LEOSA case in New York

[GSG]

LEOSA case in New York ***Interesting update, gun bought in Mass.***

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080529/NEWS/80529039

Judge tosses gun-possession charge against Coast Guard officer

By Oliver Mackson
May 29th 2008

GOSHEN — A judge on Thursday threw out a felony gun-possession charge against a Coast Guard member from Newburgh, ruling that he’s covered by a federal law that allows cops to carry their weapons in any state.
Newburgh city police arrested Petty Officer Benjamin Booth last year, after finding a loaded semiautomatic handgun in his car. In a five-page decision that was made public late this afternoon, Orange County Court Judge Robert Freehill ruled that Booth is covered by the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004. He carries a weapon while on duty, he’s authorized to make arrests and “generally take part in law enforcement duties as part of his duties as a boarding officer with the Coast Guard,” the judge wrote.
And while Booth didn’t identify himself as a Coast Guard officer when he was arrested, he was carrying two Coast Guard IDs that police found in his clothing after he was stopped.
“This is a very good day for Mr. Booth,” said Bill Wolfe, one of the lawyers who defended him. “Now he can get back to living his life and hopefully, resume his duties with the Coast Guard and continue to keep New York Harbor and America safe.”
Orange County prosecutors hadn’t seen the decision last night and couldn’t say if they’d appeal.
Booth is still contesting a federal firearms charge that’s pending in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn.

 

[Davidk]

The case was open and shut. Fed officer with police powers is covered under HR218. Shame on the NY police agency and AG's office. It's a shame, but no one will get fired.

 

[pdm]

What the hell is wrong with New York?

 

[Admin]

NY is doing their best 1940's Germany impersonation.

 

[Garys]

What the hell is wrong with New York?

Michael Bloomburg, Hillary Clinton, "Up" Chuck Schumer, for a starter. Add fine, impartial jurists such as Judge Jack B. Weinstein. Oh, I forgot this name Andrew M Cuomo, Attorney General. Gun grabbers all and all influence how the laws are enforced.

Shame on all of them.

Gary

 

[pdm]

Michael Bloomburg, Hillary Clinton, "Up" Chuck Schumer, for a starter. Add fine, impartial jurists such as Judge Jack B. Weinstein. Oh, I forgot this name Andrew M Cuomo, Attorney General. Gun grabbers all and all influence how the laws are enforced.

Shame on all of them.

Gary

Yeah, but those clowns couldn't exist without the approval of the electorate. I know MA is bad, but we're not NY bad. Jeez.

 

[Garys]

Yeah, but those clowns couldn't exist without the approval of the electorate. I know MA is bad, but we're not NY bad. Jeez.

What can I say? The normal people upstate are out voted by the left wing nut jobs in NYC and Long Island.

Gary

 

[Admin]

What can I say? The normal people upstate are out voted by the left wing nut jobs in NYC and Long Island.

Gary

Just like it is in most states. It sucks. We think it's bad now wait until Barrack gives amnesty to illegals. We will be socialist from that day forward and the democracy will be dead.

 

[Garys]

Just like it is in most states. It sucks. We think it's bad now wait until Barrack gives amnesty to illegals. We will be socialist from that day forward and the democracy will be dead.

Just a couple of points. I don't think Barrack will win in November. His negatives are starting to rise markedly and he doesn't even have the nomination yet. The Democrats, assuming they nominate him, will have the worst case of buyer's regret since, uh, 2004.

We're not supposed to be a democracy. Which is why the Founders instituted the electoral college. A representative republic works much better in balancing urban vs. rural interests. God help us if the Democrats ever get their wish to have the Presidential race determined by a national popular vote. THAT will be the death of our country. Each state is supposed to be treated as a sovereign entity, with it's own laws of governance. Unlike other countries the political sub divisions of the national entity have power to pass their own laws and each has a constitution. It's the strength of our form of government and the Democrats and liberals hate it. Which is why they are so big on activist judges.

Gary

 

[clinotus]

Stay the hell out of New York.

Your votes and voices on the internet dont do crap, start hitting the state with your dollars.

 

[drgrant]

This whole thing goes to illustrate what I've known all along- that states that have less dumb gun/weapon laws are friendlier to gun carrying LEOs and non-LEOs alike. I doubt LEOSA has any problems sticking in places like TX, NH, etc. Granted not every LEO in NJ or NY is going to be a pain in the ass, but frankly those two states are even worse than MA is overall in that regard.

