PoliceLink

just go get a ccw.

rsteade says ...

NorCalLEO says ...

You do not have to have powers of arrest OFF duty.

You are half right, what the statute says is that you must have statutory powers of arrest, something all civilian law enforcement officers have...meaning that we can arrest whether on or off duty whenever a crime is being committed in our presence. Military Police do not have statutory powers of arrest and can exercise law enforcement powers only when they are on duty.

Plus Military DO NOT have to power to arrest any civilian off a military reservation, period! It has already been legally determined that Military police ARE NOT covered under HR218. It was ruled that the USCG IS covered as they are under the control of Homeland Security and not the DoD. Congress also talked about including Military Police and including them under this bill but there was VERY LITTLE support for this. Reasons being as stated MILITARY POLICE are exactly that, MILITARY and they should ONLY be used under MARTIAL LAW. To do otherwise would lead to the Military being involved in civilian law enforcement and that is not allowed under our current Constitutional Laws except in a very limited and temporary situation. It does not matter a whit WHAT you or I think, it is what it is and it isn't going to change. Military Police are not covered and will not be in the foreseeable future. Simply get a State Issued CCW.

This is why the thread was originally locked. This happens every time this topic is brought up here

MP asks,"Are we covered?" (But they only want us to say yes whether it's right or wrong)

members answer no and explain why

MP then gets mad and argues about it

then it just starts insults back and forth.

snhadley says ...

HR 218?

In my humble opinion, service member Peace Officers should be covered.  I understand their status and the constitutional concerns. They should not have  to worry about carry in the event that engage some shithead out there!   Please don't waste your time and mine with the politics behind it!  I believe what I believe, period!

SNHADLEY, just to clarify, MPs are not pace officers. As a matter of fact the Original term military police was not about policing as we know it. It came about so that there were soldiers who would "police" up soldiers that got out of hand and bring them back to their units. It has evolved so that they now have more of a LEO role but their authority is not the same as ours, their authority ends at the end of their shift.

In NY, the National Guard MP's are considered Peace Officers, but only when they are on duty, which when they're not on duty, they have no powers or jurisdiction.

Jkaz232 says ...

In NY, the National Guard MP's are considered Peace Officers, but only when they are on duty, which when they're not on duty, they have no powers or jurisdiction.

Can you tell me when this change took place, I served four years at Ft Drum. Part of my daily duties was to police the national guard. Active duty MPs aren't even peace officers.

Jkaz232 says ...

I don't know what year it took place, I'd have to look it up, I think it was in 2004 or sometime around then. but its just the National Guard MPs that are listed in the CPL as Peace officers.

 

Are you referring to the task force guys?

Not the task force guys, I was part of that for a few years. I'm referring to just the traditional MPs, and like you said, they have no statutory powers of arrest. I believe part of the reason they wrote them into the CPL as peace officers (on duty) was because of all the deployments we were going through after 9/11, and having a lot of soldiers not showing up for duty. Our MP's were going out knocking on doors to find these people that were AWOL. The task force stuff changed drastically a bunch of years back, because of people thinking they had arrest powers in stuff. Now, all the roles they play in support of LE is strictly support, doing intel and case work.

Edit: I don't think any of them even know they are peace officers under the CPL.

jdso403 says ...

The issue of whether military law enforcement personnel are covered under LEOSA (formerly HR218) or not, has been discussed and researched to death.



The ONLY DoD law enforcement personnel who are covered under LEOSA are the following:



1. CIVILIAN special agents of the DCIO's (Army CID, Air Force OSI, Navy and Marine Corps NCIS, and DoD DCIS). Military special agents of the above are not covered. Neither are special agents of the DoD intelligence services.



2. Sworn officers of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency, and the NSA police, who have statutory powers of arrest under the U.S. Code.



Again, NO military personnel are covered under LEOSA, no matter whether or not they perform law enforcement or investigative duties, or no matter whether they are issued a badge or credentials.



And NO civilian base police officers working for the military services (sometimes called DoD police) are covered, since they do not have statutory powers of arrest either. They have the same authority to "apprehend" as MP's and posted sentries.



No statutory powers of arrest = no LEOSA. The ability to "apprehend" military personnel under the UCMJ, and deliver them to their commanding officer, does not qualify. Every E-1 or civilian security guard posted around an armory or walking around a motor pool has the UCMJ ability to "apprehend."



Sorry to disappoint the honorable LE persons in the military or working for the military, but the above is the truth, under federal law, DoD and service regulations.

Great Research JD!! Can't get any more black and white than this. ;)

antoniopr says ...

jdso403 says ...

The issue of whether military law enforcement personnel are covered under LEOSA (formerly HR218) or not, has been discussed and researched to death.



