Main Menu

Armed CAP Members

Started by Hardshell Clam, October 24, 2011, 10:58:28 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tsrup

Quote from: Major Lord on October 25, 2011, 04:02:10 AM
I have been armed by CAP, and fired weapons, many times under CAP's authority, including the firing of fully automatic ( 3 round burst, technically) assault rifles, and I know many others have too.
???
Paramedic
hang-around.

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Major Lord on October 25, 2011, 04:02:10 AM
I have been armed by CAP, and fired weapons, many times under CAP's authority, including the firing of fully automatic ( 3 round burst, technically) assault rifles, and I know many others have too. As far as my personally going CCW, it does not happen on CAP's time. When I was actively involved in workplace violence conflict resolution, I carried a 4 Million dollar E&O policy, which thankfully, I never had to make use! Now I view a personal weapon as part of my insurance, not as a thing I need to be protected from, by a usurious insurance policy. If I have to shoot anyone (or anything) now, I am confident that the powers that be will make my life miserable, but it will still be my life, a subtle, but important differentiation!

Major Lord
p.s. My favorite question on the MMPI is "Are you a special agent from god?" it makes me laugh every time I see it.

If by "armed" by the CAP, you mean you were allowed to shoot weapons under the supervision of another agency at a range, then good on you, but if you mean the CAP armed and allowed you to carry, I would have to call bull on you.

The MMPI is just a tool and heck, I always considered myself an agent of good, therefore an agent of God! ;)

Hardshell Clam

#42
Quote from: NCRblues on October 25, 2011, 04:05:31 AM
Just real quick back to my posting about the marshal...

It's not a fight the wing wanted to pick. He is an outstanding SM, puts in tons of time, and has great connections with other federal agencies.

The man does a very hard and very dangerous job; he has also made several enemies in his line of work. He said he needed to be armed (not all the time, just when on alert) and so it is allowed in the wing.

Now back to your regularly scheduled argument....

Hey, I agree, I spent my years in as a Special Agent rep in OCDEF. (a multi agency group that is designed to attack the high level narcotics and money laundering traffickers), as a 95B (Military Police) and 97B (you know who we were..) a local yocal and spent a year as a liaison to interpol (if anyone tells you they were an interpol agent, they are a real wanker). So I know a bit about being armed.

It is hard to put down my gun during CAP meeting but I do and FYI: Any authority to carry under HR218 is not valid at a CAP meeting. (If you know then you know...)


RiverAux

Quote from: SARDOC on October 25, 2011, 01:33:41 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 25, 2011, 01:05:35 AM
  It has to be required BY LAW, not just department policy that the officer must be armed even when off duty.

A weird little nuance...but what happens when your department policy is adopted by reference into the City Charter and therefore ordinance?
Much as I like to play lawyer that one may go a little beyond my "knowledge" of this area.  Guess I'd say that would be a Wing Commander judgment call.  Personally, I'd say that it would meet the exception if there were actual civil or criminal penalties for violating the ordinance.

Spaceman3750

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 04:19:14 AM
It is hard to put down my gun during CAP meeting but I do and FYI: Any authority to carry under HR218 is not valid at a CAP meeting. (If you know then you know...)

Well... LEOSA is technically still valid even at CAP activities, it's just that CAP says that they'll probably kick you out if you exercise your rights under it. Your call.

N Harmon

What are the rules about CAP members carrying anti-bear spray? Are there any?
NATHAN A. HARMON, Capt, CAP
Monroe Composite Squadron

Major Lord

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 04:08:42 AM
Quote from: Major Lord on October 25, 2011, 04:02:10 AM
I have been armed by CAP, and fired weapons, many times under CAP's authority, including the firing of fully automatic ( 3 round burst, technically) assault rifles, and I know many others have too. As far as my personally going CCW, it does not happen on CAP's time. When I was actively involved in workplace violence conflict resolution, I carried a 4 Million dollar E&O policy, which thankfully, I never had to make use! Now I view a personal weapon as part of my insurance, not as a thing I need to be protected from, by a usurious insurance policy. If I have to shoot anyone (or anything) now, I am confident that the powers that be will make my life miserable, but it will still be my life, a subtle, but important differentiation!

