PoliceLink

PSD_TEAM_LEADER says ...

KSP494 says ...

Out of respect for the original topic I just posted this question on the White House website;

"I apologize for using this forum for my question but it was the best I had found. I am a former US Army Military Police Officer (E6/SSG) and currently a KY State Trooper. There has been an ongoing debate ever since HR 218 was enacted. The question for the appropriate cabinet is, does HR 218 cover Military Police. My opinion has always been no. It has been my fear that with all the question about it, if it was not addressed soldiers could find themselves on the wrong side of the law."

Let's see if I get e response back.

The question is really answered by the military in itself. When off duty, MPs cannot even carry on post, the arms are locked up in the armory. If MPs cannot even carry 24-7 on a military installation, why would they carry in an official capacity off post where there is zero authority?

Like I said...anyone can get a concealed handgun license. Military members can get that like anyone else. What so many MPs just dont seem to understand (or just dont want to because they want to be seen in the same light as civil authority peace officers) is that police officers are armed 24-7 because of their roles as sworn law enforcement personnel...with the ability to make arrests, searches, and seizures...and because of their role as civil authority.

As a military member myself, and who just deployed as an MP with an MP unit, I just think its a serious sign of an inferiority complex when MPs want the same authority and scope as civilian police officers in civilian settings.

"Civilian police officers...give me respect, I demand your respect...validate me please!'

Silly.

Those were some of my comments earlier on and I got jumped on for them.

Lulusgt says ...

KSP494 says ...

Lulusgt says ...

ShockUSMC87 says ...

Lulusgt says ...

ShockUSMC87 says ...

Lulusgt says ...

Mmmmm No! After they got rid of the original Dr. Who I quit watching SciFi!    

 

weirdo

Bite me Wannabe! lol

 

Go pull a car over or somethin kathy

How bout I come tase you Susan!

Don't tase me bro

Speaking of "Don't tase me bro", Florida football season started last night! I love off-duty money!

Must be nice, I can't work off duty details.

you all just gave me an idea for a good cop specific topic to start...and Lord knows, this website has a peculiar lack of cop specific topics.....curiously...

...I mean really, has anyone else ever given any serious thought to just how many topics are non police related? maybe its just me...

PSD_TEAM_LEADER says ...

you all just gave me an idea for a good cop specific topic to start...and Lord knows, this website has a peculiar lack of cop specific topics.....curiously...

 

...I mean really, has anyone else ever given any serious thought to just how many topics are non police related? maybe its just me...

Andddddd where might we find this thread????????????

I don't like guns. And the Marine says I need help. Oh, well I'll shut up about HR 218, even though I'm right. By the way there was a court case in NYC regarding a Coast Guardsman carrying a weapon off duty. He was arrested by fellow law enforcement and was later acquited by a bench trial. The ruling from the judge was that the Coastie was covered under HR 218 because he was carrying boarding party credentials. I am not sure what that means.

And there was an opinion from a JAG Judge at the JAG school in Charlottesville, VIrginia stating that the UCMJ is considered statutory law. The new amendment that was dropped from the House stated added the word "apprehension" and LE agencies under the Federal Executive branch would be included as well as Amtrak officers. I don't know if it will make to the House again next year. We'll see.

When I retired from being a LEO I got rid of all my handguns, kept a Winchester 1300 for home protection. I gave away 2 Glocks and a S&W .380. I guess the Marine is right I need help................

ShockUSMC87 says ...

MACSUSN says ...

I don't like guns. And the Marine says I need help. Oh, well I'll shut up about HR 218, even though I'm right. By the way there was a court case in NYC regarding a Coast Guardsman carrying a weapon off duty. He was arrested by fellow law enforcement and was later acquited by a bench trial. The ruling from the judge was that the Coastie was covered under HR 218 because he was carrying boarding party credentials. I am not sure what that means.

And there was an opinion from a JAG Judge at the JAG school in Charlottesville, VIrginia stating that the UCMJ is considered statutory law. The new amendment that was dropped from the House stated added the word "apprehension" and LE agencies under the Federal Executive branch would be included as well as Amtrak officers. I don't know if it will make to the House again next year. We'll see.