-Mike

 

[bobsher]

I live in upstate NY and I didn't vote for any of those folks. It's the downstate people that elect them.

Bob

 

[pdm]

Just like it is in most states. It sucks. We think it's bad now wait until Barrack gives amnesty to illegals. We will be socialist from that day forward and the democracy will be dead.

Frankly, I think it died when Wilson became President. He set the precedent that FDR used to rapidly expand federal power and addict everyone to federal money. Once they started buying compliance from the states with our money, it became a race to the bottom. Just my opinion, though.

 

[jdubois]

We will be socialist from that day forward and the democracy will be dead.

Socialism and democracy aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, Karl Marx himself said, "democracy is the road to socialism."

We're not supposed to be a democracy. Which is why the Founders instituted the electoral college. A representative republic works much better in balancing urban vs. rural interests.

A representative republic where the people vote for the representatives IS a democracy. The distinction you are making is between a pure democracy and a representative democracy.

 

[GSG]

Stay the hell out of New York.

Your votes and voices on the internet dont do crap, start hitting the state with your dollars.

I agree like heck with this one. I speak with my wallet as much as I can, that's what most people seem to listen to nowadays.

 

[GSG]

From http://markknapp.multiply.com/journal/item/117

Federal Anti-Terrorism Law Exempts Officer from Weapons Charge

Benjamin BoothPhoto provided by Steven C. Mann
By Oliver Mackson
Times Herald-Record
June 07, 2008

GOSHEN — Prosecutors won't appeal an Orange County Court judge's ruling that dismissed a weapon-possession charge against an off-duty Coast Guard member from Newburgh.

The decision means that Judge Robert Freehill's ruling will stand as one of the first tests of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004, which exempted certain police officers and retired officers from local laws regulating concealed weapons.

Freehill ruled last week that Petty Officer Benjamin Booth was a qualified law enforcement officer under the federal law, because the scope of his duties includes making arrests as a boarding officer.

Prosecutors argued that Booth, who was charged with second-degree criminal possession of a weapon last year, was carrying a weapon in his car without a permit, and wasn't allowed by the Coast Guard to carry a gun while he was off-duty.

Mark Schuh, a Middletown police lieutenant and a practicing lawyer who teaches law at mid-Hudson police academies and at in-service training in Middletown, said he'll incorporate the decision into future classes.

"For a law that is four years old, it has remarkably little authority interpreting it," Schuh said. "So any case interpreting LEOSA is a step toward clarification."

Booth isn't out of the woods yet. Freehill ruled that carrying an unlicensed handgun off-duty is likely a violation of Coast Guard regulations, even though it's not a violation of the law. Booth is also facing a federal charge of receiving the handgun in question from a Massachusetts gun dealer in 2005 without having the necessary license to collect, deal or import firearms. He's free on $20,000 bond while he fights that case.

On Friday, Senior Orange County Assistant District Attorney David R. Huey said that "in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in light of the charge that's pending in federal court," the district attorney's office decided against an appeal of Freehill's order.

The order was posted on the Internet this week by the New York Law Reporting Bureau, which doesn't usually publish the full text of decisions from the county courts outside New York City. The bureau says it makes exceptions for cases that are seen as having precedential value or public importance.

Congress passed LEOSA as a way of beefing up anti-terrorism resources in the wake of the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Any theories on how the heck this guy bought a handgun in Mass.? This article is somewhat old, so I'm still digging aroud online for more info on his federal case.

 

[GSG]

I found his picture too, but nothing else so far on his federal court case.

 

[ArmySarge]

And while Booth didn’t identify him...ut, it might have helped if he just spoke up.

 

[pdm]

Any theories on how the heck this guy bought a handgun in Mass.? This article is somewhat old, so I'm still digging aroud online for more info on his federal case.

Who was that MA dealer that got busted for selling in MA without a license? Or was that selling to people who didn't have licenses? Might have been that if the timing works.

 

[CHAM12]

I worked with ben in NY. Yes we are covered under LEOSA as federal law enforcment officers. He is still in and got cleared of all charges ya dumb for not ID him self but hide site 20-20. We fall under all of the requirments of the law so. I hold a ma LTC but carry to other states as well being covered and the word is getting out that QUALIFIED Coast Guard Bording officers and QUALIFIED petty officers are covered. As for the person that sold the gun i do not know anything about that. There was an up stur about it in the CG at the HQ level but FED law covers it they say you carry off duty at your own risk but we can do it and we do.

