• 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.

Who is considered a LEO?

Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
60
Likes
1
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I'm not too familiar with LEO's so I wanted to get the scoop/education.

Who exactly is considered a LEO? I.e Local Police, University Police, MBTA Police, State Police, etc...but where does the "part time cop" and security guard fit in?

I was thinking on taking a part time police academy course to get the training and see what opportunities were out there other than a local PD...more or less a "part time cop" type of position, bud don't know where to start or if this even exists as a LEO?

Any info would be greatly appreciated...school me.
 
Who exactly is considered a Dentist? Would a Podiatrist be considered a Dentist? How about a Psychologist? Would a Gynecologist be a Dentist? I'm no anti-Dentite, but I would guess NO! An LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) is someone who is a sworn Police Officer WITH (drum roll please) POWERS OF ARREST. This is not a constable, a sheriff, a mall security guard, a hall monitor at the local high school, etc. Yes, a part-time Police Officer (with powers of arrest) is an LEO.
 
As a serving member of the Mass national guard, we are the only military that can make arrests to civilians because we can be appointed/activated by the state. (unlike federal active duty members)..but we aren't LEO's...Just trying to get educated on how it all operates...as it seems to be a fine line yet so much controversy.
 
As a serving member of the Mass national guard, we are the only military that can make arrests to civilians because we can be appointed/activated by the state. (unlike federal active duty members)..but we aren't LEO's...Just trying to get educated on how it all operates...as it seems to be a fine line yet so much controversy.
dont forget about the Coast Guard... there is actually case law where a Coast Guardsmen was considered a LEO for the purpose of LEOSA
 
Oh, this is going to turn ugly.
In my opinion, an LEO is a police officer, full or part-time period..
 
As a former national guard member, we could "detain", but had no legal powers of arrest. Detainment could be until an officer places the person under arrest-usually, when we did something where we had the potential to detain someone, we had an officer assigned to each team, to affect the arrest.
 
As a former national guard member, we could "detain", but had no legal powers of arrest. Detainment could be until an officer places the person under arrest-usually, when we did something where we had the potential to detain someone, we had an officer assigned to each team, to affect the arrest.

Any citizen can detain someone for a felony "in fact committed". That's a citizen's arrest. Read my previous post. It spells out the LEOSA definition quite clearly.
 
The real question was where's the line between a LEO and security guard? Also, what's a reserve police officer? Do PD's actually have part time officers or is this something different? Are campus cops LEO? If I were looking into becoming a Part time LEO, where would I look?
 
The real question was where's the line between a LEO and security guard? Also, what's a reserve police officer? Do PD's actually have part time officers or is this something different? Are campus cops LEO? If I were looking into becoming a Part time LEO, where would I look?
The question is complex and must be qualified.

For example, there are privately employed officers (Colleges and railroads) whe are granted LEO status under state law, but do not qualify under LEOSA because they are not pension eligible public sector employees.

There are Boston Special Police who have LEO authority and powers only while on the job at a particular location, but are not LEO when off the job (cannot carry on the badge, carry in schools without permission, not eligible for LEOSA, etc.)

The answer "I would not consider...." or "I would consider..." is meaningless, since

(a) Who one individual "considers" to be LEO is irrelevant unless that individual is making an official decision (ie, a judge, police officer, DA, etc.). The relevant answer is based on statute, not a particular individual's impression of the degree to which the individual asserts "LEOedness"

(b) There is no one list as it depends on what question you are asking. Are you asking if someone has arrest powers in MA; if they are LEOSA eligible; if they still have those powers when not on the job; etc. In order to have a precise answer, you must have a precise question.
 
I agree Rob there is no precise question.

The other issue is this. LEO stands for Law Enforcement Officer (so if we use plain English). Taken literally it would mean any officer that enforces laws. So a security officer, IRS agent, the guy that checks your LTC at walmart are all in the business of enforcing laws. Tho they are not cops. i think the term LEO is just too vague.
 