When I retired from being a LEO I got rid of all my handguns, kept a Winchester 1300 for home protection. I gave away 2 Glocks and a S&W .380. I guess the Marine is right I need help................

 

You came off as overkill

And by the way........The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are a whole nother baby than the Coasties. We are Department of Defense....the Coast Gaurd is department of Homeland Security. They arent considered military, therefore they can board vessels and conduct maritime operations on forgien vessels without having to declare war first. They dont have to worry about provisions and what not that the Navy does when conducting its maritime operations. So the Coastie being aqquited prolly had something to do with the fact that he belongs to Homeland Security and not DoD.

UCMJ can be statutory all it wants, it wont apply to civilians.....if thats what u mean. Getting a Sunburn in the military can result in "Destruction of Goverment Property", so that will never apply to civilians, along with a whole slew of other UCMJ laws and not to mention, u can bring a MP here to Texas and I guarntee he doesnt know half of the Penal code or the Criminal Code of Procedure, which is the baseline for arrests and then I wont even think about throwing Arrest, Search and Seizure into the eqaution, which is vitally important, because one mess up, even with a word on a report will get a case dismissed and for the most part, those rules dont apply on military installations, u come on a base, u can be searched without PC, warrant or consent..........The reason I bring this up is because half the reason LEOs carry aside from personal protection is so that if they see a felony or breach of the Peace being commited they can intervene and have a weapon to help their cause. MPs dont even know what consitutes Breach of the Peace or what is techinally a Felony(besides obvious things) in most states as it differs, including the state where there base is at. This is just some of the reasons I dont think they should be covered........it would cause more problems, then do good.

And I understand u were military and a LEO and most of what I said u already know, but I said it simply to state my point.

Yeah, what Shock said. US Coast guard have authority over civilians. and as stated they do not fall under DOD as do everyone else. 

KSP494 says ...

ShockUSMC87 says ...

MACSUSN says ...

I don't like guns. And the Marine says I need help. Oh, well I'll shut up about HR 218, even though I'm right. By the way there was a court case in NYC regarding a Coast Guardsman carrying a weapon off duty. He was arrested by fellow law enforcement and was later acquited by a bench trial. The ruling from the judge was that the Coastie was covered under HR 218 because he was carrying boarding party credentials. I am not sure what that means.

And there was an opinion from a JAG Judge at the JAG school in Charlottesville, VIrginia stating that the UCMJ is considered statutory law. The new amendment that was dropped from the House stated added the word "apprehension" and LE agencies under the Federal Executive branch would be included as well as Amtrak officers. I don't know if it will make to the House again next year. We'll see.

When I retired from being a LEO I got rid of all my handguns, kept a Winchester 1300 for home protection. I gave away 2 Glocks and a S&W .380. I guess the Marine is right I need help................

 

You came off as overkill

And by the way........The Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are a whole nother baby than the Coasties. We are Department of Defense....the Coast Gaurd is department of Homeland Security. They arent considered military, therefore they can board vessels and conduct maritime operations on forgien vessels without having to declare war first. They dont have to worry about provisions and what not that the Navy does when conducting its maritime operations. So the Coastie being aqquited prolly had something to do with the fact that he belongs to Homeland Security and not DoD.

UCMJ can be statutory all it wants, it wont apply to civilians.....if thats what u mean. Getting a Sunburn in the military can result in "Destruction of Goverment Property", so that will never apply to civilians, along with a whole slew of other UCMJ laws and not to mention, u can bring a MP here to Texas and I guarntee he doesnt know half of the Penal code or the Criminal Code of Procedure, which is the baseline for arrests and then I wont even think about throwing Arrest, Search and Seizure into the eqaution, which is vitally important, because one mess up, even with a word on a report will get a case dismissed and for the most part, those rules dont apply on military installations, u come on a base, u can be searched without PC, warrant or consent..........The reason I bring this up is because half the reason LEOs carry aside from personal protection is so that if they see a felony or breach of the Peace being commited they can intervene and have a weapon to help their cause. MPs dont even know what consitutes Breach of the Peace or what is techinally a Felony(besides obvious things) in most states as it differs, including the state where there base is at. This is just some of the reasons I dont think they should be covered........it would cause more problems, then do good.

