-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Can a MA Corrections Officer apply for LEOSA?
- Thread starter snatale42
- Start date
IMHO NO
unless part of your job was to carry a weapon I don't think it applies to you, and I think there also has to be power of arrest involved.
Personally ( and you guys know I am not fond of law enforcement) I think that CO's PO's LEO's, etc should have the right to carry, hell I think we all should. There is nothing that says a CO is not going to be a target of some gangbanger he went roundy round with inside the walls of Middleton, South Bay, or any other jail/prison.
I think we all should have the same rights the LEOSA provides
unless part of your job was to carry a weapon I don't think it applies to you, and I think there also has to be power of arrest involved.
Personally ( and you guys know I am not fond of law enforcement) I think that CO's PO's LEO's, etc should have the right to carry, hell I think we all should. There is nothing that says a CO is not going to be a target of some gangbanger he went roundy round with inside the walls of Middleton, South Bay, or any other jail/prison.
I think we all should have the same rights the LEOSA provides
The way that GCAB/EOPS wrote the CMR, only municipal and state police officers (from MA departments) are covered by LEOSA. The CMR is in violation of the Federal Law, but this was done intentionally by those in power. I was present during the public hearing and the GCAB meeting that followed it. To say it was contentious would be an understatement.
Now that LEOSA has been changed, I was told directly by the EOPS Legal Counsel that they "may change the CMR" someday, but it definitely sounded like she's in no hurry to address that (perhaps it will take 4 years as the original LEOSA law did to implement in MA).![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I have a few personal friends who are COs and as I understand their job and limitations of authority (arrest), I honestly don't think that a MA CO rises to the level required in the LEOSA law.
Now that LEOSA has been changed, I was told directly by the EOPS Legal Counsel that they "may change the CMR" someday, but it definitely sounded like she's in no hurry to address that (perhaps it will take 4 years as the original LEOSA law did to implement in MA).
I have a few personal friends who are COs and as I understand their job and limitations of authority (arrest), I honestly don't think that a MA CO rises to the level required in the LEOSA law.
KBCraig
NES Member
You don't "apply for" LEOSA. You're either qualified, or you're not. There's no sort of "permit" or "license" to apply for.
(c) 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.
(d) 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.
(e) As used in this section, the term firearm does not include
(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).
Those are the legal requirements. At the practical level, whether your agency will support you or throw you under the bus is an entirely different matter. When Officer Doright calls up the prison shift commander late at night and asks if you're authorized to carry a firearm, what kind of answer will he get?
The tripping point for most state or local COs is "statutory powers of arrest". Federal COs (actually, all personnel in the Federal Bureau of Prisons) have arrest authority, but many state COs do not.
(c) 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.
(d) 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.
(e) As used in this section, the term firearm does not include
(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).
Those are the legal requirements. At the practical level, whether your agency will support you or throw you under the bus is an entirely different matter. When Officer Doright calls up the prison shift commander late at night and asks if you're authorized to carry a firearm, what kind of answer will he get?
The tripping point for most state or local COs is "statutory powers of arrest". Federal COs (actually, all personnel in the Federal Bureau of Prisons) have arrest authority, but many state COs do not.
Sums it up pretty damn good right there. I wouldn't want my hold my breath waiting for much backing from Milford or One Ashburton Place.
This is the heart of the matter. LEOSA protects the individual officer, but their agency may not step up to back them.
If the Mass. DOC employee is an SSPO (not all are), then they have statutory powers of arrest.
In God We Trust
NES Member
This LEOSA shit was supposed to make things easier, but all it has done is create more confusion. How messed up is our country when LEOs are afraid to carry because they might get locked up?
A guy I know is a municipal cop in MA and he got stopped a couple weeks ago by a trooper for having a light out. When he hands the trooper his DL and shows his ID, the trooper asks if he is carrying and if he is full time or part time. The guy just rolled his eyes and handed out his LTC because he could see where it was going. The trooper then asked if he had any restrictions!
Don't think being LE is the magic ticket people make it out to be. As for if you are covered, I know feds are, not sure about state corrections. Make CERTAIN that you are covered before you try it out or you will get jammed!
