Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Amtrak police question

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Amtrak police question

    After searching this sight as well as the internet, and not being able to find much either way, can Amtrak police carry off duty under 218? If not is there a department general order or local agreement in Maryland that authorizes an officer to? Thanks.

  • #2
    Originally posted by TacMedic16 View Post
    After searching this sight as well as the internet, and not being able to find much either way, can Amtrak police carry off duty under 218? If not is there a department general order or local agreement in Maryland that authorizes an officer to? Thanks.
    Yes. Per Amtrak corporate counsel, Amtrak police can carry off duty.
    I don't answer recruitment messages....

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks. I appreciate the answer.

      Comment


      • #4
        No they cant! They dont satisfy the 218 requirement of being a governmental agency, even though every agency in the federal law enforcement community considers them a member of the Fed. LE Community as policy. The best argument for the fact that they currently are not recognized as a "qualified LEO" is the fact that there is a bill in the Senate ( S.1132) that will amend LEOSA to incorporate AmTrak Police and Executive Branch Police Officers.

        That being said, the likelyhood of an Amtrak Copper getting hemmed up attempting to carry under LEOSA is remote unless theres negligence or stupidity on the officers behalf.
        Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
          No they cant! They dont satisfy the 218 requirement of being a governmental agency, even though every agency in the federal law enforcement community considers them a member of the Fed. LE Community as policy. The best argument for the fact that they currently are not recognized as a "qualified LEO" is the fact that there is a bill in the Senate ( S.1132) that will amend LEOSA to incorporate AmTrak Police and Executive Branch Police Officers.

          That being said, the likelyhood of an Amtrak Copper getting hemmed up attempting to carry under LEOSA is remote unless theres negligence or stupidity on the officers behalf.
          No offense but stick to DA issues. I used to work there and yes they can carry off duty per the law. They are a government corporation, the same as USPS.
          Last edited by orlandofed5-0; 08-23-2009, 12:10 PM.
          I don't answer recruitment messages....

          Comment


          • #6
            No offense taken, but rather than trying to prevent others from giving their opinion, why dont you argue your point based on their merits. One doesnt have to be an Amtrak Cop to know the law as established by LEOSA. The fact is: They are not considered a governmental agency for the purposes of LEOSA, I was actually present in the Senate Hart Building when the aforementioned bill was being debated and listened to congressional testamony from the National Treasurer of The FOP to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I sat through a 45 minute discussion on the very topic. They probably are alllowed to carry off duty because they are Police officers and im certian that 99 % of political subdivisions recognize them as such. But they are not under the LEOSA umbrella as of yet...
            Last edited by Re-Birth; 08-23-2009, 12:38 PM. Reason: typo
            Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
              No offense taken, but rather than trying to prevent others from giving their opinion, why dont you argue your point based on their merits. One doesnt have to be an Amtrak Cop to know the law as established by LEOSA. The fact is: They are not considered a governmental agency for the purposes of LEOSA, I was actually present in the Senate Hart Building when the aforementioned bill was being debated and listened to congressional testamony from the National Treasurer of The FOP to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I sat through a 45 minute discussion on the very topic. They probably are alllowed to carry off duty because they are Police officers and im certian that 99 % of political subdivisions recognize them as such. But they are not under the LEOSA umbrella as of yet...
              As amtrak is qualified in 46 of the 50 states plus the district, LEOSA did not affect them unless they are/were going to Alaksa, Hawaii, South Dakota or Wyoming. Also per Amtrak's corporate counsel and sent thru the chief's office to the districts and union, Amtrak police are qualified under LEOSA as a governmental corporation. Also considering the bill is dead, it would not have much affect compared to say DA/DoN etc..
              I don't answer recruitment messages....

              Comment


              • #8
                I wouldnt doubt that they are qualified in 46 States plus DC, but i am not qualified to speak on that matter, therefore I didnt; I spoke on LEOSA. Representives from Amtrak were also at the hearing, and you are right it is their opinion that they do fall under LEOSA, it was also the likely legislative intent of Congress to include Amtrak officers, or for that matter, any Police Officer classified as such by OPM. But the Act was too narrow, which is why it is being "improved". Additionally, the opinion of a Dept.'s legal counsel does not mean its law, it is simply an opinion, and in the absence of a judicial decision, their opinion is neither more or less valid that any other legal opinion founded in reason. The reason why the opinion was written in the first place may be because of ambiguity in the law.

                As far as the Bill being dead, im not sure where you got that from. It was created in May and sponsored by a powerful member of the Senate, (D) Patrick Leahy. Who also happens to be the Committee chairman on the Judiciary and co-sponsored by the the Ranking Republican on the Judiciary, Sen. Sessions, and Sen. Kyle of Az. The Bill hasnt even been in existence for an entire baseball season and your already declaring the Bill dead. I think your wrong my friend, As far a Bills go, it is well on its way to becoming the law of the land!
                Last edited by Re-Birth; 08-23-2009, 03:20 PM. Reason: typo
                Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                  As far a Bills go, it is well on its way to becoming the law of the land!
                  I'd like to see what DOD's stance is on it before I would be proclaiming it to be "Law of the Land."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It doesnt matter what the "DoD stance" is, when Congress passes and the Chief Executive (who also happens to be the Commander in Chief) signs a Bill, it is the law of the land! The Military and Military law are Consititutionally subservient to both the legislative and executive bodies. When laws are passed forcing racial intergration, or sexual harrassment reform in the wake of "Tailgate"; or when they tell the military to "dont ask dont tell", they are legally obligated to obide, no matter how much they disagree with policy.
                    Last edited by Re-Birth; 08-23-2009, 04:15 PM. Reason: typo
                    Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                      It doesnt matter what the DoD stance is, when Congress passes and the President (who happens to be the Commander in Chief) signs a Bill, it is the law of the land! The Military and Military law are Consititutionally subservient to both bodies. When laws are passed forcing racial intergration, or sexual harrassment reform in the wake of "Tailgate". Or when they tell the military to "dont ask dont tell", they are legally obligated to obide, no matter how much they disagree with policy.
                      Are you that ignorant to think that when this goes into committee that DOD won't have a say whether they want this to happen or not...?? If DOD strongly opposes the idea...gets a few Senators/HORs on their side...the bill could be done right there.....