The ONLY DoD law enforcement personnel who are covered under LEOSA are the following:



1. CIVILIAN special agents of the DCIO's (Army CID, Air Force OSI, Navy and Marine Corps NCIS, and DoD DCIS). Military special agents of the above are not covered. Neither are special agents of the DoD intelligence services.



2. Sworn officers of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency, and the NSA police, who have statutory powers of arrest under the U.S. Code.



Again, NO military personnel are covered under LEOSA, no matter whether or not they perform law enforcement or investigative duties, or no matter whether they are issued a badge or credentials.



And NO civilian base police officers working for the military services (sometimes called DoD police) are covered, since they do not have statutory powers of arrest either. They have the same authority to "apprehend" as MP's and posted sentries.



No statutory powers of arrest = no LEOSA. The ability to "apprehend" military personnel under the UCMJ, and deliver them to their commanding officer, does not qualify. Every E-1 or civilian security guard posted around an armory or walking around a motor pool has the UCMJ ability to "apprehend."



Sorry to disappoint the honorable LE persons in the military or working for the military, but the above is the truth, under federal law, DoD and service regulations.

Great Research JD!! Can't get any more black and white than this. ;)

You gotta watch that JD girl.....she is quite the Detective! She knows how to look stuff up and put it to good use. 

Is anyone going to come back to debate the issue?

JP503 says ...

Here is a point maybe I should have explained myself better. When was the last time that an MP had to go through training on dealing with EDPs, meth heads, or responding to an active shooter. Combat training is one thing, training on dealing with civilians is another thing. Most time it is better for an off duty officer to be a witness then it is for them to get involved unless it is a life or beath situation.

OK JP I have to switch sides here. They do go through training and they do deal with it on a regular basis. Meth labs in training areas are common problems, and they do deal with tons of civilians on a daily basis. They have the authority to police anyone on the installation even civilians and they deal with all the same problems. As far as an eight hour shift it is basically the same as ours it's just when they take someone into custody they turn them over to the unit, otherwise they cite and release. The issue has more to deal with being a military entity Vs. Civilian

JP503 says ...

Cool, I did not know that, All the Mps I knew when I was in just talked about the combat training and nothing else. Thanks for educating.

No problem, a military base is a town in itself with all the same problems. All the same dependencies, all the same mental issues, shoot we even have gang problems on bases that the military doesn't like to admit. I remember the first EDP I dealt with, I was a private, alone and had to respond to a burglary in progress, long story short when I got there she informed me that three men come to her house every night and stick hoses under her doors and windows and suck the air out of her house. We have rapes, murders, tons of DUIs etc...etc...

It's not that MPs don't do police work because they do, it's all about the other issues we already discussed. There are many MPs who would not make it through a police dept hiring process and that is a concern, as well as the fact that a large number are under 21.

Jkaz232 says ...

KSP494 says ...

Well for AWOL and deserter you don't need peace officer status they have the military authority to apprehend and detain them. I am not saying you are wrong, please don't be offended but I think you are mistaken and would be surprised, but since it's been a few years since I was there I suppose it's possible.

Nah, not offended at all. Here's what I found, section 2.10, sub 48-49 is where their designation comes from.

48.  New  York state air base security guards when they are designated as peace officers under military regulations promulgated by the chief of staff to the governor and when  performing  their  duties  as  air  base security  guards  pursuant  to  orders  issued  by  appropriate military authority; provided, however, that nothing in this subdivision shall  be deemed  to authorize such guards to carry, possess, repair or dispose of a firearm unless the appropriate license therefor has been issued pursuant to section 400.00 of the penal law.   

49. Members of the army national guard military police and air national guard security personnel belonging to the organized militia of the state of New York when they are designated as peace officers under military regulations promulgated by the adjutant general and when performing their duties as military policemen or air security personnel pursuant to orders issued by appropriate military authority; provided, however, that nothing in this subdivision shall be deemed to authorize such military police or air security personnel to carry, possess, repair or dispose of a firearm unless the appropriate license therefor has been issued pursuant to section 400.00 of the penal law.

How long ago were you up at ft drum?? Just curious...I did tons of training up there, and worked out of the counterdrug office there on occasion on old post.

What I highlighted will more than likely hamper then as far as HR 218 as well. I was there from 93-97 and was on SRT there and trained with NY State Counter Drug Task Force, I helped run Operation Tri-Star on Ft Drum. When on patrol we had to spend a couple hours a shift over on Old post at the old PX policing NG and reserves.

KSP Bump on your research,

My personal opinion is why does any cop would care about a HR218 a civilian CCW (Respositoy) will work in most of the U.S.A and the power of arrest, we all have it, it's called a civilians arrest if your retired LEO or Military off duty MP!