Major Lord
p.s. My favorite question on the MMPI is "Are you a special agent from god?" it makes me laugh every time I see it.

If by "armed" by the CAP, you mean you were allowed to shoot weapons under the supervision of another agency at a range, then good on you, but if you mean the CAP armed and allowed you to carry, I would have to call bull on you.

The MMPI is just a tool and heck, I always considered myself an agent of good, therefore an agent of God! ;)

Before Tsrup's head explodes, yes, I have carried CAR's and M-16's, single shot 22, and O/U shotguns as both a range officer at encampment and in conjunction with our (former) dual charter as a BSA group. In one instance, I went "active" when a mountain lion started stalking our cadets and police explorers during a night time game of capture the flag , and the Ranger handed me his 870 and he grabbed his AR with "shoot on site" orders. The Mountain lion liked the game better when he was just planning on eating campers, not when two armed adults planned on making him into a throw rug.

FYI, two days later, a cadet told his school that he was given an M-16, and helped to hunt and kill a mountain lion during this activity. The school absolutely freaked, and much paper was generated as a result. On balance, it might have been better to let the kitty have one of our slower cadets ( or police explorers) This same Cadet also had a S/M uniform made up and was shown in the national CAP magazine impersonating a a S/M! Gotta love those little badgers.....

Major Lord
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."

Eclipse

Quote from: N Harmon on October 25, 2011, 02:02:24 PM
What are the rules about CAP members carrying anti-bear spray? Are there any?

Make sure you read the "point towards bear" label correctly.

"That Others May Zoom"

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 25, 2011, 12:47:34 PM
Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 04:19:14 AM

Well... LEOSA is technically still valid even at CAP activities, it's just that CAP says that they'll probably kick you out if you exercise your rights under it. Your call.

Sorry, by the LEOSA specifically does not apply at CAP meeting and if at a school, then you have even more problems.

LEOSA does not override federal law or federal regulations. (CAP rules are a codified federal regulations) and case law has affirmed that when a federal agency, unit, etc. has under its control an area, (by renting or "temporary possession"), the agencies rules apply, period, no fourm debate can change that. So if the CAP uses a room in lets say a church, that area being used is "under control" of the CAP. Nothing need be signed. Now here is a twist: It most likely would not apply to a party packing just going through the area because that person is not subject to CAP regulations.

The prohibition on carrying firearms within 1000 feet of a school contained within the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1995, which authorizes on-duty law enforcement officers to carry firearms in such circumstances still applies to off-duty and retired law enforcement officers who would otherwise be allowed to carry firearms under LEOSA. Off duty officers HAVE been convicted of violation this law. Take the time to research it and you will see that this is correct.

And another twist: Some states have legal clauses in the laws that allow you to drop off your kid outside of the school and then leave while carrying your pistol with a CCW permit. However, (and this will upset the LEO types) your badge does not grant you the same privileges if you are off duty... Several cases have affirmed this and officers have been convicted. And please do your research before saying calling bull on me. And FYI the old "I'm always on duty" has been discounted by the courts numerous times. You are "on duty" only when you are being paid (full or "on-call" pay), or driving an official vehicle.

This information come from legal opinion published in the FBI bulletin, the FOP and "Chief Magazine"

davidsinn

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:39:27 PM
(CAP rules are a codified federal regulations)

That's a crock of bull. CAP regs are the internal rules of a private corporation.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Spaceman3750

Where are CAP regs incorporated as federal regulation? Also, we're AUXOFF during regular meetings (since it's not an AFAM) therefore not a federal entity during the period in which we control a specific area.

I actually didn't know about the Gun Free School Zones Act vs. LEOSA bit, so that's an interesting tidbit.

Not calling bull, you know way more than I do. Just making a couple of points.

(By the way, I'm not a cop, I just play one on TV)

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Eclipse on October 25, 2011, 03:29:01 PM
Quote from: N Harmon on October 25, 2011, 02:02:24 PM
What are the rules about CAP members carrying anti-bear spray? Are there any?

