Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A debate on HR 218

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • A debate on HR 218

    It's been discussed before (on here and in the "real" world) but I'd like to bring it back up again with a few points directly from state statutes. I'd like some well thought out responses to this question; "Do Corrections Officers in the state of Vermont fall under the provisions of HR 218?".

    From what I've read it appears that one could make a very good argument that we are indeed covered under it regardless of what "others" have said. The basis for my statement are these statues:

    From HR 218
    `(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;
    From VT Statutes, Title 28, Chapter 5, Section 301
    (2) Arrest of person on probation. Any correctional officer may arrest a probationer without a warrant if, in the judgment of the correctional officer, the probationer has violated a condition or conditions of his or her probation other than a condition that the probationer pay restitution; or may deputize any other law enforcement officer to arrest a probationer without a warrant by giving him or her a written statement setting forth that the probationer has, in the judgment of the correctional officer, violated a condition or conditions of his or her probation other than a condition that the probationer pay restitution. The written statement delivered with the person by the arresting officer to the supervising officer of the correctional facility to which the person is brought for detention shall be sufficient warrant for detaining him or her.
    Now according to what I have been reading on this it appears that one of the biggest deciding factors for HR 218 is powers of arrest, something that I have been told that CO's in VT lack. But according to this statue we do have powers of arrest even if they are limited to porbationers.

    The only thing that I am still a bit hesitant on is line 2 of HR 218 that I posted above, the one that says
    `(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
    . In general the vast majority of CO's are unarmed in the state, but we do have a few positions that are armed. The question to me is if that statement is in regards to a person or to a position. I.E. "You" as in me personally or "You" as in CO's in the state of Vermont.

    So your thoughts on this please. BTW I just love it when goverment agencies attempt to cover everything with the wording of their laws and still manage to miss an entire area of classification. Gotta love it.
    12
    Yes
    16.67%
    2
    No
    33.33%
    4
    Still need more information to decide
    50.00%
    6

  • #2
    The State of Vermont does not consider CO's as Law Enforcement Officers unless they have completed at least the Part-Time Officer School. There are provisions for this to occur by statute, but it is DOC policy not to do so.

    Comment


    • #3
      I had a similar question in Pennsylvania, here is what the president of the Union sent me as a reply:

      Pa. Corrections Officers are not Sworn Peace Officers. We do not have the statutory powers of arrest.



      This is a really “gray area” .The Uniform Firearms Act section 6106 provided that firearms may not be carried without a license.

      However subsection (b) lists 10 exceptions, 1 of which is: Constables, sheriffs, prison or jail wardens, or their deputies, policemen

      of this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions, or other law enforcement officers. Legal counsel for our former union opined that we

      fell under this exception, but it has never been challenged. I strongly suggest officers obtain a concealed carry permit from their county sheriff.



      I don’t believe HR 218 applies to us, since we do not have arrest powers.
      -------

      In PA have no powers of arrest whatsoever, but, we MUST qualify for firearms use in the academy.

      Comment


      • #4
        I envy those that it is even a possibility of being covered under HR 218.....

        Here it is clear cut, we do not have arrest powers and are not authorized to carry off duty. Some of us do carry but only because we have personally obtained a CHL from the State Police.
        the only true rehabilitation starts with a needle............

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by VtCo View Post
          It's been discussed before (on here and in the "real" world) but I'd like to bring it back up again with a few points directly from state statutes. I'd like some well thought out responses to this question; "Do Corrections Officers in the state of Vermont fall under the provisions of HR 218?".

          From what I've read it appears that one could make a very good argument that we are indeed covered under it regardless of what "others" have said. The basis for my statement are these statues:

          From HR 218

          From VT Statutes, Title 28, Chapter 5, Section 301

          Now according to what I have been reading on this it appears that one of the biggest deciding factors for HR 218 is powers of arrest, something that I have been told that CO's in VT lack. But according to this statue we do have powers of arrest even if they are limited to porbationers.

          The only thing that I am still a bit hesitant on is line 2 of HR 218 that I posted above, the one that says . In general the vast majority of CO's are unarmed in the state, but we do have a few positions that are armed. The question to me is if that statement is in regards to a person or to a position. I.E. "You" as in me personally or "You" as in CO's in the state of Vermont.

          So your thoughts on this please. BTW I just love it when goverment agencies attempt to cover everything with the wording of their laws and still manage to miss an entire area of classification. Gotta love it.
          Keep in mind, that if you want to carry off duty, you should be able to go by what your department says. Otherwise, they most likely won't vouch for you.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Vtfuzz View Post
            The State of Vermont does not consider CO's as Law Enforcement Officers unless they have completed at least the Part-Time Officer School. There are provisions for this to occur by statute, but it is DOC policy not to do so.
            As I understand the bill, it does not matter what the state considers you. This is a Federal Law which supercedes state law. The Federal law outlines what you must be in order to be considered a qualified law enforcement officer under HB-218.

            That said, I would advise anyone unsure about their coverage under this law to obtain an answer from their State or the Federal AG's office or at a bare minimum your Dept's legal dept, and not rest their chances on what someone convinced them of in an Internet forum.

            Not trying to be condescending to anyone, but knowing some of the staff working with the NCDOC I thought it might be a good idea to put that thought out there
            Be sure you're right, then go ahead
            Davy Crockett

            Never pick a fight with an old man.
            If he's too old to fight, he'll just kill you
            .


            PM me if you wanna swap patches.

            Comment


            • #7
              According to statute, only specially trained CO's (read P&P officers) can make any type of arrest. The CO has to be approved by the commissioner and attend special training. The statute wording is below.

              TITLE 28
              Public Institutions and Corrections
              CHAPTER 7. PAROLE
              Subchapter IV. Revocation of Parole
              § 551a. Law enforcement powers of correctional officers; training requirements

              (a) The commissioner of corrections shall establish training requirements necessary for a correctional officer to be authorized to exercise the power to arrest a person on probation under section 301 of this title, to arrest a person serving supervised community sentence under section 363 of this title, or to arrest a person on parole under section 551 of this title. The required training shall include but not be limited to training in search and seizure, criminal law, authority to arrest, use of force, reporting and record keeping, and liability for actions and conduct.

              (b) The commissioner may also authorize and designate any correctional officer as defined in section 3(10) of this title to become certified by the criminal justice training council as a part-time law enforcement officer, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 151 of Title 20. The commissioner and the director of the training academy shall develop curriculum subject to the approval of the training council. The commissioner by department policy may prescribe the use of those law enforcement powers consistent with the official duties and job descriptions of the correctional officer, and may direct that the correctional officer not carry any weapon while on duty. Any person hereby certified shall be sworn by the commissioner. (Added 1997, No. 152 (Adj. Sess.), § 6.)

              Comment

              MR300x250 Tablet

              Collapse

              What's Going On

              Collapse

              There are currently 6049 users online. 310 members and 5739 guests.

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

              Welcome Ad

              Collapse
              Working...
              X