A guy I know is a municipal cop in MA and he got stopped a couple weeks ago by a trooper for having a light out. When he hands the trooper his DL and shows his ID, the trooper asks if he is carrying and if he is full time or part time. The guy just rolled his eyes and handed out his LTC because he could see where it was going. The trooper then asked if he had any restrictions!
Don't think being LE is the magic ticket people make it out to be. As for if you are covered, I know feds are, not sure about state corrections. Make CERTAIN that you are covered before you try it out or you will get jammed!
Last edited:
Indeed, nothing forces an agency to issue a proper LEOSA-compliant ID. My former PD didn't even issue Retired IDs to some of their retired FT officers who honorably served >20 years.
Although the Fed Law changed to >10 years, NO retirement benefits required . . . which actually qualifies folks like me (>15 years as a PT PO, no retirement benefits from town), there is no way in hell that my former boss (chief) would ever issue me an ID and their regular IDs aren't LEOSA-compliant either.
Exactly, it pained GCAB/EOPS to even create the CMRs for MA. It took them 4 years to do this and they made it as restrictive as possible. They have done nothing to update to address the less restrictive newer Federal Law and I doubt that they will even address this during the Patrick administration.
KBCraig
NES Member
I've carried every single day since July 22, 2004. It made things easier for me, not worse.
Granted, when I traveled through Maryland, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts en route to NH (with a .45 on my right hip and a .38 in my left rear pocket), I did so while paying extreme attention to the traffic laws. I was nervous as hell until I crossed into Vermont. I was confident I would prevail in a legal battle, but it wasn't a battle I could really afford to fight.
Yeah, I could have locked up my handguns back in the travel trailer while traversing those states, but that was a whole 'nuther story: about a dozen long guns in various calibers/gauges and about 10k rounds of ammo so my friends and I could have fun shooting in a free state. Anti-gun states tend to have less regard for the 4th than for the 2nd, so if I'd been stopped by "that guy", I'm sure I'd still be trying (5 years later) to get my stuff back.
In God We Trust
NES Member
Same here, but I should also mention that I have never been "made" off duty and have only been stopped a couple times since 2004. I try to toe the same line everyone else has to.
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
I have heard some horror stories, but I think the vast majority of the cops out there are pretty pro LEOSA.
Not the first time that a trooper decided to play "my badge is better than your badge." An ICE agent that I know has told me of two similar incidents involving an ICE agent and an FBI agent. The troopers who pulled them over tried to tell them that they couldn't carry on the federal badge while off duty.
In God We Trust
NES Member
I agree with you coyote 100%. Any free man should be able to carry anywhere in thecountry
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Kisspik002
NES Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,984
- Likes
- 506
I have been trying to figure this out for a while I'm a ma co (sheriifs dept) I work the block, Not a check writer, have been to the reserve academy as well as the dept academy if I read the qualifications for leosa we meet everyone. The only one that can be debated is the powers of arrest but on jail property we can detain and arrest, same as a campus or college PO. I have even Contacted the NRA and can't get a clear answer. Your best best whether your a CO or PO would be to talk to someone in your department to see if they will back you if you were ever called on it out of state. Merry Christmas to all.
OfficerObie59
NES Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 5,419
- Likes
- 1,899
My father-in-law works for the MA DOC and this topic comes up every once in a while, and we always arrive to the same sticking point: Whether the powers of arrest granted to CO's in limited circumstances under their SSPO power satisfy the requirement. He has encoutered numerous job-created situations while out and about that would definately warrant the protections provided under the spirit of LEOSA (like encoutering former cons on the subway), and I think it's BS that CO's (and everyone else, for that matter) isn't allowed to carry out-of-state.
With the aforementioned EOPS regulations brought up by LenS, the issue becomes even more convuluted. The problem is, if you can possibly debate whether or not you have statutory powers of arrest, there's enough latitude for an over-zealous prosecutor to ruin you life.
