TexasCHLforum.com

Follow-up from a second email:

Here's one of the factors that I didn't mention in my e-mail to you, but I did at the convention: The Officer was also in the Air Guard, and while the Bureau had him in a Administrative Leave Without Pay status, and even after the Agency fired him, the DOD continued to employ him as a reservist while he was waiting for the full outcome of his case.

What makes the story even better is the fact that his Air Guard Commander, when he was told that the Bureau had fired the Officer, put him on full-time work in his Guard Unit so he wouldn't starve.

This probably played a large part in the Bureau settling his MSPB claim; how could they have explained why they fired the guy before his case was fully disposed, while another Federal Agency not only kept him on the rolls, but gave him more work hours.

The general story is out there, so use it however you wish; the Officer is currently on deployment overseas and won't be back until early next year. I'll ask him where his civil action is at when I talk to him again.

I heard back from the local union president in Hawaii, where the LEOSA arrest took place. Here's the update, posted with his permission:

Aloha, Kevin:

The incident I described occurred in September, 2004. A Senior Officer Specialist at our institution was arrested based on complaints from his ex-girlfriend; she told the police that he had a hand gun and that he kept it with him all the time. When the police went to pick him up where his ex said they would find him, he did have his firearm with him (legally registered in Hawaii), and he showed it/surrendered it to the police without protest. Hawaii has a law called "place to keep and carry" that allows for only unloaded weapons to be transported to specific locations (like a firing range or the police station).

Read Hawaii's gun laws here:

http://www.hawaiirifleassociation.org/i ... &Itemid=27

In Hawaii, because no firearms are manufactured here, all gun charges can be picked up by the Federal Prosecutor as interstate felonies.

The State Prosecutor called the institution to ask if it was true that the officer had a legal right to carry 'off duty' because of the recently passed LEOSA; the Bureau attorney told the DA, "no", so the state proceeded with prosecuting the 'place to keep' charge.

During the time between his arrest and trial, the Officer was detained at the Oahu Community Correctional Center (OCCC) for 6 months, due to the fact that his bail was set ridiculously high.

The Bureau Officer had all of the other original charges dropped, except for the "place to keep and carry' charge, which the state dropped down from a felony to a misdemeanor. During the trial, the Bureau Attorney again stated that the Officer had no legal right to carry a firearm off duty. The judge found the officer guilty of the 'place to keep and carry' misdemeanor.

At this point, the then Vice President of Local 1218 asked me to help the Officer by providing all of the information that I had collected on LEOSA (I had become a LEOSA subject matter expert while acting as the Legislative Officer for Local1680 at FCI Terminal Island before transferring to FDC Honolulu). I provided the Officers attorney (a public defender) with LEOSA and all of the supporting laws the give Bureau employees arrest authority, firearms authority and law-enforcement status. The Officer's attorney was then able to show this new evidence to the judge and get the Officer a new hearing on the one misdemeanor charge. The Officer was released from OCCC on his own recognizance.

The Officer, who had been in a LWOP status, asked the Bureau to continue to keep him on the rolls as an employee until his case was fully disposed of; he sent a memo to the warden asking for such. The warden wrote "denied" across the letter in a magic marker and terminated the Officer.

At the new hearing, the Bureau Attorney wouldn't answer any of the judge's questions in regard to LEOSA, saying only, "I don't have the authority to answer that question." each time a new question was asked by the judge. The judge set a new hearing date and wrote a questionnaire based on the qualifications listed in LEOSA and sent it to the institution for response; the deadline for answering the questionnaire was the new hearing.

When the second reconsideration hearing took place, the Bureau failed to show up and provide the answers to the questionnaire. The judge set a new date for the hearing and warned the Bureau that he would find the agency in contempt of his court if they failed to answer his questions at the next deadline.

The Bureau passed the buck to the DOJ and the AG's office, and the questionnaire was returned to the judge by the date of the hearing. The DOJ answered ALL of the questions in favor of the Officer, including the last question, which was something like, "Was Officer (blank) qualified under law to carry a concealed weapon in an off-duty status on September (date), 2004?". The judge then dropped all charges against the officer.

The Officer then filed a MSPB appeal to get his job back; the Agency was fairly quick to settle, giving him his position and lost wages back.

Current status: The Officer has filed a civil suit against the Bureau and specifically against the Warden and Senior Attorney as individuals. He has agreed to give Local 1218 copies of all of his trial/hearing documents, including the questionnaire and the DOJ answers to it as soon as his civil action is completed. His attorney has asked him not to share any of the documentation because it is currently evidence in his case against the Bureau.

Liberty wrote:

KBCraig wrote:
Sorry, Federal Bureau of Prisons. And unless he was on another island, then it would be the Honolulu PD (they cover all of Oahu). Hawaii has county-wide PDs, and no state police.

Wasn't Steve McGarrett a State Cop?

