Able to carry via job; want CCW

[CCWInstructor]

Originally Posted by litespeed

OK-the federal gov--did the back ground check on all this agents and determine that these guys were only good enough to carry their gun during the hours of 9-5 only---beyond those hours--all the trainings and all the money that we ( the tax payers) spent on the back grounds check, the training, the continue training and so on and so on----These agents are just zombie after 5---Is that what our fed , state govt think of their so call highly trained and skills agents. If they went out and earned the Fed badge-their gun is part of their badge. Matter of fact, they should have the serial number.

Lets cut to the chase here. California Penal Code does not recognize Federal law enforcment. Lot's of other states are set up the same way.

It's goes back to the day when the States did not get along with federal agencies.

I don't agree with it, and I don't like it. That's they way it is.

[akulahawk]

Originally Posted by CCWInstructor

Lets cut to the chase here. California Penal Code does not recognize Federal law enforcment. Lot's of other states are set up the same way.

It's goes back to the day when the States did not get along with federal agencies.

I don't agree with it, and I don't like it. That's they way it is.

I saw that in PC 830.8... and here it is...

830.8. (a) Federal criminal investigators and law enforcement
officers are not California peace officers, but may exercise the
powers of arrest of a peace officer in any of the following
circumstances:...

For the record, I don't agree with it either, but it is what it is...

[EM2]

830.8. (a) Federal criminal investigators and law enforcement
officers are not California peace officers, but may exercise the
powers of arrest of a peace officer in any of the following
circumstances:...

I do not see the problem.
Federal agents are NOT California Peace Officers.
Apparently, the state does allow them powers of arrest under cetain circumstances.
This kind of goes back to states rights issues and the concern of the federal government overreaching its authority.
Remember Waco?
It is a shame however that as a federal agent Max Deployment is only allowed to defend himself or another LEO with his duty weapon while off duty. Does this smell to anyone else out there of an US vs THEM mentality within the federal government when in reality they work for us.

[CCWInstructor]

It has been US Vs. them for a long time. It started with J. Edgar Hoover making Bank Robberies a "Federal Crime" and a long list of others state crimes.

By State law the Feds Have the power to arrest, no where does it say they can carry off duty.

It is very sad, and very embarrassing. I do not like having retired Federal Special Agent in Charge (SAC's) from very famous agencies and these fine individuals commanded large offices with staff's of sworn agents in the thousands.

Their Agencies have SCREWED them over on H.R.218.

[Max Deployment]

Originally Posted by Bombast

When were you there? My wife graduated in 80, my sis-in-law teaches English there.

1979 to 1983. And as far as I can recall, we didn't win a single football game the whole time.

California Penal Code does not recognize Federal law enforcement.

As peace officers, no. But are you implying that by carrying off-duty with my federal credentials, I am breaking the law?

(For the record, I don't dig the "federal government rules over the states" concept; I'm all about sovereign states governing themselves with the fed to *ahem* protect the borders. But then, I'm old-fashioned like that.)

As far as "us vs. them," I don't see that in my case. It seems to me that although my agency has allowed 24-hr carry, it has tried to make it as unappealing as possible for us in order to discourage us from taking advantage of the privilege (probably a result of merging multiple agencies with different policies). That said, new rules have recently been issued regarding carry equipment. Now we have a little more choice beyond "strong-side leather belt holster or fanny pack." But still...

[X-ffdo]

I "feel" for you bro. I had to deal with a lot of inconsistencies myself when in a past life, so I can understand what is going on when you merge agencies/policies together, or otherwise dealing with "teething pains" of a new agency.
As far as liability if you have to defend yourself or someone other than another LEO, like a member of your family, check with your union/professional association, a lot of times they have that angle covered.
I hope this helps.

[CCWInstructor]

Originally Posted by Max Deployment

As peace officers, no. But are you implying that by carrying off-duty with my federal credentials, I am breaking the law?

Because your agency has a 24 hour policy you are covered. Those agencies that don't have a stated policy, that's the gray area.

I agree, Us Vs. Them does nobody good. We are all on the same team.

[akulahawk]

Originally Posted by CCWInstructor

It has been US Vs. them for a long time. It started with J. Edgar Hoover making Bank Robberies a "Federal Crime" and a long list of others state crimes.

By State law the Feds Have the power to arrest, no where does it say they can carry off duty.

It is very sad, and very embarrassing. I do not like having retired Federal Special Agent in Charge (SAC's) from very famous agencies and these fine individuals commanded large offices with staff's of sworn agents in the thousands.

Their Agencies have SCREWED them over on H.R.218.

Yep... there's SO many ways that they can (and DO) exactly that... and it's not JUST the Federal Agencies that do this...

It's just WRONG.

[Bombard]

It's not limited to Government agencies - any organization can develop an "us vrs. them" attitude. Some of the nastiest fights I've ever seen were between academic departments at a small, second (or third) tier liberal arts college.

Those of us observing the battle from the outside would say "They fight so hard because the stakes are so low."

They had tenure, and the worst they were facing was who got the good office and parking spot.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Bombast

When were you there? My wife graduated in 80, my sis-in-law teaches English there.

Graduated in 77... the whole education thing at South...was a joke... I think my buddy and I are the only two people in the graduating class to complete college and we both have masters degrees....the pricipal was laughable...we used to call him anonymously and say there was going to be a race fight and he would cancel school....He went on to run the district or something...peter principle....Had a GREAT shop teacher and I love cars to this day...well not like I LOVE firearms...but something like it...