Armed CAP Members

[RiverAux]

Thats sort of how I viewed this whole issue.  Frankly, I think that whoever originally proposed this exception either intentionally or unintentionally misrepresented department policy as a law.  Perhaps whatever LEO got the ball rolling on this didn't really know that their policy wasn't law or perhaps he/she correctly said that it was policy but the CAP leaders that put it into regulation misunderstood and thought that it was an actual law. 

If, as Flying Pig seems to have found, there are not really any such laws out there, what should we do about this regulation?

Eliminate it entirely? 

Change it to allow carry by LEOs required to do so by department policy?  Personally, I'm fine with that.  However, if we make such an exception we should also make it clear in our regulation that if the LEO is also required to respond at all times if they observe crimes that they are doing so based on their LEO authority and are not doing so as CAP members. 

[Major Lord]

I don't believe you could even show me a law that requires police to be armed at all, let alone compel full time CCW. State Hospital police, etc don't carry guns, but are still actually sworn Officers. Florida as I understand it has Rabbi's that are code enforcement officers and police Kosher establishments to make sure they are in compliance with municipal codes regarding handling and claims of kosher foods. I have not heard of any of them getting in shootouts with Colombian Traif Brisket dealers.

So much of this is dancing on the head of a pin. When CAP members fly Counter-Narcotics flights, its clear ( to me at least) that they are acting as "Police Agents" ( Unless the Agents on board give them no instruction of any kind) while trying to maintain the pretext of being "passive participants" in order to avoid violating the Posse Comitatus Act is just silly. It seems that CAP is in the cycle when the rainbow flag is flown above the American Colors at NHQ, and all those nasty guys with guns are just unenlightened cavemen. The attitude that a police officer should be disarmed when on CAP duty is a red herring; He is ALWAYS a police Officer regardless of whether he has his badge, gun, or donuts on his person, and has certain duties that are concomitant. This baseless phobia of firearms is something we see promulgated by members who envision CAP's association with the Armed Forces of The United States of America as accomplished with one arm holding them at arms length, and the other holding their nose. Let me restate for the record, lest I be tackled by a brute squad of elderly Senior Members, that I accept the limitations and rules of CAP, and adhere to them, even when I find them to be preposterous and somewhat un-American.

Major Lord

Major Lord

[Hawk200]

Well said, Major Lord.

[Ed Bos]

Frankly, I think that whoever originally proposed this exception either intentionally or unintentionally misrepresented department policy as a law.  Perhaps whatever LEO got the ball rolling on this didn't really know that their policy wasn't law or perhaps he/she correctly said that it was policy but the CAP leaders that put it into regulation misunderstood and thought that it was an actual law. 

I think you're misunderstanding the "required by law piece."

Perhaps I'm mistaken (doesn't happen THAT often), but I doubt any law enforecement officer has ever been required to carrry a firearm in the off-duty time as part of their employment.

1. Firearms. Civil Air Patrol members will not carry, wear, or use firearms, including air guns (pellet or BB) while engaged in Civil Air Patrol activities. The carrying of firearms prohibition is subject to the following exceptions:

a. A member may carry firearms on his/her person when required to do so by law provided he/she has a written statement of proof of such requirement signed by the wing commander.

b. Firearms may be carried in survival gear in CAP aircraft when required by law. When firearms are so authorized, they will not be removed from the survival gear unless an emergency situation exists.

I am sure that the requirement to carry a firearm must have something to do with situations like the former Alaska Statute that required certain folks to carry firearms for protection from animals. I believe paragraphs a. & b. are related, and that it has nothing to do with law enforcement officials and their off-duty time.

*Modified to correct quote formatting.

[davidsinn]

Can you cite the law that requires said person to carry?

If it becomes necessary, yes.

Assuaging your curiosity doesn't qualify as "necessary."

You made the claim. Back it up. Otherwise it's just anonymous internet BS.

Still waiting.

[RiverAux]

While it is true that the exception in question doesn't specifically limit itself to law enforcement officers, I'm relatively certain that was the context it was placed in when it was proposed.  I imagine that someone could look through the minutes to confirm it.

[Ed Bos]

While it is true that the exception in question doesn't specifically limit itself to law enforcement officers, I'm relatively certain that was the context it was placed in when it was proposed.  I imagine that someone could look through the minutes to confirm it.

That would be useful as all get-out.

[Buzz]

Can you cite the law that requires said person to carry?

If it becomes necessary, yes.

Assuaging your curiosity doesn't qualify as "necessary."

You made the claim. Back it up. Otherwise it's just anonymous internet BS.

You assume that I care whether or not you know.

Consider that there are things that people know but don't want to put details out on the net.  If you had a legitimate need to know, you WOULD know, so obviously you don't have the need.  If it's that important to you, you can find the information for yourself. 

BTW, an earlier poster is correct -- if agency policy requires full-time carry, and that policy is codified as a town, city or county ordinance, that policy is the law, whether or not the officer is in town.  Many jurisdictions have in fact put that into law for liability purposes and to satisfy state laws regarding CCW.

[Buzz]

He is ALWAYS a police Officer regardless of whether he has his badge, gun, or donuts on his person

Actually, no.  MOST cops are always cops, but some are given limited commission.  For instance, some such as school or transit cops are given specific areas of authority.  For instance, there are two school zones on my way out of the airport where I live.  There used to be a couple of hundred feet between them, until the week after a school cop wrote a traffic ticket to an idiot who blew a stop sign in the not-a-school-zone.  Turns out the school cop can only write for what happens in school zones, and the idiot was an attorney who knew that.  The county also let the word get around that some of the School Police SUVs were being driven by Sheriff's deputies, whose commission wasn't so limited.