The term LEO comes up because of the difference in some states as to who has arrest powers. If a LEO was supposed to mean JUST a PO, then we wouldnt even need the term LEO, just PO. Other states have Municipal police, County police, Sheriffs and who knows what else for organizations enforcing laws in the same way that police officers do in this state.

To me, A governmental agency employee who has the powers of arrest and is compensated, whether full or part time is a LEO. I am sure others will disagree.
 
I'm understanding a bit now, thanks for the laymens terms :)

so I guess what I'm looking for in specific would be the ability to wear the badge on or off duty. That to me would be (in my mind) a LEO. If I were to look into a law enforcement job, I would look into something like this. I've applied for a few federal positions, but haven't much knowledge in the civilian sector.

After doing some research tonight, the reserve PD seems like a good start, but it sounds like there's such a backlog of people trying to get on that it might be a difficult path...

Any advice would be great. Sorry about the confusion.
 
I am not really disagreeing, but will clarify 2 things...
For example, there are privately employed officers (Colleges and railroads) whe are granted LEO status under state law, but do not qualify under LEOSA because they are not pension eligible public sector employees..
Although it is implied, I will just clarify this applies to "private" colleges, not "state" schools (as they obviously are state employees with state pensions).
There are Boston Special Police who have LEO authority and powers only while on the job at a particular location, but are not LEO when off the job (cannot carry on the badge, carry in schools without permission, not eligible for LEOSA, etc.)
"Boston Special Police" isn't really a job/possition so much as a "license" (for lack of a better word) granted to some of those who work security jobs in Boston. (On a related note go down to DC you'll note every armored car "guard/driver" is a DC "special")
After doing some research tonight, the reserve PD seems like a good start, but it sounds like there's such a backlog of people trying to get on that it might be a difficult path... Any advice would be great. Sorry about the confusion.
Yes, starting part time is a good place. I am reluctant to use the specific term "reserve" there are 3 "common" types of PD part timers: reserves, specials, and auxilary (plus civil service type: perminent intermitent). Regardless of "title" your best bet is to research the department, the powers/duties granted vary town to town, from literelly doing everything a full timer would do (but ussually with out a set schedule, but may even be 40+ hours a week) to once a month you direct traffic in front of a church...
so I guess what I'm looking for in specific would be the ability to wear the badge on or off duty.
If that is your definition of LEO, that is fine. But if that is why you want to be a LEO, you need to consider another profession...
 
Wearing the badge on and off duty wouldn't be the reason to become one, but rather something to be aware of when pursuing this career. I'd rather be involved on this level as I tend to get really involved in my work...
 
Last edited:
Wearing the badge on and off duty wouldn't be the reason to become one, but rather something to be aware of when pursuing this career. I'd rather be involved on this level as I tend to get really involved in my work...

You mean like ummmm....THIS involved?

militia-fail.jpg
 
it seems I opened a can of worms...I now see the massive debates on other forums about this subject so I'll have to lay this to rest to dodge some bullets. ;-)
 
Most of the newspapers and news stations considered the guard at the Boston hospital shooting "law enforcement", because he was an off-duty "special police" or guard or whatever. I guess a lot of people, some here, took exception to that. So, "it depends" is the answer.
 
If the badge says POLICE then they are a LEO. All else is immaterial. Is a campus cop less then a town cop, or a town cop less then a city cop? Or a city cop less then a Fed?
 
To add to my post before someone says those groups are unequal in jurisdiction, consider environmental police. They have the widest jurisdiction by far in this state but aren't allowed to carry into some courts for whatever arbitrary reason like a town or state police officer.
 
it seems I opened a can of worms...I now see the massive debates on other forums about this subject so I'll have to lay this to rest to dodge some bullets. ;-)

Yes you did!

