NFL doesn't want off duty cops carrying

[mojo84]

Next it will be no guns for uniformed cops either.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ss ... ps_fr.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[philip964]

Hmmmm. They want less legal guns.

[Ameer]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

[mojo84]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

Right, but they are cops.

[jmra]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

Right, but they are cops.

An off duty cop shouldn't have any more rights than any other person licensed/authorized to carry a concealed firearm.

[baldeagle]

So maybe more cops that are asleep will wake up. Anything that pries the blinders off is good.

[rotor]

I thought off duty cops had to carry. I guess I am wrong.

[jmra]

I thought off duty cops had to carry. I guess I am wrong.

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

[JSThane]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

Right, but they are cops.

An off duty cop shouldn't have any more rights than any other person licensed/authorized to carry a concealed firearm.

I'll go one further. We shouldn't have any more rights than anyone, license or not. One of the reasons I have a CHL, even though I "don't need it."

And no, we aren't required to carry off-duty. It is an option we can exercise, but it isn't required.

[EEllis]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

Right, but they are cops.

An off duty cop shouldn't have any more rights than any other person licensed/authorized to carry a concealed firearm.

That is like saying an on duty cop shouldn't have anymore rights tho I think rights are the wrong verbiage. Officers don't have rights to their job they have duties that they are required to fulfill even when not working. If everyone has equal rights and duties then why have cops at all?

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

Hate to break it to you but some dept do require their officers to carry off duty. The phrasing usually, but not always, gives some out like "When "off duty", each member will carry or have in his/her immediate possession, his/her badge, department sidearm, or a pistol or revolver, as authorized by the Department, and the identification card. This rule shall not apply when members are engaged in sports and activities of such a nature as to make it impractical or when imbibing alcoholic beverages."

em mine.

Some northern depts don't encourage, or even allow, off duty carry and train officers to be witnesses and if they do get involved not to use force but that is rare. Also consider in a rural area the only backup for an office in trouble for hours might well be off duty cops and that most Texas officers consider their duty requires them to able to act as a police officer at all times.

[jmra]

They're off duty so it's basically the same logic as prohibiting CHL from carrying at professional sporting events.

Right, but they are cops.

An off duty cop shouldn't have any more rights than any other person licensed/authorized to carry a concealed firearm.

That is like saying an on duty cop shouldn't have anymore rights tho I think rights are the wrong verbiage. Officers don't have rights to their job they have duties that they are required to fulfill even when not working. If everyone has equal rights and duties then why have cops at all?

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

Hate to break it to you but some dept do require their officers to carry off duty. The phrasing usually, but not always, gives some out like "When "off duty", each member will carry or have in his/her immediate possession, his/her badge, department sidearm, or a pistol or revolver, as authorized by the Department, and the identification card. This rule shall not apply when members are engaged in sports and activities of such a nature as to make it impractical or when imbibing alcoholic beverages."

em mine.

Some northern depts don't encourage, or even allow, off duty carry and train officers to be witnesses and if they do get involved not to use force but that is rare. Also consider in a rural area the only backup for an office in trouble for hours might well be off duty cops and that most Texas officers consider their duty requires them to able to act as a police officer at all times.

Sorry, don't buy the argument at all. My God given right to protect myself and my family trumps their "duty" everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

[jmra]

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

Hate to break it to you but some dept do require their officers to carry off duty. The phrasing usually, but not always, gives some out like "When "off duty", each member will carry or have in his/her immediate possession, his/her badge, department sidearm, or a pistol or revolver, as authorized by the Department, and the identification card. This rule shall not apply when members are engaged in sports and activities of such a nature as to make it impractical or when imbibing alcoholic beverages

Not sure why you "Hate to break to (me)" when you have actually proven my point. Unless you simply want to argue semantics, the policy you quoted is what I was saying. Not to mention the fact that the quoted policy probably hasn't been enforced in most departments in over twenty years.
I'll never forget the look on a local detectives face when I explained to him that it was legal for a CHL to carry in Church and that most of the non-LEOs having coffee with him before Church were armed. He simply couldn't understand why anyone would feel the need to carry in Church. He then polled the LEOs sitting at the table and 3 of the 4 were unarmed. I'll have to ask about their "policy" but I'm sure it's been long ignored.
Not to mention the fact that almost all the younger officers I know, when off duty are either engaged in one of the activities you mentioned or they are home asleep. I can most definitely assure you that if these officers are at any professional sporting event, they are consuming alcohol and are unarmed.
Simply put, if an officer doesn't want to carry off duty there is plenty of room in the policy stated above (even with departments that might enforce it) for the officer to go unarmed pretty much anytime he wants. So, no - in practical everyday application, they are not "required" to carry off duty.

[E.Marquez]

I thought off duty cops had to carry. I guess I am wrong.

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

Depends on the department.... and the policy in place at the time.
I know of at least two local departments that have a policy in place that requires them to carry off duty under most circumstances, and two other department that encourage it, but not require...

[EEllis]

Sorry, don't buy the argument at all. My God given right to protect myself and my family trumps their "duty" everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.

What? That really isn't an argument for anything but "I wanna carry!" and has nothing to do with the FACT that officers for depts all over the country are required to carry 24/7

[EEllis]

Ever seen an inebriated off duty cop? They are not required to carry off duty.

Hate to break it to you but some dept do require their officers to carry off duty. The phrasing usually, but not always, gives some out like "When "off duty", each member will carry or have in his/her immediate possession, his/her badge, department sidearm, or a pistol or revolver, as authorized by the Department, and the identification card. This rule shall not apply when members are engaged in sports and activities of such a nature as to make it impractical or when imbibing alcoholic beverages

Not sure why you "Hate to break to (me)" when you have actually proven my point. Unless you simply want to argue semantics, the policy you quoted is what I was saying. Not to mention the fact that the quoted policy probably hasn't been enforced in most departments in over twenty years.
I'll never forget the look on a local detectives face when I explained to him that it was legal for a CHL to carry in Church and that most of the non-LEOs having coffee with him before Church were armed. He simply couldn't understand why anyone would feel the need to carry in Church. He then polled the LEOs sitting at the table and 3 of the 4 were unarmed. I'll have to ask about their "policy" but I'm sure it's been long ignored.
Not to mention the fact that almost all the younger officers I know, when off duty are either engaged in one of the activities you mentioned or they are home asleep. I can most definitely assure you that if these officers are at any professional sporting event, they are consuming alcohol and are unarmed.
Simply put, if an officer doesn't want to carry off duty there is plenty of room in the policy stated above (even with departments that might enforce it) for the officer to go unarmed pretty much anytime he wants. So, no - in practical everyday application, they are not "required" to carry off duty.

I don't know why it gets you so worked up but you are incorrect. There are dept where if you are found without your gun you get days off. Some depts say on you, some say available but if you bump into your LT and don't have a gun then yes you will get days off. Some depts expect and require cops to be armed when drinking. That the ones you know don't belong to such depts really doesn't mean that much.