Make sure you read the "point towards bear" label correctly.

More inane responses, but your is a valid question.

If you read the regulation, and then your state law, which the regulation makes reference, you will see what it prohibits. And a good response is never ask a question that you don't already know the answer... Or don't want to hear the answer.

Hardshell Clam

#52
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 25, 2011, 03:46:30 PM
Where are CAP regs incorporated as federal regulation? Also, we're AUXOFF during regular meetings (since it's not an AFAM) therefore not a federal entity during the period in which we control a specific area.

I actually didn't know about the Gun Free School Zones Act vs. LEOSA bit, so that's an interesting tidbit.

Not calling bull, you know way more than I do. Just making a couple of points.

(By the way, I'm not a cop, I just play one on TV)

Good points. And that may well be the case. With one exception: The govt and military are specifically authorized to make regulations for their employees and they need not be published in the federal register, only "approved and published" to have the effect, as they apply only to the conduct of their employees. Our regs are approved and published.

And for the purposes of this forum we are "employees".

As to the LEOSA, what I have said is the best of the prevailing professional and legal opinions available, and not just off the top of my head. I included references so if you are going to call bull on me, have the forethought to have some supporting references...

I am NOT anti gun or cop, but rather pro law and made my career in same. While not a practicing attorney, I was admitted to a local bar (not the drinking type, I am often admitted to those ) a number of years ago.

Being a criminal investigator/special agent vs a local cop is as difference as day vs night in a lot of respects. I am thankful I was a local cop before being an agent and I brought some useful prospective with me that was most helpful.

Eclipse

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:57:48 PMAnd for the purposes of this forum we are "employees".

No, we are not.

"That Others May Zoom"

Spaceman3750

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:57:48 PM
And for the purposes of this forum we are "employees".

IMHO, the only time we are considered employees is when FECA and FTCA come into play on an AFAM. Any other time, AUXON or AUXOFF, we are volunteers.

Being an employee would be nice - the extra paycheck would be helpful.

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Eclipse on October 25, 2011, 03:59:39 PM
Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:57:48 PMAnd for the purposes of this forum we are "employees".

No, we are not.

Wow, what an insightful comeback, OK Eclipse, you pick a word that shows were are subject to the regulations.

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 25, 2011, 04:04:41 PM
Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:57:48 PM
And for the purposes of this forum we are "employees".

IMHO, the only time we are considered employees is when FECA and FTCA come into play on an AFAM. Any other time, AUXON or AUXOFF, we are volunteers.

Being an employee would be nice - the extra paycheck would be helpful.

Now this is a thinking mans reply! You are correct.

However I stated for the 'proposes of this forum only".  More often then not, volunteers are considered the same as "employees" in respect to rules of conduct.


davidsinn

Quote from: Hardshell Clam on October 25, 2011, 03:57:48 PM
The govt and military are specifically authorized to make regulations for their employees and they need not be published in the federal register, only "approved and published" to have the effect, as they apply only to the conduct of their employees. Our regs are approved and published.

This is relevant how? We are not government nor military. We are a non profit corporation.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

Eclipse

We are not "employees" in any sense.

The rules of conduct are in respect to "membership" not "employment". That we may be granted certain benefits as part of that membership
does not make us "employees".

"That Others May Zoom"

Hardshell Clam

Quote from: Eclipse on October 25, 2011, 04:32:54 PM
We are not "employees" in any sense.

The rules of conduct are in respect to "membership" not "employment". That we may be granted certain benefits as part of that membership
does not make us "employees".

You can pick away at a minor improper use of a word, but you did not bring anything to the table in reguards to the gist of what I said, only the misuse of a word.

Bottom line: You carry a weapon in violation of CAP regs, you will be You can pick away at a minor improper use of a word, but you did not bring anything to the table in reguards to the gist of what I said, only the misuse of a word.


Bottom line: You carry a weapon in violation of CAP regs, you will be cashiered.  In all likeliness you will NOT be prosecuted, but your membership is history.

In all likeliness you will NOT be prosecuted, but your membership is history.