Off duty carry on school grounds?

[Stock weld]

Question,

According to MGL 269 sec. 10(J) a law enforcement officer can carry on school grounds. It does not mention however, whether he or she is to be on duty or within their officially capacity such as the federal gun free zone law mandates. So what is the real answer here? Is off duty law enforcement carry at schools legal in Mass or only within official duties?

 

[jasons]

Aren't cops always "on duty?" Isn't that the whole point of LEOSA?

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Aren't cops always "on duty?" Isn't that the whole point of LEOSA?

Leosa is federal. 269 10 is state. I would not put it past AG to prosecute.

 

[jasons]

Leosa is federal. 269 10 is state. I would not put it past AG to prosecute.

I'm aware of that, but LEOSA preempts state law with very few exceptions. If there's a state law that specifically exempts cops from state prohibitions on carrying on school grounds (and as the OP pointed out there is,) then I would think that would be good enough.

Even with LEOSA out of the picture, 269/10 doesn't specify on or off duty so logically both would apply. (And yes this is MA so logic isn't dependable.) It would be a tough case to prosecute, I sort of doubt it would make it to arraignment but in MA you roll the dice pretty much every time you exercise your rights.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I'm aware of that, but LEOSA preempts state law with very few exceptions. If there's a state law that specifically exempts cops from state prohibitions on carrying on school grounds (and as the OP pointed out there is,) then I would think that would be good enough.

Even with LEOSA out of the picture, 269/10 doesn't specify on or off duty so logically both would apply. (And yes this is MA so logic isn't dependable.) It would be a tough case to prosecute, I sort of doubt it would make it to arraignment but in MA you roll the dice pretty much every time you exercise your rights.

There is also specific exemption for 'high cap' mags that is equally vague I believe, and eopps has been vocal to FFLs not to sell to individual officers as they are taking the mindset that if you're not on the clock, its not official capacity. This is just behind the scene stuff, so I was mainly referrring to the shifting winds, not any particular cite I could give at the moment.

 

[jasons]

There is also specific exemption for 'high cap' mags that is equally vague I believe, and eopps has been vocal to FFLs not to sell to individual officers as they are taking the mindset that if you're not on the clock, its not official capacity. This is just behind the scene stuff, so I was mainly referrring to the shifting winds, not any particular cite I could give at the moment.

I disagree that the exemption in 131M is vague.

......The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement.....

Compare that to 269/10:

(j) Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, and notwithstanding any license obtained by him under the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty, carries on his person a firearm as hereinafter defined, loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

No language in there about "for purposes of law enforcement," just a blanket exemption for "a law enforcement officer."

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Point taken. Law enforcement can't happen off duty though? Just sayin'

 

[Len-2A Training]

On or off duty. There were NDs at colleges and they tried to restrict them but no dice. Any MA LEO or Fed LEO is exempt from the MA GFSZ.

 

[jasons]

Point taken. Law enforcement can't happen off duty though? Just sayin'

Even if a cop is off duty, he's still a law enforcement officer. He may or may not be engaged in the act of enforcing the law even when on duty. (Some more than others. ) 131M is dumb for a couple reasons and that's one of them.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Even if a cop is off duty, he's still a law enforcement officer. He may or may not be engaged in the act of enforcing the law even when on duty. 131M is dumb for a couple reasons and that's one of them.

Agreed.

 

[jasons]

Please don't cross post the same question in multiple forums. I merged the two and move them to law.

 

[xtry51]

What is this not being able to carry into schools you speak of?

 

[jasons]

What is this not being able to carry into schools you speak of?

The federal GFSZA applies in NH too. Feel free to discuss in the NH laws forum.

 

[xtry51]

The federal GFSZA applies in NH too. Feel free to discuss in the NH laws forum.

Yes it does, but if you have a permit it's allowed unless barred by state law. It's not barred by law in NH.

ETA:

18 USC 922

If you have a permit issued by an officer of the law you're exempt. My permit was issued by my local PD, not a selectman (though it's debatable and has never be challenged that a selectman is not a officer of the law).

 

[jasons]

Yes it does, but if you have a permit it's allowed unless barred by state law. It's not barred by law in NH.

That sounds like a great discussion to have in the NH law section.

 

[xtry51]

That sounds like a great discussion to have in the NH law section.

Got it.

 

[ochmude]

Aren't cops always "on duty?" Isn't that the whole point of LEOSA?

Not really. If you thing about it, an on duty LEO wouldn't need and has never needed LEOSA coverage in order to carry. While on duty, an LEO carries under the authority of the commission, warrant, appointment, or whatever their jurisdiction calls it. LEOSA is only needed for off duty carry, and LEOSA by itself does not override the federal GFSZA.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Not really. If you thing about it, an on duty LEO wouldn't need and has never needed LEOSA coverage in order to carry. While on duty, an LEO carries under the authority of the commission, warrant, appointment, or whatever their jurisdiction calls it. LEOSA is only needed for off duty carry, and LEOSA by itself does not override the federal GFSZA.

