Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 04-16-2017, 11:00 AM
LenS LenS is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MA
Posts: 236
Likes: 192
Liked 127 Times in 60 Posts
Default

ispcapt, since Indian reservations are "sovereign territory" we aren't technically in the US anymore when on their property. IANAL but it is my belief that LEOSA won't protect us. I'm going to make further study of this in the future, as I will be doing my first LEOSA qualification this coming week.
__________________
MA Gun Law & NRA Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-16-2017, 07:22 PM
ispcapt ispcapt is online now
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 711
Likes: 44
Liked 621 Times in 258 Posts
Default

They're actually like any other US territory. While sovereign they still come under US law. Legal matters are before US courts and eventually could be to the US Supreme Ct. Criminal violations on reservation lands come under the jurisdiction of the FBI. So while sovereign they're still US possessions and their residents are US citizens.
Sort of look at them as a territory or another state which has it's own laws like any other territory or state but ultimately they're US property. Sovereignty does not mean independent from or a separate nation from the US. In fact, the sovereignty is only because Congress passed the law granting tribes their sovereignty. It pretty much means the tribal lands are another state, with laws like any other state. The USSC has also ruled tribal lands are still under the control of the federal govt but like states they can exercise some laws at their level. US territories are pretty independent to a degree of US control such as reservations. Therefore, without doing a lot of research into it I believe one could make the case the LEOSA is covered.
__________________
183rd FBINA

Last edited by ispcapt; 04-16-2017 at 07:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-16-2017, 07:45 PM
Mistered Mistered is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wickiup Junction, OR
Posts: 549
Likes: 9
Liked 660 Times in 287 Posts
Default

Quote:
The best thing to do is avoid Reservations if you can.
I agree. We have Warm Springs Res in North Central Oregon and while relatively productive (casino, hot springs resort, lumber mill) it is a very dangerous place to be after the sun goes down and outside of the resort areas. The 'residents' are very predatory toward 'outsiders' and crime is rampant.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-16-2017, 07:50 PM
Muss Muggins's Avatar
Muss Muggins Muss Muggins is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: southeast Missouri
Posts: 7,166
Likes: 2,477
Liked 8,543 Times in 3,078 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ispcapt View Post
They're actually like any other US territory. While sovereign they still come under US law. Legal matters are before US courts and eventually could be to the US Supreme Ct. Criminal violations on reservation lands come under the jurisdiction of the FBI. So while sovereign they're still US possessions and their residents are US citizens.
Sort of look at them as a territory or another state which has it's own laws like any other territory or state but ultimately they're US property. Sovereignty does not mean independent from or a separate nation from the US. In fact, the sovereignty is only because Congress passed the law granting tribes their sovereignty. It pretty much means the tribal lands are another state, with laws like any other state. The USSC has also ruled tribal lands are still under the control of the federal govt but like states they can exercise some laws at their level. US territories are pretty independent to a degree of US control such as reservations. Therefore, without doing a lot of research into it I believe one could make the case the LEOSA is covered.
That's all well and good until you're staring at a Tribal Police Officer on a Friday evening at the side of the road. Not many reservations in Illinois, so I suspect your analysis is about like the rest of ours . . .
__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-16-2017, 07:56 PM
Mistered Mistered is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wickiup Junction, OR
Posts: 549
Likes: 9
Liked 660 Times in 287 Posts
Default

Quote:
That's all well and good until you're staring at a Tribal Police Officer on a Friday evening at the side of the road.
Yea - you might find yourself 'Dancing with the wolves'
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-16-2017, 11:28 PM
ispcapt ispcapt is online now
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 711
Likes: 44
Liked 621 Times in 258 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muss Muggins View Post
That's all well and good until you're staring at a Tribal Police Officer on a Friday evening at the side of the road. Not many reservations in Illinois, so I suspect your analysis is about like the rest of ours . . .
I already said that. When I was on the state committee implementing LEOSA after it was signed tribal lands was not an issue we researched. There are no tribal lands in IL.
I did have a lot of experience sitting on the committee and doing the research on LEOSA. It wasn't an assignment I asked for tho.
Here's something to throw in the mix and something to think about. From other research I've seen tribal officers are covered by LEOSA just like the rest of us who qualify for it.
__________________
183rd FBINA

Last edited by ispcapt; 04-16-2017 at 11:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #57  
Old 04-17-2017, 08:51 AM
LenS LenS is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MA
Posts: 236
Likes: 192
Liked 127 Times in 60 Posts
Default

ispcapt, I like your analysis. I would just hope that the various tribal police units agree. We have very little tribal land in MA and no such casinos yet. Sadly the MA Gaming Commission created a CMR banning all armed LE (and any guns) from all casino property (we have a non-tribal casino) unless they are Mass State Police AND assigned to the gaming commission! I doubt that their CMR complies with MGL but it is now administrative law.
__________________
MA Gun Law & NRA Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-18-2017, 03:35 AM
VictorLouis VictorLouis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 514
Likes: 3
Liked 195 Times in 124 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gen3guy View Post
.....the Gila River reservation south of Phoenix...... the tribal cop (Dept. of Interior) unsnapping his holster as he ....did say; "I could confiscate your guns, arrest you, and you would face a hefty fine." I said; "What if I was just out here taking pictures?" He replied; "I could confiscate your camera, arrest you, and you would face a hefty fine."
......
I have a friend on that particular force. They can and do bar the news media from covering the crime that occurs there. Despite the fact such nastiness is almost always far-removed from the Casinos/Resorts....the knowledge getting out would be bad-for-business.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-19-2017, 10:18 AM
LenS LenS is offline
Member
Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations Carrying on Indian Reservations  
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MA
Posts: 236
Likes: 192
Liked 127 Times in 60 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorLouis View Post
I have a friend on that particular force. They can and do bar the news media from covering the crime that occurs there. Despite the fact such nastiness is almost always far-removed from the Casinos/Resorts....the knowledge getting out would be bad-for-business.


My town tries to keep the media from covering crime too, to keep it looking like no crime happens here. That has nothing to do with Indian Reservations . . . it is due to town fathers (tribal leaders) trying to keep a "clean profile" to the unwashed masses.
__________________
MA Gun Law & NRA Instructor
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CCW on Indian Reservations 357larry Concealed Carry & Self Defense 33 02-07-2012 11:31 PM
Information on CCW for Reservations Gary Slider Concealed Carry & Self Defense 1 08-18-2010 06:50 PM
No Reservations with Anthony Bourdain 2000Z-71 The Lounge 22 07-31-2009 07:56 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:32 PM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)