Wearing your firearm off duty

[knoxstar18]

This question is for the officers. Does a rookie officer have to wait until their probation is up before they are allowed to carry their firearm off duty or while in civilian clothes? If not,how does that rule work? I am curious b/c I see some officers wearing their gun more so then others when they are not in uniform. And with that, are you allowed to wear it on days your not working?, say...when you take your girlfriend out to dinner perhaps or your days off :smile:Just a little food for thought.

[not5150]

I believe it's up to the officer whether they want to carry off-duty. There are some other departments around the nation that require officers to carry off-duty. Some departments even require you to help at accidents.

[Mac]

Any sworn law enforcement officer (probationary or not) can carry a concealed firearm off-duty at any time. Whether they do, or how often, is a personal choice.

[PeckerHead]

Any sworn law enforcement officer (probationary or not) can carry a concealed firearm off-duty at any time. Whether they do, or how often, is a personal choice.

To add to Mac's response. It's really nobodys business and really should not be asked on an open forum:mad: How bout next time you just ask an officer friend of yours what their opinion is.

[knoxstar18]

To add to Mac's response. It's really nobodys business and really should not be asked on an open forum:mad: How bout next time you just ask an officer friend of yours what their opinion is.

*scratches head* gee Pecker I wish I had an officer friend to ask but since I don't I figured hey why not just ask one of the officers on the CHP forum that I suscribed to, sorry if it was too sensitve of a subject. I also figured it wasn't a matter of opinion but a matter of rules and regulations, forgive me for even asking.

[Your Mentor]

To add to Mac's response. It's really nobodys business and really should not be asked on an open forum:mad: How bout next time you just ask an officer friend of yours what their opinion is.

*scratches head* gee Pecker I wish I had an officer friend to ask but since I don't I figured hey why not just ask one of the officers on the CHP forum that I suscribed to, sorry if it was too sensitve of a subject. I also figured it wasn't a matter of opinion but a matter of rules and regulations, forgive me for even asking.

I don't think PH was offended Knoxstar18. There are certain issues that most uniformed members are immediately retiscent to discuss; especially involving firearms. The answer given to you by Mac is straight out of the Penal Code which is clearly public domain information or he wouldn't have posted it. But you implied with your opening post that you have observed people you know are officers carrying concealed weapons. I think that's where PH was trying to point you. Regardless, this isn't something we care to discuss with the general public because a concealed firearm that someone knows about is NOT a concealed firearm. LEO's have been targeted off duty because perps knew they had a firearm on them. So please don't take offense. Some young hopefuls find the idea of carrying a firearm while off duty novel and they look forward to it from day one while in the Academy. The reality is, it's a huge responsibility and major pain in the butt. That's why it's neither encouraged or discouraged by our agency. The choice is up to each uniformed member.

[LA893NPURSUIT]

The reality is, it's a huge responsibility and major pain in the butt. That's why it's neither encouraged or discouraged by our agency. The choice is up to each uniformed member.

Nicely said Mentor, I think PH took Knox's question a little too serious. Knox, it seemed bigger than life to all of us at some point but the reality is..........it's a job, nothing more, nothing less.

[knoxstar18]

The reality is, it's a huge responsibility and major pain in the butt. That's why it's neither encouraged or discouraged by our agency. The choice is up to each uniformed member.

Nicely said Mentor, I think PH took Knox's question a little too serious. Knox, it seemed bigger than life to all of us at some point but the reality is..........it's a job, nothing more, nothing less.

Hey thanks LA89, I guess my question crossed the line in some ways...it was just something I've thought about I guess. PH misunderstood me cause I never said I actually knew anyone pesonally, but hey its cool. We're all friends here (in some ways:smile: ) so..with that said...we'll leave it at that, thanks for the info all.

[dave b]

I didn't see anything out of line with knox' question as he was asking if something is allowed or not, not prying into this or that officer's personal life. I am not an officer but as I frequently travel into high crime areas I do carry all the time, no matter where I am, even in safe areas. I noticed that a lot of Boston Police officers do not carry off duty, and that it varies tremendously from officer to officer in that dept, like wearing vests. A lot do not and it is not required. But to me, asking what is allowed and not allowed seems to be just trying to satisfy curiosity. At least he sounds like he is supportive of law enforcement, which is not always the case.

[knoxstar18]

hey thanks Dave b ...your right, you knew exactly where I was coming from. PH, no hard feelings eh buddy ol' pal? :biggrin: its hard to interpret ones intentions or tone over an internet forum.