And I understand u were military and a LEO and most of what I said u already know, but I said it simply to state my point.

Yeah, what Shock said. US Coast guard have authority over civilians. and as stated they do not fall under DOD as do everyone else. 

And to be honest, I think its only CERTAIN members of the USCG that can carry off post/base. As I understand USCG, there is a job within the USCG that does have federal LE credentials.

Certainly a Yeoman, a cook, a gunner's mate...etc etc would have no reason to be armed off official duties.

Well I have to say I have read over 150 blogs about Military Police and weather or not they can carry an off duty weapon. I have never responded to a blog until now, Here is my credentials: I am a Military Police Accident Investigator on a Marine Corps Base, I have more Civilian Law Enforcement Certs than I ever will have Military, I travel over an hour to and from work, I have assisted in serving Fedral warrents on Murder suspects and I have had a hand in upsetting more Civilians and Military personell in my short career as an MP than most would hope for.

I guess that is what you get for being devoted to the duties in which you are tasked with!! This country bases its decisions to allow Military Police Officers the oportunity to carry an off duty weapon of some very out of date resources.   For starters the Posse Comitatus act of 1878 was , well along time ago and times change!!!  Further more when does someone stop to realise we are not dealing with a bunch of kids who want to play COP, but some of the finest trained Men and Women in the world asking to be allowed to have that means to defend them selves!!  I personaly deal with more civilians on this base than I could have ever imagined.  I have had to deal with everything from Grand theft, to Trafficking and Homicide. 

I can honestly say with the exception of haveing a few hour class on how to carry a weapon off duty and a few hour class on how to properly handle off duty situations I would say that I meet the requirements as do so many other people in my position.  Yes it is true as Military Police we Detain and Apprehend, and when broken down into plain english what do you do when you arrest someone?  Well a Deputy or a PD officer would book the subject into a jail or holding facility that is the only differance between the two.

When I signed my contract to serve in the Marine Corps over Ten years ago I swor to uphold the constitution of the United States of America and defend My country against all enemies Forign and DOMESTIC!!!  would someone define Domestic enemy for me please?

Can we see yet were the problems with laws and acts that were put into place many moons ago are causing now!!!  I am a Marine 24/7 and I am bound by Federal Law to up hold what i swor to do!  My country expects it of me and everyone else in my shoes, past present or future.

It comes down to a simple fix.  Give the proper training under federal guidlines, properly screen MP's over 21 that are gainfully employed as Police Officers based on the state they are stationed in,  Encourage them to act on the oath they took when they joined the Military and next time you are on a traffic stop that goes the worst way it could go, Thank your lucky stars when that off duty Military Police Officer stops and assists.

I had a young lady stand in my front yard two weeks ago and take 9 shots from a 45 calibur weapon at a crowd of people across the street, I came out of my bedroom with my XD40 in hand and went out the front door to assertain and fortunitly for me the individual had already gotten in a car and drove off,  I say fortunatley for me because had I interupted her while this was happening I can tell you how I would have handled it but I can not tell you how the courts in this state would have because of the same clouded laws that I have read about all through this blog!!!

Our Country needs to take a step back and realize that we as Military Police have more than sufficent training in almost all the areas needed to properly carry an off duty weapon and should be given the same oportunity to ddefend our sleves in the event that we come face to face with someone we have had prosecuted just as they have asked us to defend a country that even allows this to be an issue!

Thanks for giving me ten minutes but I have spoke my peace here.

And thank all of you for what you do as police officers, Firemen, Military and all the above, I know not enough people say it!!!!

PSD_TEAM_LEADER says ...

FDODC says ...

Just a thought, but maybe we could ask SARGE to end this thread.  It has become redundant and has run its course. On a different note, there are other developments on this subject matter; although, not related directly to MPs, MAs, etc. It relates to DoD Police under HR 675 and may help to shed some light to this subject in a different context.

+1, the question was answered long ago.

not TheSarge but will lock it per members requests.