MPs covered under LEOSA now?

[Tincon]

I agree, the latest amendment opened the door for legal carry for tons of people. The problem for 99% of the new additions is going to be credentials.

Can you explain how military ID (CAC), particularly with an accompanying arms room ID card or some such, would not be:

The identification required by this subsection is the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.

[Matt1984]

Can you explain how military ID (CAC), particularly with an accompanying arms room ID card or some such, would not be:

Your cac card doesn't say your unit and your arms room card does, but every unit had individuals that are attached to them with different mos. when I did AWOL apps I was issued actual federal law enforcement creds not every mp gets that only special assignments

[IXIVI]

Once again PVT (now i am really assuming this with the wrestling lingo Jabroni? who says that anymore) you attachment to yolo county about MP's being included in LEOSA made it seem you where attempting to obtain a ccw because of your law enforcement background as a MP, not because you where a civilian wanting to carry. They probably looked into it, even probably looked for some type of off duty carry memorandum, which we all know that doesnt exist. So they probably denied you because if something where to happen it could fall back on them. And trust me I am telling you this stuff because I know what the hell is up. As an NCO MP I would sit in staff calls and hear DACP whine and cry about why they cannot carry off duty and in summary it was plain and simply. There is no DOD/DA reg or FM (which you will learn private is reg's and FM's are the commandments of the military) concerning off duty carry. I suggest you get looking into them regs/fm especially FM 19-10

Ok Bud. Army MP NCO you are. I can tell based on all your professional grammar and proper spelling.

Bottom line is, LEOSA now covers MPs. Damn us all to hell, YOU'RE INCLUDED too. Whether you can put a coherent sentence together, or not.

Regardless of Field Manuals, DA regulations, or LACK of DoD guidance, Federal Law qualifies you and me both to carry a personal weapons off duty. No off duty carry memo required. I suggest YOU read Title 18 USC, sec 926b, as amended by HR 4310 sec 1089.

[Tincon]

Your cac card doesn't say your unit and your arms room card does, but every unit had individuals that are attached to them with different mos. when I did AWOL apps I was issued actual federal law enforcement creds not every mp gets that only special assignments

Yeah I know what MP creds look like, for PSD or MPI, etc. However, nothing in the statute requires that your ID state your unit or even that you are an LEO. It says "the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer". For MPs that would be the CAC. Now I think it would be a good idea to carry the arms room ID also so you can prove you are an MP, but the statute does not require it. The existence of MP creds being out there does not change any of this.

[IXIVI]

Yeah I know what MP creds look like, for PSD or MPI, etc. However, nothing in the statute requires that your ID state your unit or even that you are an LEO. It says "the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer". For MPs that would be the CAC. Now I think it would be a good idea to carry the arms room ID also so you can prove you are an MP, but the statute does not require it. The existence of MP creds being out there does not change any of this.

The latest amendment clarifies the ID requirement by inserting that identifies the employee as a police officer or law enforcement officer of the agency that they work for

So no, CAC wont qualify unless they start putting MOS on the CAC.

[Matt1984]

Ok Bud. Army MP NCO you are. I can tell based on all your professional grammar and proper spelling.

Bottom line is, LEOSA now covers MPs. Damn us all to hell, YOU'RE INCLUDED too. Whether you can put a coherent sentence together, or not.

Regardless of Field Manuals, DA regulations, or LACK of DoD guidance, Federal Law qualifies you and me both to carry a personal weapons off duty. No off duty carry memo required. I suggest YOU read Title 18 USC, sec 926b, as amended by HR 4310 sec 1089.

Damn grammar police you try typing all that out on a phone and no all that crap will not fly. Go ahead put that on your commanders desk and tell him your going to do what you believe. Last time I checked your left chest says us army and that's the final straw. You guys need to stop playing barracks lawyer this was brought up in 2010 and I know the Commandant of the mp corp addressed this before

And if you want to go ahead a question my professionalism go ahead an pm me ill give you my number and we can talk offline high speed.