                      Saying it's going to slide right through is foolish at best....as it's not that simply slick....to get something through....even if you have that assthat Leahy backing it. Do you even know how many bills aren't even signed into law ever year...? Hundreds!

                      Aren't you the same 0083 from Meade that was on here a while back saying you could fly armed/carry off duty on your Creds....?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It was an argument about carrying on your credentials. I stated that you are allowed to carry in accordance to what your credentials permit. Therefore, if it puts expressed limits on your carry then you must follow those limits. If it doesnt place expressed limits on your carry but you act in accordance with those credentials, than the burden will lie with the individuals who authorized the credentials and believed that you were legally permitted to carry as such. I then wrote what my credentials stated, which included, that I was authorized to carrying in ACCORDANCE with FAA and TSA regulations. (Thats when someone said that if I tried to carry on a plane i would get hemmed up). He is correct, cause FAA Regs state that in addition to Police Credentials, a governmental agent must also present the necessary documentation from their agency. But if he read my creds carefully, he would see that my credentials doesnt deviate legallly from anything that is unlawful, SJA wouldnt allow them to. The key word is "Accordance".

                        You are correct, in the Bill making process, the DoD does have a voice at the table. But so does many other organizations like the FOP. But once a decision is made, it is made... DoD may even have less influence at times because, unlike the FOP, they are not a lobbying organization and dont have millions to throw into the war chest of a congressional campaign nor can the military officially advocate for any candidate. A prime example of the military advocating a position and then losing the battle is the Enviromental Protection Act which states that DoD is not exempt from most evironmental protection measures. Merely because the DoD opposes a Bill does not mean its necessarily dead on arrival.

                        And your wrong, Thousands of bills arent signed into law every year. But it doesnt have to be signed into law next week to be well under its way, it can take 5 years for some bill to finally be passed. Im not unaware of that fact, but relatively speaking; the bill is well on its way to being law.
                        Last edited by Re-Birth; 08-23-2009, 05:23 PM. Reason: clarification
                        Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          It was an argument about carrying on your credentials.
                          Last time I checked, DOA wasn't allowing folks to carry their creds off-duty any more..... Needless to say, with my new job, guess what...? I will find out soon enough and let you know....and perhaps call to the folks at Meade and make sure their folks are in compliance... See....GS-13/14 folks that are LE Managers at the Command level (as in Pacific Command) can do that...

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          I stated that you are allowed to carry in accordance to what your credentials permit.
                          Nope...what your Command/Commander/DOA policy states is how one can carry.....

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          I then wrote what my credentials stated, which included, that I was authorized to carrying in ACCORDANCE with FAA and TSA regulations. (Thats when someone said that if I tried to carry on a plane i would get hemmed up). He is correct, cause FAA Regs state that in addition to Police Credentials, a governmental agent must also present the necessary documentation from their agency.
                          Yawn....you can't carry off-duty...and you damn sure can't carry on a Aircraft......no matter what your creds say..... AR prevents that. As I recall, you tried to argue that you could....and that other Navy dude said he had done both and was carrying off-duty.... Which is bull and a good way to get fired and/or tossed in jail....

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          You are correct, in the Bill making process, the DoD does have a voice at the table.
                          DOD has a huge voice.....and if they don't want folks like you running around carrying off-duty, one is suspecting they will not only make that clear to the various Senate/House Committes but I am sure they will get with like minded friendly Senators/HORs....and make sure the bill gets shot down...


                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          DoD may even have less influence at times
                          Bull.... Look at them standing behind the POTUS on new weapons that the Congress wanted.... Look who won...? DOD/POTUS...

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          unlike the FOP
                          Is the FOP even standing behind this...? If so...is it just on the local level or is their National folks...?

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          And your wrong, Thousands of bills arent signed into law every year.
                          You know what I meant...but have to be a horses ***...so....

                          Originally posted by Re-Birth View Post
                          but relatively speaking; the bill is well on its way to being law.
                          Keep smoking what you are smoking..... Nothing is a sure thing....or are you that stupid not to realize it..?
                          Last edited by Bearcat357; 08-23-2009, 05:42 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            [QUOTE=Bearcat357;1953893]Last time I checked, DOA wasn't allowing folks to carry their creds off-duty any more..... Needless to say, with my new job, guess what...? I will find out soon enough and let you know....and perhaps call to the folks at Meade and make sure their folks are in compliance... See....GS-13/14 folks that are LE Managers at the Command level (as in Pacific Command) can do that...


                            Wow you are that pressed to prove a point that you are going to jam up some DOA cops for carrying off duty? How would you feel if that happens and they stop carrying off duty and they end up catching a hot round and can't defend themselves because of it? I am not debating the legalities here but if the guys at DOA are "cops" why mess with them over that. Don't get drunk off power and know your roots brother.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I dont know what his problem is
                              Last edited by Re-Birth; 08-23-2009, 07:07 PM. Reason: typo
                              Never ask a man if he served in the Marine Corps! If he earned the title "Marine" he will tell you, if he didn't, there is no need to embarrass him.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 6267 users online. 346 members and 5921 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X