Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Any updates on DOD LEO's and legislation?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Any updates on DOD LEO's and legislation?

    Just wondering if anyone has any updated information that they can post about legislation affecting DOD LEO's. The latest rumor I've heard pertains to adding HR 324 (or a bill like it) to the Defense Authorization Act his year. Anyone else heard anything?

  • #2
    I have been wondering the same thing, I was thinking that with the budget problems, the last thing on Congress' minds is our plight. I'm guessing all of our bills are sitting in a committee.

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, I think any financial issues, such as retirement and pay legislation are probably dead. But, maybe our addition to LEOSA and/or amending Title 10 (as HR 324 does), might be something we could see. Just curious, haven't heard much chatter about this lately.

      Comment


      • #4
        I thought LEOSA covered DoD 0083s now?

        Comment


        • #5
          Yes, the intent of the most recent change to the LEOSA was to include DoD officers and others to the text of the law. However, some genius decided they didn't need to put "....officers who make an arrest OR APPREHENSION..." into the bill, so the DoD's policy stance is we do not in fact qualify for LEOSA.

          Comment


          • #6
            Obviously there's alot of controversy about LEOSA, and the whole "arrest" versus "apprehension" issue. We all know that they are in fact the same thing (Rule 302 MCM "...Apprehension is the equivalent of “arrest” in civilian terminology."), that we ARE covered by statute (i.e. 10 USC 809(e) and the UCMJ...etc.), and the intent WAS to include us in the current LEOSA. But, nay-sayers and detractors will always avoid this with smoke-and-mirror manuevering. The memo that has been circulated originating from DOD doesn't present policy, but merely an unofficial opinion; however, many duty stations have adopted this as an official decision, and are using this to satisfy their inaction on the issue and/or refusal to recognize the coverage. However, legal precedence is growing in favor of DOD officers, and in some cases, recognition and backing by their duty stations.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by I0347 View Post
              Well, I think any financial issues, such as retirement and pay legislation are probably dead. But, maybe our addition to LEOSA and/or amending Title 10 (as HR 324 does), might be something we could see. Just curious, haven't heard much chatter about this lately.
              I wouldn't say dead, tabled would be the more appropriate term, but not dead.
              GOD IS A NINJA WITH A SNIPER RIFLE, WAITING TO TAKE YOU OUT.

              "For weapons training they told me to play DOOM"

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by I0347 View Post
                Obviously there's alot of controversy about LEOSA, and the whole "arrest" versus "apprehension" issue. We all know that they are in fact the same thing (Rule 302 MCM "...Apprehension is the equivalent of “arrest” in civilian terminology."), that we ARE covered by statute (i.e. 10 USC 809(e) and the UCMJ...etc.), and the intent WAS to include us in the current LEOSA. But, nay-sayers and detractors will always avoid this with smoke-and-mirror manuevering. The memo that has been circulated originating from DOD doesn't present policy, but merely an unofficial opinion; however, many duty stations have adopted this as an official decision, and are using this to satisfy their inaction on the issue and/or refusal to recognize the coverage. However, legal precedence is growing in favor of DOD officers, and in some cases, recognition and backing by their duty stations.
                Yeah, its been discussed on this forum. As far as my station, there isn't a chance in hell that they will interpret LEOSA in our favor. It will take an act of Congress to fix this, which isn't going to happen any time soon. We all know its B.S. and that apprehension and arrest are the same. I, like others aren't patient enough to wait for them to get their **** straight.

                Comment


                • #9
                  HR 324 is stuck in committee. If we as a group are serious about it then we all need to get off our collective butts. I was in DC the first of August and met with Congressman Filner along with a few others from AFGE and FOP. He provided us a lot of good information and took the time to answer all questions. His recommendation was to bug our respective Congressman/women while they are at their home offices and not in DC. They tend to listen more when you are one of their constituents. When we go to the Hill, they view us as special interest lobbyists.

                  Sen Akaka from Hawaii has introduced a bill to give Pentagon Police retirement and I am advocating to get him to amend it to include us. We all need to keep this going or else it will die. It is easy to sit back at watch but unless we get our act together it will die.
                  He who has never learned to obey
                  cannot be a good commander.
                  Aristotle

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Is there any "language" in the Defense Authorizaton for 2012 in relation to us? I briefly skimmed over it, but didn't see anything specific.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yes. Scroll down and read the FOP thread.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by 0083 View Post
                        HR 324 is stuck in committee. If we as a group are serious about it then we all need to get off our collective butts. I was in DC the first of August and met with Congressman Filner along with a few others from AFGE and FOP. He provided us a lot of good information and took the time to answer all questions. His recommendation was to bug our respective Congressman/women while they are at their home offices and not in DC. They tend to listen more when you are one of their constituents. When we go to the Hill, they view us as special interest lobbyists.

                        Sen Akaka from Hawaii has introduced a bill to give Pentagon Police retirement and I am advocating to get him to amend it to include us. We all need to keep this going or else it will die. It is easy to sit back at watch but unless we get our act together it will die.
                        Just to add, this bill has made it further this time than in previous years, the fight is not over don't give up get involved make a difference.
                        It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by I0347 View Post
                          Is there any "language" in the Defense Authorizaton for 2012 in relation to us? I briefly skimmed over it, but didn't see anything specific.
                          Yes, but it is rather broad, and the wording is not all that great but it is a start.
                          It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.

                          Comment

                          What's Going On

                          Collapse

                          There are currently 4010 users online. 191 members and 3819 guests.

                          Most users ever online was 19,482 at 11:44 AM on 09-29-2011.

                          Working...
                          X