Public Law 108-277

[retiredyardcop]

Can anyone tell me why the Michigan Department of Corrections doesn't allow for the pistol qualifying and ID card issuance per the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004? Michigan corrections officers seem to possess the qualifiers to be included in this class, but the MDOC doesn't even thank retirees for their service, much less issue any kind of identification cards to retirees. Anyone?

[Citicop]

Welcome to the site!

A couple of notes:

1.) We have a strict rule here about usernames. You cannot have a name that implies you are a Law Enforcement Officer unless you meet the requirements set forth here. If you do, follow the instructions to get "verified" as an LEO. If not, you are welcome to stay, but you will etither need to register a new name or PM a mod to have your name changed to something else.

2.) This area is for people to stop by and tell us a little about themselves. I'll move your question to a more appropriate area, but I would still encourage you to come back to the intro area and introduce yourself.

Thanks for understanding-

-Citicop.

[MikeG]

Can anyone tell me why the Michigan Department of Corrections doesn't allow for the pistol qualifying and ID card issuance per the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004? Michigan corrections officers seem to possess the qualifiers to be included in this class, but the MDOC doesn't even thank retirees for their service, much less issue any kind of identification cards to retirees. Anyone?

Google-fu brings me here. And this flowchart.

[retdetsgt]

I know this is a touchy subject, but in Oregon at least, corrections officers are not LEO's. We have different training and different jobs even though we deal with the same segment of society. A corrections officer here can be arrested for impersonating a police officer if he tries to say he is. For example, if a corrections officer in Oregon wants to carry concealed weapon off duty, he has to get a permit.

I certainly don't mean to put down corrections folks, I wouldn't do their job on a bet.

It does suck they don't recognize your service, I give you that.

[MikeG]

I know this is a touchy subject, but in Oregon at least, corrections officers are not LEO's. We have different training and different jobs even though we deal with the same segment of society. A corrections officer here can be arrested for impersonating a police officer if he tries to say he is. For example, if a corrections officer in Oregon wants to carry concealed weapon off duty, he has to get a permit.

I certainly don't mean to put down corrections folks, I wouldn't do their job on a bet.

It does suck they don't recognize your service, I give you that.

My reading of the law (and with that, and a quarter you can get coffee) is that it's broader than the state defintions. Basically anyone with statutory power of arrest is covered by LEOSA (and the other provisions like authorized to carry firearm, etc). In arizona I think that extends to armed corrections officers (they can serve warrants on prisoners/parolees), probation officers, etc. I don't think they are state law enforcement as their powers of arrest are strictly limited but I think LEOSA is intentionally broad. Those positions don't go through the LEO academies for peace officers. I even think the probation department is through the court system.

[retdetsgt]

True, in Oregon parole officers can serve warrants too, but they are far from being considered LEO's. In fact, only recently have they even been allowed to be armed on duty.

Corrections officers can serve warrants within the confines of their institution also, but they still don't fall within the definition of being a police officer. Otherwise, they'd be called that.

One distinction I can think of off the top of my head is that neither can issue a traffic citation without court assistance like any other citizen.

Other states could well be different, but Oregon instituted the corrections officer classification to take the place of police officers and regular deputies in jails.

[MikeG]

Arizona is similar I think, We have an Correctional Officers Training Academy. I think it's about half the time as the Police Officer basic course. They are both uder the auspices of the same standards board but correctional officers seem to have a lot looser requirements (probably less competitve as teh cream is most likely going to go to police academy). I don't think the county jails have correctional officer, but are staffed by full authority deuputy sheriffs. OUr county superior court probation department I believe the officers can choose to be armed (it's not mandatory but it is avaiable). They have no powers outside of probation warrants of the court. I am not sure if they are even allowed to serve bench warrants. Also, a lot of the cities have small jails they use as either holding facilities until they do a transport run to the county jail or as just a processing center for city misdemeanors. I do not know who staffs the city jails. I doubt it's full authority peace officers though if they can get away with it. I think it's most likely armed guards controlled through the police department but only allowed to carry firearms in uniform and on duty. I don't think they have any powers of arrest so LEOSA doesn't cover them.

[retdetsgt]

County jails are mixed here. Some S.O.'s use the term "corrections deputies", but the are corrections officers. Others use regular deputies. I think we had the last city jail in Oregon and we closed it in 1972 and just use the county now.

But regardless, the OP's problem is with Michigan's DOC.... I hope he had no expectations beyond being able to vent.

[MikeG]

County jails are mixed here. Some S.O.'s use the term "corrections deputies", but the are corrections officers. Others use regular deputies. I think we had the last city jail in Oregon and we closed it in 1972 and just use the county now.

But regardless, the OP's problem is with Michigan's DOC.... I hope he had no expectations beyond being able to vent.

From the links I gave him, it looks like Michigan has a central "retiree" setup for LEOSA. I read other stuff where law enforcement "advocates" were argung that government entities shouldn't provide anything for retiirees under LEOSA because the retiree would be liable for any action it was "for their own good" basically. They argued that Michigan didn't have a statewide uniform firearms qualification so therefore the agency would have been liable for training and certifying the retirees (something the LE "advocates" also warned about). It looks like that in the last year or so, they centralized it all so if you're retired, you can bypass your agency for everything except a letter that verifies they are retired with 15 years of service, and they had statutory arrest authority. Firearms testing, ID and everything else is handled by the Michigan Commission on LE standards. It looked pretty smooth and straightforward.

I looked some more at the questionaires and FAQs and it looks like MCOLES is more strict than LEOSA as well. They only want to deal with LEO retirees with authority to arrest for any offense. Interesting to note that the feds consider their DOC people to be covered under LEOSA (http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/FBOP-LEOSAMemo.pdf but specifically say their job may not be law enforcement officer in the civil service retirement system.

[MikeG]

County jails are mixed here. Some S.O.'s use the term "corrections deputies", but the are corrections officers. Others use regular deputies. I think we had the last city jail in Oregon and we closed it in 1972 and just use the county now.

But regardless, the OP's problem is with Michigan's DOC.... I hope he had no expectations beyond being able to vent.

More info...Michigan DOC m,anual states that the DoC officer has no powers of arrest beyond that of ordinary citizen. Fed Bureau of Prison s have power of arrest within their facility. Michigan guys apparently do not. They can make arrest as civilians. OP will have trouble arguing he had statutory arrest authority if his agencies policy manual says he doesn't.

[justanothercop]

Actually, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has arrest authority outside the prison while on duty. It is found under Title 18 sec 3050. Off duty we have none, but the limited authority under title 18 is what allows us to qualify under LEOSA.

[Samuel]

you're going to have to submit your horsepower if you want to keep that screenname...

[marinepilot]

Actually, the Federal Bureau of Prisons has arrest authority outside the prison while on duty. It is found under Title 18 sec 3050. Off duty we have none, but the limited authority under title 18 is what allows us to qualify under LEOSA.

you're going to have to submit your horsepower if you want to keep that screenname...

You're also going to have to stop practicing thread necrophilia. Thread closed, PM sent about user name. I will say tho, that you should have paid pretty close attention to the SECOND post in this thread in that it explains about how you will need to prove that you can keep that choice of user name.