[snowdog]

are you allowed to wear it on days your not working?, say...when you take your girlfriend out to dinner

I don't know if PH was picking up on the same thing that jumped out at me when I first read your post, but that one statement is what I like to refer to as a "Psych Red Flag". You're correct, it can be hard to interpret one's intentions or tone over an internet forum, and sometimes it's not so hard.

[knoxstar18]

snow dog, lol dear god I didn't mean it to sound that weird. I was just thinking of the most random scenario possible where wearing a firearm was totally unnecessary, but if one wanted to (don't know why anyone would) they could. Damn, now that I look at it the way you did, it does sound kinda fishy :smile: I take it back.

[SweetTaterPie]

A little perspective: when LEOs are being killed by juvenile delinquents lying in wait, or by wannabe gang-bangers trying to prove their "stuff," or any other method formerly believed to be inconceivable, a bit of paranoia can be expected. So, while none of us want to come off as antagonistic, the occasional and unintentional "third degree" may surface, especially when multiple interpretations of a post can be made. This in no way insinuates knoxstar18 intended evil, but we all live in a pretty violent world; and, LEOs have an enormous target on their backs that must be covered at all costs, on and off-duty.

[dave b]

When you said just now that you don't know why anyone would (wear a firearm unnecessarily) I must say that if a person always carries, no matter where and when, then if that one time in a thousand (or maybe a hundred, these days), he or she needs that sidearm, then they will stand a chance of not being a victim. But when a person carries only here or only there or is very selective about it, in my humble opinion, and this is only my opinion, that person takes an unnecessary chance. Not because something would happen but because it could, in this age of very random and senseless violence. You have no idea what will happen because the perpetrators have no idea what they are going to do next. A victim can become a target spur of the moment, an opportunity that is very sudden to the criminal, and then acted upon. Every one of you know this so I am not telling you anything new.
My point is that on a sunny beautiful day in sunny California, at some beach resort, on a day off, you can have some bizarre incident occur, and if you are unarmed then it is not up to you whether you become a victim, it is completely up to the perpetrator. I never did like that aspect of it, so I carry whereever I go, day or night, high crime areas in Boston or here on Cape Cod after court, where it is all beaches and quietness. I am not going to allow a perpetrator to decide to make me a victim if I have any input into it. And the constant presence of a firearm evens out my changes somewhat. Does not guarantee my safety, but increases my chances of going about my business without some savage making me his next victim. So, all this is to say one thing: That carrying a firearm, in my own personal opinion, seems unnecessary but it only seems that way unless and until a person not carrying becomes a victim when that could have been prevented. These criminals have no idea what they will do next, half the time. Sure they plan things but they also act impulsively and you may be in their sights to pull a little robbery and get some fast cash without their going to an ATM for it. That is why I carry wherever I go, at all times. Without exception.

[dave b]

SweetTaterPie, Just wanted you to know that I was responding to Knox even though my post looks like it is in reply to yours. I agree with you completely, so I guess I typed as you were typing at the same time. But my post was to his when he said he did not know why anyone would carry etc in a situation where it is not necessary

[Fire1]

Some carry, some don't. Some carry all the time, some not at all. Some carry on duty, some don't. Whether they do or don't that is their choice. Is it anyone else's concern? No. Enough said.

[dave b]

When you think about it, not much of anything is anyone's concern, I guess, with very few exceptions.

[dave b]

What I mean is: If there is a discussion going on about some topic, whatever it happens to be, and I don't care one way or the other, then I never enter the discussion. I just read it or skip over it. To give an example, if on some forum somewhere, there was a discussion about how many animals San Diego Zoo can safely accomodate, I would never jump into a discussion like that because I don't care if it is a hundred, or one, or ten thousand. But it would be okay for animal lovers and zoo aficianados to discuss it all day and all night. It would not concern me, so I would not make it a concern of mine. Really, except for emergency situations and natural disasters, there is rarely anything that concerns anyone else except for the person who is just voicing an opinion.

[Your Mentor]

I had hoped after my last post this thread would have been worked its way to the back of the pile.

When I said there are certain things we aren't comfortable talking about on the open forum I had hoped everyone would get the message; i.e. let it go. I can appreciate hearing the perspective of an out-of-state LEO who is not familiar with CHP policy or our very unique subculture. One moderator gave the public domain information directly out of the Penal Code and I followed up with a post reinforcing that fact.

Incidentally, none of our uniformed members on this forum will disclose ANY information regarding ballistics vests so don't even bother asking. My point here, and this relates to firearms policies, is that there are a ton of departmental policies which are restricted from public disclosure. Such disclosure can lead to disciplinary action. So, please respect the fact that we just plain won't table a subject.

Thread locked.