 

[cekim]

I worked with ben in NY. Yes we are covered under LEOSA as federal law enforcment officers. He is still in and got cleared of all charges ya dumb for not ID him self but hide site 20-20.

Am I alone in wondering if perhaps he didn't know he would be covered under LEOSA (or more to the point, did not believe he was)?

I know its fun to line up with torches and pitchforks, but this one has a whiff of the PSGWSP.

But then, our laws are a stupid game, so I guess we all play that.

Free states should fight NY, MA, CA with embargos and blockades...

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I worked with ben in NY. Yes we are covered under LEOSA as federal law enforcment officers. He is still in and got cleared of all charges ya dumb for not ID him self but hide site 20-20. We fall under all of the requirments of the law so. I hold a ma LTC but carry to other states as well being covered and the word is getting out that QUALIFIED Coast Guard Bording officers and QUALIFIED petty officers are covered. As for the person that sold the gun i do not know anything about that. There was an up stur about it in the CG at the HQ level but FED law covers it they say you carry off duty at your own risk but we can do it and we do.

Did the CG issue a policy on this? Check out post #6 here:
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...ossession-of-alcohol-under-21?highlight=leosa

I am not opening that can of worms. The Coast Guard has not come out with any policy regarding LEOSA. Until they do I would rather do it without them. I would be OK by the state probably. I just don't need any hiccups in my career.

 

[Coastie2010]

The CG never issued a policy, most likely because they are not able to issue the policy they want. The consensus seems to be that HQ would like to forbid it, but the letter of the law is quite clear that we are permitted to, and the whole reason for the law was to circumvent the states and departments that forbade off-duty carry. If a policy was issued saying that we can follow the law and carry, then people with no LE training but who are still covered by the law would start carrying (under the law, all E-4 and above are allowed to), which scares the crap out of chiefs and captains who joined when LE was a very small job for us. By not issuing a policy, they do not openly encourage it, but remain in compliance with the law by not forbidding it.


That's my theory, anyways.

 

[wolf223]

I found his picture too, but nothing else so far on his federal court case.

DWB

 

[CHAM12]

Thats what i was speaking of the whole QUALIFIED thing if you read the LEOSA there are things the need to be followed Quals letters Carry letters and so on and so forth. True HQ has not said yes or no nor do i plan on asking and yes not opening that can of worms either so yes obay the standart SHEEP laws. As we here it is easier to ask for forgivness than permission.

The CG never issued a policy, most likely because they are not able to issue the policy they want. The consensus seems to be that HQ would like to forbid it, but the letter of the law is quite clear that we are permitted to, and the whole reason for the law was to circumvent the states and departments that forbade off-duty carry. If a policy was issued saying that we can follow the law and carry, then people with no LE training but who are still covered by the law would start carrying (under the law, all E-4 and above are allowed to), which scares the crap out of chiefs and captains who joined when LE was a very small job for us. By not issuing a policy, they do not openly encourage it, but remain in compliance with the law by not forbidding it.


That's my theory, anyways.

 

[CHAM12]

We knew about it but it's cover we did not.

Am I alone in wondering if perhaps he didn't know he would be covered under LEOSA (or more to the point, did not believe he was)?

I know its fun to line up with torches and pitchforks, but this one has a whiff of the PSGWSP.

But then, our laws are a stupid game, so I guess we all play that.

Free states should fight NY, MA, CA with embargos and blockades...

 

[CHAM12]

What does this mean

DWB

 

[wolf223]

Am I alone in wondering if perhaps he didn't know he would be covered under LEOSA (or more to the point, did not believe he was)?

I know its fun to line up with torches and pitchforks, but this one has a whiff of the PSGWSP.

But then, our laws are a stupid game, so I guess we all play that.

Free states should fight NY, MA, CA with embargos and blockades...

We knew about it but it's cover we did not.

What does this mean

driving while black - but i was somewhat joking,

as cekim already put it... there is trace of "play stupid games, win stupid prices with this one"

i.e. IF he's covered by LEOSA, why would he omit the fact that he is USCG? also, not sure how LEOSA reads towards USCG vs. Title 10 U.S.C, but it's usually "in performance of official duties" ...???? right? -but again, with the USCG falling under DHS (post-9-11) i'm not sure.

either way, it reeks of stupidity. were they "issued" weapons? how does LEOSA apply to the USCG vs issued vs personally owned weapons?

 

[bostonasphalt2]

Mfennell, next to the "m" key is the comma button and then next to THAT is the period button. Don't be afraid of them.

 

[tools8288]

.