Mistake-of-law is generally not a defense, and a classic case that deals with a strikingly similar facts to the one we're discussing is assigned to many first-year law students in their criminal law casebooks. In the 1987 pre-LEOSA case, People v. Marrero 69 N.Y.2d 382 (1987), a Federal Corrections officer based in CT thought he met the plain-text requirments of a "peace officer" under New York law entitling him to carry sans a permit. He was later arrested an convicted as the NY courts decided his mistake in interpreting the law was irrelvent to his case.
The exeption law read as follows:
NY defined peace officer as:
The moral of the story is that there can always be a test case and the plain reading of the law doesn't always work out the way you think. Unless language has been clarified by a court, it is extremely dangerous to attempt to rest your possibly-illegal actions on a point that, as you yourself admit, can be argued by the other side.
With the aforementioned EOPS regulations brought up by LenS, the issue becomes even more convuluted. The problem is, if you can possibly debate whether or not you have statutory powers of arrest, there's enough latitude for an over-zealous prosecutor to ruin you life.
Mistake-of-law is generally not a defense, and a classic case that deals with a strikingly similar facts to the one we're discussing is assigned to many first-year law students in their criminal law casebooks. In the 1987 pre-LEOSA case, People v. Marrero 69 N.Y.2d 382 (1987), a Federal Corrections officer based in CT thought he met the plain-text requirments of a "peace officer" under New York law entitling him to carry sans a permit. He was later arrested an convicted as the NY courts decided his mistake in interpreting the law was irrelvent to his case.
The exeption law read as follows:
NY defined peace officer as:
The NY Courts in their infinate wisdom narrowly interpreted the "any penal correctional institution" to only be those institutions within New York. Thus, as a federal CO working at a Danbury, CT institution, Defendant Marrero was SOL under the statute. Problem is, he didn't find out until he was already in hotwater and the court didn't even allow his good-faith mistake to be considered by the jury.
The moral of the story is that there can always be a test case and the plain reading of the law doesn't always work out the way you think. Unless language has been clarified by a court, it is extremely dangerous to attempt to rest your possibly-illegal actions on a point that, as you yourself admit, can be argued by the other side.
Could you cite the reference to corrections officers having the same powers as Campus POs?? NRA wont answer you as they could care less about the state of MA.
Unless you are deputized you do not have powers of arrest. I even know of one Sheriffs Department that used to call in the local PD to arrest visitors who show up with warrants. If you were to be prosecuted guaranteed they will ask somone from either your training department of another person with authority how a Sheriffs Department officer is granted the power of arrest and that person would then reply that is it through being deputized.
OT: BTW, you do your own profession a disservice by stating that those that are deputized are "check writers" as you dont see police and fire beating each other up (at least much) publicly. If you want the SD to remain a second class citizen in public safety continue doing that and the public takes all of it as truth for every department.
OfficerObie59
NES Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 5,419
- Likes
- 1,899
Campus PO's and Corrections officers are often given appointments as Special State Police officers, but those powers are limited to specific circumstances--with Campus PO's it's a geographic limitation (their campus), and with Corrections officers, it limited to circumstances. As with even County Corrections officers, many are given SSPO appointments as their transports often lead them outside of the county (where even deputies have no territorial jurisdiction) to perform transports from one county's HOC to their HOC. I assume this is where the poster's logic stemmed from.
Not necessarily. See above.
Many sheriffs departments do that for a number of reasons, none of which have anything to do with whether CO's have the right of arrest--for example, whether there are the proper intial entry booking facilities available at the jail. Doesn't mean it can't be done, it just means one option may be more appropriate.
But this example makes even less sense when you consider an actual sheriff's deputy is more likely to be available at the correctional institution than anywhere else in the county.
Perhaps, but to assert that a number of sheriffs departments don't participate in patronage vs. hiring on merit is either short sighted, or you really are unaware of how stuff works. There are some damn good deputies out there who do a great job day in, day out, but unfortunately for them, no matter how meritorious, their appointments are often seen as suspect by virtue of the patronage jobs given out by elected sheriff. It was the posters intention to distingush himself from the latter.
Last edited:
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