Yup. And like McGarrett, "5-0" (Hawaii State Police), was purely fictional.

Hawaii has a Department of Public Safety with a Sheriff Division, which operates state-wide. They do traditional sheriff functions like warrants, subpoena service, and prisoner transport. They also do airport security and protect the governor. They don't do many of the things traditional state police do (highway patrol, crime lab, etc.).

frankie_the_yankee wrote:BTW, I couuldn't tell from your post. What department was the guy from? And what department busted him?

Sorry, Federal Bureau of Prisons. And unless he was on another island, then it would be the Honolulu PD (they cover all of Oahu). Hawaii has county-wide PDs, and no state police.

What I can't figure is why the guy had to do time. Why didn't he appeal his conviction? It would seem that someone at his trial improperly applied the law. His lawyer should have moved for summary dismissal, and the judge should have granted it. So either his defense was incompetent or the judge erred. Either is grounds for appeal.

Those are the kinds of details I'm waiting to hear. I've got an email in to our union VP for that region.

frankie_the_yankee wrote:I think the law is working out well. I haven't heard of any horror stories.

I just learned Thursday of a case that happened in the last year or so in Hawaii. I'm waiting to learn more details, but the union is pretty mad that we're just now finding out about it.

Nutshell version of what I know now: an officer at FDC Honolulu had a police encounter of some type (traffic stop, I presume). By whatever means, they discovered that he was carrying a pistol. He explained to them that he was doing so legally, that he was covered under LEOSA (we are), they doubted his word, so they called the institution, and were told that he was not authorized to carry!

The only way he would not be authorized would be if he was suspended from his job, or if he had failed annual qualification (qualification is mandatory, no exceptions, you must qualify to keep your job).

End result: six months in jail, and he got fired.

I just learned of this two days ago, and am waiting for more information. The national union president is livid that no one at Honolulu informed anyone that this was happening.

This will all work out in the guy's favor, but meanwhile he's been fired and spent six months in jail. Not only will he get his job back when we're done, but I hope he successfully sues personally any BOP personnel who left him hanging.

It's 18 USC 926B & C, or LEOSA -- the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004. Sometimes still (inaccurately) referred to by its bill number, HR218.

It became Public Law 108-277 when signed by President Bush on July 22, 2004.

You can get a PDF of it here.

Public Law 108-277
108th Congress

An Act



To amend title 18, United States Code, to exempt qualified current and
former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying
of concealed handguns. <<NOTE: July 22, 2004 - [H.R. 218]>>

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act of 2004. 18 USC 921 note.>>

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act
of 2004''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS
PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 926A the following:

``Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
officers

``(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or
any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law
enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by
subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or
transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection
(b).
``(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the
laws of any State that--
``(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property;
or
``(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any
State or local government property, installation, building,
base, or park.

``(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement
officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--
``(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the
prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the
incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has
statutory powers of arrest;
``(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
``(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the
agency;
``(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency
which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a
firearm;

[[Page 118 STAT. 866]]

``(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another
intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
``(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.

``(d) The identification required by this subsection is the
photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which
the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.
``(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--
``(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the
National Firearms Act);
``(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of
this title); and
``(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of
this title).''.

(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such chapter is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926A the
following:

``926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
officers.''.

SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM
STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is
further amended by inserting after section 926B the following:

``Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement officers

``(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or
any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified
retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification
required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been
shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to
subsection (b).
``(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the
laws of any State that--
``(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property;
or
``(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any
State or local government property, installation, building,
base, or park.

``(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified retired law
enforcement officer' means an individual who--
``(1) retired in good standing from service with a public
agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of
mental instability;
``(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to
engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation,
or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any
violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;
``(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a
law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or
``(B) retired from service with such agency, after
completing any applicable probationary period of such service,
due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such
agency;
``(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the
retirement plan of the agency;

[[Page 118 STAT. 867]]

``(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at
the expense of the individual, the State's standards for
training and qualification for active law enforcement officers
to carry firearms;
``(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another
intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
``(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.

``(d) The identification required by this subsection is--
``(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency
from which the individual retired from service as a law
enforcement officer that indicates that the individual has, not
less recently than one year before the date the individual is
carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found
by the agency to meet the standards established by the agency
for training and qualification for active law enforcement
officers to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed
firearm; or
``(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency
from which the individual retired from service as a law
enforcement officer; and
``(B) a certification issued by the State in which the
individual resides that indicates that the individual has, not
less recently than one year before the date the individual is
carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found
by the State to meet the standards established by the State for
training and qualification for active law enforcement officers
to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.

``(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--
``(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the
National Firearms Act);
``(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of
this title); and
``(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921 of
this title).''.

(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such chapter is
further amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926B the
following:

``926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement officers.''.

Approved July 22, 2004.