Should off duty cops be subject to the same gun laws as the rest of us?

[Owen Sparks]

After what happened in Wisconsin there is sure to be talk of stoping off duty police from from going about armed. Any thoughts on this?

OS

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

Define the rest of us? Law abiding citizens? Felons? Anyone in general?

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

No, we shouldn't keep officers from carrying out of uniform.

And we shouldn't be stopping the general populace from going about armed either.

 

[Geno]

They're "off-duty" aren't they?! I have said since forever, every human being needs a break for both physical and emotional rest. To carry other than duty, all people should be held to the identical standards. That is a rather egalitarian view, is it not?!

 

[Reyn]

Are people in Wisconsin not allowed to carry? I dont think they should be unarmed because of this incidence any more than guns should be banned because of Columbine or the VT shooting.

 

[ilbob]

Should off duty cops be subject to the same gun laws as the rest of us?

why would this even be up for debate?

it is like asking "Should off duty cops be subject to the same tax laws as the rest of us"?

 

[ozwyn]

Off duty police should be subject to the same gun laws, and those laws should allow concealed carry in all 50 states.

the problem isn't that law enforcement has extra carry rights, it is that the carry rights of the masses has been infringed to give the illusiion of extra rights for LE. well, that's my twisted POV.

 

[LAR-15]

What is the point of this question?

Should cops hand in their guns once their shift is over?

 

[Ala Dan]

NO

In respect, full time sworn police officers are NEVER off duty; as they are
subject to call 24/7. And, perhaps even while not on the offical government
clock so to speak; they may witness a FELONY going down in their presence,
and most [if not all] would respond if innocent lives were at risk~!

The Wisconsin shootings were a random act, with the shooter acting out
cuz of girlfriend problems. A reasonable person, LEO or not is simply going
to put those kind's of things behind them and move on with their lives;
most seeking a new partner for a relationship. I think the percentage of
PO's acting out with rage would be more like .01 of 1%.

 

[Tin Gizel]

Exactly, if I can't do it, neither should an off duty cop. Truth is, there's a lot they can do off duty that I can't. The problem isn't the cop, it's the laws against us.

 

[Rumble]

Are people in Wisconsin not allowed to carry?

As far as I know, you cannot carry concealed in Wisconsin.

 

[Reyn]

As far as I know, you cannot carry concealed in Wisconsin

Open or none at all?

 

[the naked prophet]

Quote:

As far as I know, you cannot carry concealed in Wisconsin

Open or none at all?

I seem to recall that there is a law against both concealed and open carry, though when he vetoed the concealed carry permit law, the governor said "if you want to carry a pistol, carry it openly on your hip." I don't suppose the police would take it well if you said "the governor said it's okay."

As to the original question, nobody should have more rights than anybody else - occupation makes no difference. I think there should be a constitutional amendment to this effect, though writing it concisely would be very difficult. Nobody gets special treatment. If a cop wants to carry a gun off-duty (he/she'd be crazy not to - see the attempted assassination of the off-duty corrections officer) then that cop should be subject to the exact same restrictions as everyone else. My life is no less valuable than his, and I have no less moral compulsion to protect innocents.

 

[jerkface11]

The police should be subject to the same laws as the citizens on duty or not.

 

[KelTecian]

the term "Off Duty" doesnt mean they are no longer police officers. Most police officers are commissioned, They are police officers 24 hours a day and must act and respond that way. They are not considered "civilians" and therefore must abide by the laws and policies set forth by the fed, sate, and local governments regarding police men and women.

 

[bsf]

I think the Wisconsin crazy cop incident has absolutely no bearing on whether “cops be subject to the same gun laws as the rest of us”. I think good people should be allowed effective defense of themselves and those they deem worthy of protection, regardless of their occupation. The only valid reason I see for restricting LE carry off-duty is a political maneuver to tie the recognition of their rights to those of non-LE.

 

[ronwill]

Being an "off-duty" police officer is very similar to being "off-duty" military. Although your not working you are subject to recalls. Remember that the nationwide law enforcement carry law is only for certified officers. Not all are certified in the required fashion.

 

[benEzra]

Had this guy not been "allowed" to carry off duty (assuming someone who'd break a law against mass murder would be stopped by a law making it "more illegal" to do so), what's to stop him from doing the same thing while on duty instead?

Added on edit--he wasn't carrying at the time. He left the apartment to get guns from his car (patrol car?), then came back and shot everyone. It was premeditated.

 

[Rumble]

Okay, there is no concealed carry in WI (per www.handgunlaws.us), and open carry is legal, but not in a vehicle (that's per www.opencarry.org).

As for the point of the thread - I believe cops and non-cops should have the same firearm carry rights, but I don't want to impose restrictions to make a point. Instead, what should happen is non-LEO should have, as a matter of course, the same ability to carry firearms wherever and whenever that LEOs have.

 

[cpileri]

hmmm

I know that "off-duty" Military Officers are subject to their local laws regarding CCW's.

Maybe the question should be rephrased to:

Should "off-duty" officers be afforded exemptions from local restrictions on carrying firearms that would otherwise apply to the citizenry?

C-

 

[TexasRifleman]

I guess the question is, do their arrest powers cease when they are off duty?

If so then yes I would want them subject to the same weapon restrictions as the "rest of us".

If you intend for a peace officers arrest powers to continue when off duty, and the states code REQUIRES action of said peace officer if they witness a crime etc (which many do) then you can hardly disarm him when off duty since there really is no such thing as "off duty".

This a pointless backwards argument. The argument should be that we all can carry 24/7 not that we should restrict those that already can. How does that help our cause?

 

[ilbob]

since there really is no such thing as "off duty".

do they get paid for 24 hours of work every day, 7 days a week?

what about when they are in vacation in another state?

 

[Yosemite**Sam]

There are thousands of cops who carry off duty every day. Off duty cops throughout the nation come to the aid of private citizens every day. Many must use their firearms to aid those private citizens. Look back at the mall shooting in Minnesota.

If you were to disarm all cops off duty throughout you would see two things happen. First a large number would continue to carry anyways and second those who didn't carry would refuse to get involved in off duty incidents.

I believe like the state of Texas everyone should have the right to carry.

 

[dasmi]

Should off duty cops be subject to the same gun laws as the rest of us?

Yes, 100% yes. If we can't carry, then they shouldn't be able to either.

 

[TexasRifleman]

do they get paid for 24 hours of work every day, 7 days a week?

Certainly not but many states have a "duty to act" provision in LEOs certification. You can't disarm someone that you have REQUIRED to act 24/7 that's my point. If you want to disarm them when off duty you have to remove their "duty to act" and then you have a whole other can of issues to deal with .

It's not a simple yes/no question.