imported post
qball54208 wrote:
J.Gleason wrote:
:shock: They have the DOC listed as law enforcement. That can't be right. The Police Officers in Wisconsin don't consider Corrections Officers to be in the same league as they are so therefore the Police couldn't possibly be wrong and this must be a misprint.
I mean why would you even attempt to think that any individual who deals with the worst scum of society on a daily basis would be in the same league as a police officer?
Why would you think that an individual who places more scum bags in handcuffs in one month then most police officers do in their whole career would be in the same league as a police officer.
Why would you think that an individual who completes the same and even more frequent training as any LEO in Wisconsin would be in the same league as a police officer.
Why would you think that an individual who has more firearms training then the average LEO in Wisconsin would be in the same league as a police officer.
Why would you think that an individual who has all granted powers of a peace officer would be in the same league as a police officer.
I mean after all Corrections Officers don't ride around in squad cars.
Isn't it amazing just how far the Turf War mentality goes?
Based upon my experience, LEO & CO's have similar training, further more, they both protect us! Both place their lives on the line EVERYDAY, day in and day out!
I hope the day never comes when you are in a position desperately relying on LEO to render aid to you or a loved one!
I for one have a tremendous respect for the Men and Women that selflessly put their lives on the line for you and me, something I am willing to do as well.
I am a proud Soldier in the United States Army, (former 31B) Men and Women just like me do it without expectation, gratuity or thanks. For me to read some of these posts lambasting those that do selflessly sickens me to no end. I will put my life on the line to defend what you and others like you so thoughtlessly babble on and on about!
Let this fact speak for it self, those that put on a uniform (Armed Service Members) are in a class of their own, approximately 1% of the US population does it.
I dare ask, what is it that you do to earn a paycheck?
What ever it is, I hope you're perfect at it!
That's my 2 cents worth, enough said!
Since you dare ask. I will tell you.
I am also a veteran. Former U.S. Army Ranger. What I seen and accomplished while I was in is irrelevent in this issue and I will pass on that part of the discussion and get right to the LEO point.
I currently work as a Sergeant for the DOC. At this time I work at KMCI. I formerly worked at GBCI as a Sergeant as well.
GBCI is referred to as Gladiator School, because of the daily fights between gang members that many times are just a setup to get an officer into the right position where they can be attacked, forcing the officer to physically defend themself on a regular basis.
But here is the issue. In 2004 G.W. signed into law the Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act. This law allows LEO to CCW virtually anywhere in the U.S. The definition of a "Law Enforcement Officer" was given by Congressman Robert Scott during the Congressional hearings on HR 218 (The Law Enforcement Officer's Safety Act). Let me quote that for you,
"Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to join you
in convening the hearing on H.R. 218, the Law Enforcement Officers
Safety Act of 2003. The bill authorizes ‘‘qualified’’ active and
retired Federal and State law enforcement officials to carry concealed
weapons interstate without regard to State and local laws
prohibiting or regulating such carriage.
A law enforcement officer includes corrections, probation, parole,
and judicial officers, as well as police, sheriff, and other law enforcement
officers who have had or who have statutory power over
arrest and who were or are engaged through employment by a governmental
entity in the prevention, detection, investigation, supervision,
prosecution, or incarceration of law violators."
Now in order to be a Qualified LEO one must meet the requirements of the law which are,
"‘‘(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;
H. R. 218—2
‘‘(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."
Seems simple enough huh?
Yeah Right. Try and find a Cop who thinks that a Corrections Officer meets the requirements.
What you get from a cop is:
Corrections Officers do not have statutory powers of arrest!
Wrong! As confirmed by two attorney Generals Opinions and I will Quote both:
"WILBUR J. SCHMIDT, Director,
State Department of Public Welfare.
You request an opinion as to the extent of the department's regulatory powers over institutions operated by the department and you also inquire as to the extent of police powers of law enforcement officers and of institutional officers and employees of the department within such institutions and upon adjacent roads and grounds.
You are therefore advised that the department has the power to enact reasonable police regulations for the government of institutions and adjacent open areas operated by It.
Institutional officers and employees, and local law enforcement officers have jurisdiction to enforce the law and make arrests for its violation within Such areas.The primary duty of active, preventive surveillance and maintenance of peace and order rests with the department and its institutional officers and employees. Local law enforcement officers have a duty to render aid for law enforcement purposes within
their jurisdiction, when called upon by the institutional officers and employees."
"ELMER O. CADY, Administrator
Division of Corrections
Department of Health and Social Services
You have requested an opinion on the authority of non-deputized
correctional system staff members to pursue escapees. Actually, you
have asked six related questions, the answers to which evolve from the
general duties of the warden and the idea of deputization.