Add in the fact it covers retirees with ZERO enforcement authority?

 

[jasons]

Not really. If you thing about it, an on duty LEO wouldn't need and has never needed LEOSA coverage in order to carry. While on duty, an LEO carries under the authority of the commission, warrant, appointment, or whatever their jurisdiction calls it. LEOSA is only needed for off duty carry, and LEOSA by itself does not override the federal GFSZA.

Yeah, LEOSA was not a well thought out example on my part. What I was trying to get at was that cops are generally expected to be cops even when not officially carrying out a specific law enforcement task.

Add in the fact it covers retirees with ZERO enforcement authority?

It's a bit of a thread drift (totally my fault,) but is that strictly true? Do cops lose their law enforcement powers when they retire or are they still obligated to enforce laws if the situation requires? And if the answer is no, are they really still cops? (It seems that the law still treats them as cops in many circumstances.) I don't know the answer, not that it's really relevant to the OP's question.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Yeah, LEOSA was not a well thought out example on my part. What I was trying to get at was that cops are generally expected to be cops even when not officially carrying out a specific law enforcement task.

A better example would be the Massachusetts case law that states the burden of proof for police officer outside of their jurisdiction for a felony arrest is probable cause vs non law enforcement standard is in fact committed

 

[ochmude]

It's a bit of a thread drift (totally my fault,) but is that strictly true? Do cops lose their law enforcement powers when they retire or are they still obligated to enforce laws if the situation requires? And if the answer is no, are they really still cops? (It seems that the law still treats them as cops in many circumstances.) I don't know the answer, not that it's really relevant to the OP's question.

I'm not aware of any agency that requires retired officers to take any enforcement action whatsoever. And no, they aren't really still cops, they're just retired guys. Heck, we're not supposed to take any enforcement action if we're off duty, let alone retired. We're told all the time that unless we're on duty, just be a good witness. Then again, we're not really cops either, and our thin line is green, not blue, lol.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

It's a bit of a thread drift (totally my fault,) but is that strictly true? Do cops lose their law enforcement powers when they retire or are they still obligated to enforce laws if the situation requires? And if the answer is no, are they really still cops? (It seems that the law still treats them as cops in many circumstances.) I don't know the answer, not that it's really relevant to the OP's question.

I think we pretty much cover the OP question. Concerning retired officers I think it's really an individual department issue. Some departments might keep up their warrant so they can work details. Most of them just completely retire as they want nothing to do with law enforcement for the short rest of their life. I'm not arguing for the legitimacy of making special classes of people. I'm just trying to explain what I know.

 

[Boghog1]

go for it, what is the worse that could happen

 

[Len-2A Training]

Yeah, LEOSA was not a well thought out example on my part. What I was trying to get at was that cops are generally expected to be cops even when not officially carrying out a specific law enforcement task.

It's a bit of a thread drift (totally my fault,) but is that strictly true? Do cops lose their law enforcement powers when they retire or are they still obligated to enforce laws if the situation requires? And if the answer is no, are they really still cops? (It seems that the law still treats them as cops in many circumstances.) I don't know the answer, not that it's really relevant to the OP's question.

Most departments (in MA) do NOT want off-duty officers taking action, but prefer they observe and report instead.

Retirees are just ordinary citizens, nothing more and are not to take any action either.

In both cases if they see something and it is "big" (will earn brownie points for the PD/brass) they will make a point of putting "retired PO/off-duty PO" in any reports to give alleged credibility to whatever charges they are pursuing against a perp. See the Paul Langone case at MGH, they made a huge deal of his Special PO status although it was totally irrelevant to what he did and he had no legal authority whatsoever to intercede in that action.

I think we pretty much cover the OP question. Concerning retired officers I think it's really an individual department issue. Some departments might keep up their warrant so they can work details. Most of them just completely retire as they want nothing to do with law enforcement for the short rest of their life. I'm not arguing for the legitimacy of making special classes of people. I'm just trying to explain what I know.

Departments that keep retirees on "reserve status" do so by having them appointed by selectmen/mayor/etc. and sworn in as Special/Reserve POs. A good number of FT guys I worked with did this to earn extra $$ after retirement. So they are still sworn officers in this case with the same legal authority they had when they were FT (although dept policies may attempt to limit that).

 

[mtndew84]

Why would we care if a off duty cop is carrying on school grounds. With what's been going on the past few weeks we shouldn't care. If something happens that off duty cop can call it in and respond first hand before it can get worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Len-2A Training]

Why would we care if a off duty cop is carrying on school grounds. With what's been going on the past few weeks we shouldn't care. If something happens that off duty cop can call it in and respond first hand before it can get worse.

Back many years ago Northeastern cared and tried to prevent it. They got "educated" that there was nothing that they could do about it. Given the location, I can't imagine any off-duty LE not wanting to carry there!