There is tremendous rivalry between different "branches of LE", but some of the things that I think all LEOs (of every stripe) will agree upon is that the following are the WRONG reasons to become one:

- desire to carry a gun w/o hassle,
- desire to get out of traffic tickets,
- desire to "flash the badge" and demand respect,
- desire to obtain guns that mere mortals aren't allowed to buy (or buy new),
- personal ego stroking,
- etc. (you should have gotten the point by now [wink] )

As to "who is a LEO" . . .

- If you ask some Feds this question, they look their noses down on all State and Municipal police!
- If you ask some State Troopers, they will look their noses down on all Municipal police.
- If you ask some Municipal Police Officers, they will look their noses down on State Troopers, all Auxiliary/Special/Reserve Police Officers.
- Everyone looks down their noses at the Auxiliary/Special/Reserve Police Officers, Sheriffs Department, Constables, Harbormasters, etc.

Here are some examples from MGL wrt Constables that really gets Municipal Chiefs (and unions) panties in a twist:

• MGL Ch. 90 Sect. 1 – which clearly states that Constables have authority (although we don’t usually use it) to enforce motor vehicle law.
• MGL Ch. 56 Sect. 57 – which states “. . . constables shall arrest without a warrant any person detected in the act of violating any provision of . . .“ the election laws.
• MGL Ch. 41 Sect. 95 – “If a warrant is issued against a person for an alleged crime committed within any town, any constable thereof to whom the warrant is directed may apprehend him in any place in the commonwealth.”

Someone I know used to work all the elections in his town (in MetroWest) as a Constable. The union and police chief objected as it was "taking away OT pay" from the troops and he (Constable) lost that battle on political turf. Under statute, he was absolutely correct, however the chief has a lot more political clout than any Constable will ever have.


Most of the newspapers and news stations considered the guard at the Boston hospital shooting "law enforcement", because he was an off-duty "special police" or guard or whatever. I guess a lot of people, some here, took exception to that. So, "it depends" is the answer.

Since MA discourages "self-help" being able to tag the do-gooder as LE in any way "makes it alright" in the eyes of the bureaucracy and LSM . . . without changing the most important message "that a common citizen should never get involved, just call 911 and wait to die"!

If the badge says POLICE then they are a LEO. All else is immaterial.
Really? So the only LEOs are those that say "Police" in their title?

So, according to you, DEA Agents, FBI Agents, etc. aren't really LEOs?

If the question is "who is a police officer" then the correct answer would be "anyone with 'police' in their title. However, the term LE and LEO encompasses more than "police officers" by definition. The fact that some folks don't see it that way is due to personal prejudice, not due to a flaw in definitions. [See some cites from MGLs wrt Constables above as an example.]


To add to my post before someone says those groups are unequal in jurisdiction, consider environmental police. They have the widest jurisdiction by far in this state but aren't allowed to carry into some courts for whatever arbitrary reason like a town or state police officer.

The Chief Justice of EACH COURT makes a determination on WHO can carry in his courthouse in MA. VERY strange system, but that is the only official answer and is not related to who has what authority in LE. There are some courthouses in MA that don't want any local POs carrying, Most Federal courthouses in MA will not allow any LEO (other than Feds) to carry in their courthouses. I've been allowed to carry in some MA courthouses and been requested to lock it up in others.

So this is not indicative of LE power . . . only the power of the Chief Justice of that particular courthouse.
 
If the badge says POLICE then they are a LEO. All else is immaterial.
Really? So the only LEOs are those that say "Police" in their title?

So, according to you, DEA Agents, FBI Agents, etc. aren't really LEOs?

I was only referring to the comments about campus police not being LEO's in post #14. Or more accurately questioning if they were considered a LEO. It seemed erroneous to question if someone with police in their title is a LEO.
 
Last edited:
This is one of the reasons I switched to the Fire side of things. Collectively, the entire LEO side in Mass has had their panties in a wad for DECADES. When I got selected for the MSP in 1982, my father the Boston cop, threatened to disown me!!! I could not believe the incredible level of hatred toward another agency.
 
Back
Top Bottom