[Tincon]

Damn grammar police you try typing all that out on a phone and no all that crap will not fly. Go ahead put that on your commanders desk and tell him your going to do what you believe. Last time I checked your left chest says us army and that's the final straw. You guys need to stop playing barracks lawyer this was brought up in 2010 and I know the Commandant of the mp corp addressed this before

This law wasn't around in 2010 as it is now. Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting taking this with your CO. Why would you? Congress and the President outrank him/her by a bit don't you think? Also, I don't think the LEOSA applies on post although it would take a real Blue Falcon to be running around trying to enforce it).

So the way I see it, unless your CoC has issued orders to the contrary you can carry off post. I don't see what the big issue is for you.

[IXIVI]

Damn grammar police you try typing all that out on a phone and no all that crap will not fly. Go ahead put that on your commanders desk and tell him your going to do what you believe. Last time I checked your left chest says us army and that's the final straw. You guys need to stop playing barracks lawyer this was brought up in 2010 and I know the Commandant of the mp corp addressed this before

And if you want to go ahead a question my professionalism go ahead an pm me ill give you my number and we can talk offline high speed.

I'm not questioning your professionalism, only poking fun at your un-unprofessional grammar.


Also, though I have on multiple occasions seen combat with, and even supervised an entire detachment of Soldiers, my left chest does not say US Army.

[IXIVI]

Look Matt, like Tincon mentions, there is no barracks lawyer here. Just FEDERAL LAW that now qualifies MPs under LEOSA. No permission from your Commander needed.

In all seriousness, have you even read the law?

[Matt1984]

I'm not questioning your professionalism, only poking fun at your un-unprofessional grammar.


Also, though I have on multiple occasions seen combat with, and even supervised an entire detachment of Soldiers, my left chest does not say US Army.

Well if it doesn't say us army then do what you will. Like I always tell the joe's do what your rank can handle.

[Tincon]

Well if it doesn't say us army then do what you will. Like I always tell the joe's do what your rank can handle.

Don't confuse your rank with my authority.

[Matt1984]

MPs covered under LEOSA now?

Look Matt, like Tincon mentions, there is no barracks lawyer here. Just FEDERAL LAW that now qualifies MPs under LEOSA. No permission from your Commander needed.

In all seriousness, have you even read the law?

Yea I have, I actually had to read it in depth because I was also supporting this up hill battle, but how it was broken down to me makes complete sense. There just can't be a "unit" memo on off duty carry policy, because if something where to happen they wouldn't be ultimately liable it would be the dod in whole. Just like (dont know if you guys know this) some base commanders are issuing general orders that no permanent party members who have a ccw will carry out of uniform. The law is clear and cut on the federal side, I have read it but it is to be implied with parameters, and the dod has not established them. I do know they are working on the Dacp off duty carry policy back at leonard wood. I do not know what the status of that is yet.

[Matt1984]

Don't confuse your rank with my authority.

That is the worst thing anyone could say lol. Automatic negative counseling statement lol

[Tincon]

That is the worst thing anyone could say lol. Automatic negative counseling statement lol

Yeah I know we aren't allowed to say that anymore, just kidding. When I joined though we were allowed to say it, and I'm not sure I saw a negative counseling statement for years. We had... other kinds of corrective action. Those were the days.

Anyway I do agree that command can have a more restrictive policy than LEOSA allows. Just as for anything. But absent some such order LEOSA allows you to carry off post. DOD liability is a non-issue, this was passed by congress and signed by the president.

[IXIVI]

Base commander issuing orders preventing members from carrying with a civilian issued CCW? Beyond a shadow of a doubt, that cannot be a legal order off of the installation.

Coming full circle on a similar issue, years ago when CA open carry was legal, a local Commander issued an order to his troops stating that they would not open carry or face non-judicial punishment.

Staff Judge Advocate stepped in and squashed him on the same day the memo was issued. He cant supersede local or Federal Law because he doesn't want to be embarrassed.

Eventually DoD will come around with their own guidance on the law as it applies to MPs, but as mentioned, no sooner than December 2013....