peace officers bill of rights behind me would be way better than going it alone... Your department will suspend and fire you in either scenario I'd think....

[Ora Serrata]

Not a cop. But when I took my class getting my initial CCW there was a LEO getting his. His supervisor told him if he moonlighted working security that the agency was not going to back him so he needed to get his own CCW for that.

Before that I had never heard of a LEO getting a citizen CCW. Makes sense to me now.

[RickD427]

This is the only thing I could find regarding my question. And the below conversation seemed more about retirement and LEOSA.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=21017714&highlight=CCw#respuesta

Any ACTIVE LEOs that maintain a CCW? I’m thinking I’ll apply since I’ll be able to carry as a “citizen” rather than a LEO. Separation of church and state type mentality. If I’m carrying under LEOSA and use my duty weapon it becomes a “police action” and my agency gets involved but I do have the benefit of being backed/represented by them. But if I carry under LEOSA and NOT my duty weapon, they will not represent me so it can be a tricky situation. Also, if the shooting gets “controversial” my agency might turn their back.
Thoughts besides “just carry your duty weapon”.
Also, is a CCW for a LEO faster or cheaper? Thanks.

Not a cop. But when I took my class getting my initial CCW there was a LEO getting his. His supervisor told him if he moonlighted working security that the agency was not going to back him so he needed to get his own CCW for that.

Before that I had never heard of a LEO getting a citizen CCW. Makes sense to me now.

Gents,

The issue of whether you are, or are not, covered for your actions by your employer is not fully determined by whether you are carrying under LEOSA, or under a CCW Permit.

As "Spaffo" has pointed out, you should expect any person that you use force against to sue your agency, as well as you (in both your personal and professional capacities) for damages. It's the plaintiff's prerogative to shape their pleadings, not your agency's.

Your agency may have the ability to deny you representation for actions taken in your private capacity, but remember that the plaintiff is going to make it a "Package Deal." When the agency is sued, and you're sued in a professional capacity, the agency is on the hook to defend and pay the damages.

It's irrelevant to that equation whether you used a duty weapon or not, and whether you carried under LEOSA or not.

In the unlikely event that you're sued only in your private capacity, then you stand alone. But since the plaintiff is looking for a "Deep Pocket" that's really unlikely.

In every case that I've seen, where the officer is sued both professionally and personally, it's always been the preference of the agency's defense counsel to represent the officer in both capacities. The reason is that they then have complete control over the defense strategy and the conduct of the defense. If the officer hires their own counsel to represent them personally, then the defense really tends to crumble. Think of the football team that has two "Co-Quarterbacks" that have very different playbooks, and who have to agree on how each play will be conducted. How would such a team fare against an opposing team with a single skilled Quarterback? That's what happens when you have when separate defense attorneys represent the agency and the officer.

[TRICKSTER]

This is the only thing I could find regarding my question. And the below conversation seemed more about retirement and LEOSA.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=21017714&highlight=CCw#respuesta

Any ACTIVE LEOs that maintain a CCW? I’m thinking I’ll apply since I’ll be able to carry as a “citizen” rather than a LEO. Separation of church and state type mentality. If I’m carrying under LEOSA and use my duty weapon it becomes a “police action” and my agency gets involved but I do have the benefit of being backed/represented by them. But if I carry under LEOSA and NOT my duty weapon, they will not represent me so it can be a tricky situation. Also, if the shooting gets “controversial” my agency might turn their back.
Thoughts besides “just carry your duty weapon”.
Also, is a CCW for a LEO faster or cheaper? Thanks.

Huh????????????

[003]

Frankly, I don’t see the point of a retired California cop getting a California CCW. If one is concerned about liability, then they should get private CCW insurance, or should be a retired Associate member of PORAC and pay the additional few bucks and get covered under their “Retired Associate Member Legal Defense Fund”.


I do see a reason for a retired California cop living in Arizona to get an Arizona CCW. First the Arizona CCW allows a person to carry in some business locations that non CCW holders cannot, (not sure how Arizona law covers LEOSA).

The best or most important reason is when an Arizona resident with a CCW purchases a firearm from an FFL, it is cash and carry without any sort of additional background check. No phone call or automated computer check required. Under Arizona law the dealer can rely on the CCW holder having already passed a background check.


Lastly, the Arizona CCW covers a person in a number of other States, while not important to a holder of a valid LEOSA credential, it is a nice backup if one is out of state and failed to renew their ID and/or requal in a timely manner as required by LEOSA.

[bigb0886]

What agency do you work for that said all that? As a probation officer, my old department made it clear if you were carrying off duty you were not acting in any kind of official capacity. Granted, we weren’t 24 hour peace officers under 830.5, so maybe full time PD or SO does that? I don’t know.

But to answer your question yes I maintained both and still do, because at my old department you could be transferred at any time to an unarmed unit and I just wanted to do it to cover myself because I had one before I joined anyway. And no it was not any faster or easier at least in my experience. It’s the same process as anyone else. The only thing was the class I took offered a LE discount so it was like $25 off or something along those lines. Currently I don’t carry my every day duty weapon off duty but we are allowed to qualify to carry a different weapon for off duty, so I do that with one other pistol. My county issued CCW has several pistols on it just because I can.

[caliprep]

Not a cop. But when I took my class getting my initial CCW there was a LEO getting his. His supervisor told him if he moonlighted working security that the agency was not going to back him so he needed to get his own CCW for that.

Before that I had never heard of a LEO getting a citizen CCW. Makes sense to me now.

Yea, this is true.-

[buenhec]

I maintain my CA CCW just in case I am not able to qualify quarterly for my department as required. I still want to be able to carry in the meantime that I requalify my departmental off duty permit.

[Ron-Solo]

Regardless of whether you have a ccw perming in addition to your LE credential, if you get into a shooting, there is still a nexus to your Department and any lawyer worth his salt will make that connection.

On the other hand, if you have a ccw, your Department may try to wash theirs hands of you, making you cover your own legal bills and any judgement against you.

Keep your LEOSA qualifications current, as well as your Department certifications and enjoy life.

[003]

I maintain my CA CCW just in case I am not able to qualify quarterly for my department as required. I still want to be able to carry in the meantime that I requalify my departmental off duty permit.

Curious, given that LEOSA is good for one year, and California law requires requalification every 5 years, what Department requires quarterly qualification for retires.

[dogrunner]

Absolutely no need for a CCW if you are an "active duty" LEO.

A retired LEO also does not need a CCW, provided s/he still lives in/near his/her issuing agency and can re-qualify for the LEOSA endorsed ID card each year.

If a retired LEO lives too far away to so qualify, s/he may have to apply for a CCW in his/her current place of residence. However, unlike an LEOSA card which qualifies the retired officer to carry in ALL 50 states, the CCW (of course) will only qualify him/her to carry w/in the state of issue (unless there are some reciprocity provisions with other states).

Wrong. Should you move from California to Florida you may acquire a LEOSA card by simply qualifying in Florida via an FDLE certified instructor........Lotta NYPD types retired hereabouts qualify locally, two from my former agency are now N.C. residents and get their cards certified there.

One other justification for that separate ccw license, at least hereabouts, is that it exempts one from the mandatory purchase waiting period.......LEOSA certification does NOT apply to that restriction.

[kwest10]