LEO Firearm law exemptions.

[Shredicus]

HBD = Has Been Drinking

I thought it was "Heavy Badge Disorder"

[Bobby Ricigliano]

Can they carry off duty in more places than someone with a regular permit?
Are there other exemptions or perhaps restrictions?

The Bear goes everywhere

[TripleThreat]

Rules Don't Always Work As Intended...

There are places like the staples center and home depot center that ban leos even. I worked off duty on a high risk personal protection government contract with federal credentials and they still would not let us carry in civilian clothes

Another great place for a crazy man to have his way.

[Bobby Ricigliano]

Another great place for a crazy man to have his way.

Yes. The folly of a 'gun free zone' translates into 'A bunch of soft targets gathered into a slaughter pen with no means to defend themselves'.

[Ninety]

I was just having this conversation, LEO is under the impression that his dept approved black rifle once registered as an Assault Weapon will always be an AW . . . So upon leaving the dept would have to have the rifle destroyed upper and all.. Dept won't force the destroying of said rifle but will make officer sign release form stating that it is a felony to posses said rifle..

I thought you could un-register or atleast remove the upper from the lower .. upper being <16" and at least rebuild the rifle as a pistol .. any one have any more information on this?

[socalblue]

There are places like the staples center and home depot center that ban leos even. I worked off duty on a high risk personal protection government contract with federal credentials and they still would not let us carry in civilian clothes

Federal LEO or federal contract security credentials? Trying to stop a federal LEO with credentials while working = jail time

[Bobby Ricigliano]

I was just having this conversation, LEO is under the impression that his dept approved black rifle once registered as an Assault Weapon will always be an AW . . . So upon leaving the dept would have to have the rifle destroyed upper and all.. Dept won't force the destroying of said rifle but will make officer sign release form stating that it is a felony to posses said rifle..

I thought you could un-register or atleast remove the upper from the lower .. upper being <16" and at least rebuild the rifle as a pistol .. any one have any more information on this?

Yeah... I'm not about to buy an expensive rifle for work and then 'turn it in' when I retire because of the 'opinion' of some hippie government hack.

[socalblue]

I was just having this conversation, LEO is under the impression that his dept approved black rifle once registered as an Assault Weapon will always be an AW . . . So upon leaving the dept would have to have the rifle destroyed upper and all.. Dept won't force the destroying of said rifle but will make officer sign release form stating that it is a felony to posses said rifle..

I thought you could un-register or atleast remove the upper from the lower .. upper being <16" and at least rebuild the rifle as a pistol .. any one have any more information on this?

This is a major point of contention (Many threads on this issue). All that exists today is an AG letter opinion.

Unless the lower is an AW by name it can be put into a compliant form & unregistered.

[CALREB]

I thought they were still fighting that lil gift from JB, as he left.
Anyway once registered as an AW, which it has to be , unless you want other problems, there is no proceedure provided to unregister it or change it to a compliant form, state doesnt care , just another fubared CA, rule/law/opinion, depending on who you get at the CA GOV Firearms Bureau.

[Notorious]

So far, it's a divided debate with half of the agencies in my area saying you have to return it or de-AWB it with BB's and the other half saying screw it, keep it, it's already a RAW which is in your name and there's nothing that addresses otherwise besides Moonbeam's parting shot which holds no weight other than non-precedent persuasive argument for a court that may be too lazy to do their own analysis.

As for other LEO courtesies, everyone has already said their piece which are all correct and while CA does not specifically ban alcohol or being under the influence while carrying, LEOSA does, and LEOSA also talks about government buildings not being subject to LEOSA if there are such rules in place.

It doesn't matter if you are a 24 hour peace officer status LEO in CA carrying on that status, but for limited status LEO's who are not 24 hour but are carrying under LEOSA in state, such as level 1ND or level 2 reserves or LA General Services Police who are prohibited by state law from CCW while off duty, you would have to be mindful of LEOSA restrictions as well as agency restrictions which don't conflict with LEOSA.

[TripleThreat]

That's a New One

What Laws says Cal. Reserves can't carry CCW (off-duty).

Triple

[Q619]

Some LEO's can carry on the plane. No CCW can do that. It's nice to bypass tsa, keep my shaving cream and board first.

[Notorious]

What Laws says Cal. Reserves can't carry CCW (off-duty).

Triple

The same laws that define the levels of reserves with level 1-Designated being the only one that is 24 hour status. (P.C. 836, et.al.)

All other levels are not peace officers when not acting in their official capacity (on duty) and need a CCW from the agency under state law to carry off duty, which is in itself kinda superfluous to say, because if you are not peace officer status and you have a CCW, you are carrying like any other civilian with a CCW, just with an ID that says reserve on it.

The conflict comes in with LEOSA stating all qualified officers can carry off duty, as long as they can carry on duty and have statutory arrest powers, which now includes level 1ND and level 2 but not level 3 reserves. Since LEOSA is federal and the language specifically trumps and overrides state law in such situations, it is the controlling law.

Your agency might not like it, and some local ones here sure don't, and still enforce their own version and interpretation, but it is federal law and it is pretty clear on its face what it is supposed to do.

BTW, I hear CA's CRPOA had a huge hand in pushing for some LEOSAIA provisions as well.

[TripleThreat]

So if my understanding is correct. LEOSA says Level 1 & Level 2 Reserves can carry CCW, but some departments don't allow that, unless that Department gives them a CCW, in which case everything is covered at that point.

Triple

[Notorious]

Legally, yes, as well as administratively.