Also, a cop on duty may carry past the metal detectors at the airport, that same cop may have to put his pistol in the locker when meeting Auntie Mabel's flight on his day off.

and has certain duties that are concomitant. This baseless phobia of firearms is something we see promulgated by members who envision CAP's association with the Armed Forces of The United States of America as accomplished with one arm holding them at arms length, and the other holding their nose. Let me restate for the record, lest I be tackled by a brute squad of elderly Senior Members, that I accept the limitations and rules of CAP, and adhere to them, even when I find them to be preposterous and somewhat un-American.

Same here.

I'm a VOLUNTEER, and part of volunteering is agreeing to follow policy.  If any group that I'm volunteering with comes up with a policy that I can't follow, my only option is to leave the group.

I believe that any adult on a ground team should have a pistol, the first two rounds being snake loads.  CAP policy prohibits this.  Living in a desert, and having used several snake loads "in anger" (actually more like in "What the HELL???") just during my normal, non-CAP activities, I feel that the policy puts GT members at risk -- but I follow policy, because I have VOLUNTEERED.

[RiverAux]

Snake loads?  Get real.  If you've got time to pull out and aim a pistol at as small a target as a snake is, then you've got plenty enough time to retreat out of the situation.  Trying to kill the snake is about the best way to get yourself bit. 

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

I'm a VOLUNTEER, and part of volunteering is agreeing to follow policy.  If any group that I'm volunteering with comes up with a policy that I can't follow, my only option is to leave the group.

The other option is to advocate for changes in policy.

[RADIOMAN015]

Hmm, if a member is on an assigned Air Force Funded mission, would they be able to carry their firearm even if approved by the wing commander    It would seem to me that the approval is only for CAP activities and not AF activities.   The Air Force regulation is very specific about CAP being in a non combat, non law enforcement role.
RM 

[RiverAux]

If that was a problem CAP-USAF would have spoken up when this regulation was proposed.  And there is no indication at all in the regulation that it only applies to corporate activities.

[lordmonar]

Hmm, if a member is on an assigned Air Force Funded mission, would they be able to carry their firearm even if approved by the wing commander    It would seem to me that the approval is only for CAP activities and not AF activities.   The Air Force regulation is very specific about CAP being in a non combat, non law enforcement role.
RM

AF activities are CAP activities......and there is a federal law that allows CCW for any off duty policeman....even in states without CCW laws.
Being armed or not armed does not have anything to do with being in combat or not.....Chaplains and Doctors are non-combantants too.....and they carry weapons.

[wuzafuzz]

This has been an entertaining thread so far.

When I was a cop there was no requirement to carry a weapon off duty.  Even if I was required to carry, I'd be a little worried about going on a flight and then winding up at an Air Force base.  (Yes that happens where I'm at.)  While the chances of it being noticed are slim, I suspect the base police could care less about my need, the CAP regulation, or my wing king's okey dokey.

[lordmonar]

And not care all that much either way.

While it says no weapons on the sign.......if you a legitmate need and reason to being one on base....they got no problem.  (like a divert for fule or what ever.

There are ranges on Nellis that they used to let civilan NRA instructor use.....they would bring guns on base all the time.

Now...if you land on base and they see the weapon....they may ask you to check it at base ops while you were resting up gettind lunch....but it is not like they would throw you in the lock up....assuming you were polite and up front about it.

[wuzafuzz]

^^ Ah OK.  Thanks for the scoop.  I was thinking back to my days as a gate guard at a Navy base, where cars were routinely searched based on the random criteria of the day.  Finding a gun would have been very bad mojo.  Then again, that was when President Reagan was routinely flying onto Pt Mugu for his trips to Santa Barbara.

[Major Lord]

^^ Ah OK.  Thanks for the scoop.  I was thinking back to my days as a gate guard at a Navy base, where cars were routinely searched based on the random criteria of the day.  Finding a gun would have been very bad mojo.  Then again, that was when President Reagan was routinely flying onto Pt Mugu for his trips to Santa Barbara.

Right, like anyone could have seriously injured "The Gipper" with a mere firearm! Isn't there some way we can clone him?

Major Lord

[SARDOC]

^^ Ah OK.  Thanks for the scoop.  I was thinking back to my days as a gate guard at a Navy base, where cars were routinely searched based on the random criteria of the day.  Finding a gun would have been very bad mojo.  Then again, that was when President Reagan was routinely flying onto Pt Mugu for his trips to Santa Barbara.

The Bases around my house are okay with you bringing a Firearm on the base if you display your Law Enforcement Officer Credentials and check in with either the Command Duty Officer or the Base Police Watch Commander...They like to know why you are carrying your Firearm on the base.    In my case...it was because I was a reservist coming in for drill and I was either coming directly from work or was headed straight back to work after completion of Drill...they just asked that I keep it secured in my Vehicle.  Now that I'm retired from Law Enforcement I very rarely ever even carry my firearm and I never carry for anything CAP related.

[Short Field]

Ordinarily, an Officer accepts the word of a brother Officer, even in CAP.  If the word of a fellow Officer is insufficient, you have to ask if your honor and dignity are compromised by complying; if not, no harm.

Wow, pay roughly $71 for National Dues and pass a cursory background check to make sure you have no felony convictions and I have to trust your word because we are brother officers?  Sorry, that is just a bit too funny to pass up.