It is my opinion that correctional staff, acting under direction of the warden, are peace officers within the institution and on institutional grounds by virtue of both secs. 53.07 and 46.05(2), Stats.
When correctional staff are commanded by the warden or his representative
to enforce his duty to prevent escape and recapture escapees, they have peace officer status while pursuing such escapees. Correctional staff also enjoy the immunities and rights of a deputy under the doctrine of posse comitatus, or sees. 53.07 and 968.07(2), Stats., so long as the warden retains his current statutory status as a peace officer.
The warden and correctional staff are state employes and their jurisdiction is statewide when carrying out their mandate to capture escaped inmates. They may pursue inmates throughout the state and may arrest, after hot pursuit and otherwise, in any county of the state.
This does not in any way affect or limit local peace officers' responsibility to pursue and arrest escaped inmates.
The answers to your specific questions are premised on the conclusion that the warden is a peace officer for the purposes described above and those acting at his command enjoy the immunities and rights of a deputized peace officer. Your detailed questions and my answers follow:
1. What is the authority of non-deputized staff members to pursue escapees off-grounds of correctional institutions?
Section 53.07, Stats. The warden or superintendent may adopt proper means to capture escaped inmates. Based upon the above discussion, it is immaterial whether the warden or superintendent has been deputized by the sheriff or are acting with the inherent powers of their position.
2. [M] ay [such staff] carry concealed weapons or unconcealed weapons?
Since they carry the same status as deputized peace officers, they may act in the same manner as a peace officer. They may carry unconcealed weapons and are not prohibited by law from carrying concealed weapons. For example, sec. 941.23(1), Stats., prohibits any person, except a peace officer, from going armed with a concealed weapon."
Not to mention that a Corrections Officer Places handcuffs on more individuals in one month then most cops do in their whole career.
Now you would think that this clarifies any questions right?
Wrong!
What you then get from a cop is:
Your not authorized to carry a firearm.
Wrong! Corrections Officers are authorized to carry firearms and in fact annual qualifications is a requirement for employment. One must meet all agency standards to qualify. In fact Corrections officers may very well train with firearms more then some Police Departments do.
See my discussion was with my local Police Chief who does not believe that Corrections officers are included in HR 218 even though he has been shown all of the information he needs to see that proves that Corrections Officers are included.
After seeing this information he conatcted my employment agency and tried to cause me an issue at work by telling my administration that I was CCW and I was going to get arrested. How's that for working together?
See, even though my Department does not authorize any officer to carry while off duty, the federal law is very specific and Congress allowed the Fraternal Order of Police to publish a Frequently asked Questions page on the issues, I quote:
"My agency has a policy that does not allow me to carry my firearm while I am
off-duty. Does this mean that this legislation will not benefit me?
If you are a qualified active law enforcement officer, you are legally able to carry a firearm under the provisions of H.R. 218. There may be agencies which enforce or adopt policies, rules, regulations, or employment conditions which discourage or punish officers which choose to carry while off-duty, but such actions do not mean that the officer cannot carry under the provisions of the bill."
I guess my point is, Whether they are wearing a uniform or not doesn't stop them from acting out against any of us when they are on their power trip and want to show just how much of an @#$% they can be.
I am not bashing anyone. I am simply telling the truth. There is a difference.
The state has purposely kept this information from Corrections Officers only on the agenda of the anti gun administration that we have so painfully enjoyed for the last 8 years.
Heres the real kicker. HR 218 Grants me the "Right" to CCW in addition to my 2nd Amendment Right as per the testimony of Congressional members:
"Mr. SCOTT. Now, would this bill require local jurisdictions to
allow off-duty police officers to carry firearms while they are off
duty, even within their jurisdiction?
Mr. CANTERBURY. I believe it would grant the right. I don’t believe
it would mandate.
Mr. SCOTT. Grant the right. Would the police officer have the
right to carry a firearm, notwithstanding the local jurisdiction’s decision
otherwise, to carry a firearm within the jurisdiction?
Mr. CANTERBURY. Yes, I believe it would.
Mr. SCOTT. Okay."
So you see, the fact is, it isn't that the Police don't know the laws because they have been educated in this particular situation, they just chose to ignore the law and enforce their own versions and cause law abiding citizens as much trouble as possible because they can not stand the fact that any one else can do the same thing they can do. Turf War Mentality. Their definition of a cop is someone who rides in a squad car, nothing more. Corrections Officwers are harassed throughout the state over HR 218. Will anyone stand up for them?
So why bring this up? Well because if there are some 12,000 plus corrections officers out there that are CCW over and above the number of active and retired LEO, and nothing even close to the OK Corral has occured then why shouldn't our state government pass a law mirroring Arizonas? Why do we continuously have to keep waiting for more and more legislation? It is nothing more than stalling for the anti's.
