Louisiana House Bill HB264

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/11
• Refer: 4/25/11
• Report Pass: 5/11/11
• Engrossed: 5/19/11
• Refer: 5/23/11
• Report Pass: 6/7/11
• Enrolled: 6/15/11
• Chaptered: 6/20/11
• Passed: 6/20/11

Caption

Creates the crime of unlawful production, manufacturing, distribution, or possession of law enforcement badges

Impact

The implementation of HB264 introduces a new legal standard in Louisiana regarding the production and use of peace officer badges. It seeks to protect the authority and recognition of duly authorized law enforcement agents by limiting the possession and distribution of badges to only those sanctioned by specific law enforcement agencies. This addition to the state's criminal code will likely aid in reducing cases of badge-related impersonation, which can undermine public trust in legitimate law enforcement officers.

Summary

House Bill 264 establishes regulations concerning the unauthorized production, manufacturing, distribution, or possession of peace officer badges. This bill aims to enhance law enforcement integrity by criminalizing the creation and use of badges that are not authorized by official law enforcement agencies. Under the bill, individuals found in violation could face fines and imprisonment, thus providing a legal framework to combat impersonation of law enforcement personnel.

Sentiment

Discussions surrounding HB264 generally reflected a supportive sentiment among lawmakers and law enforcement bodies, who view the bill as a necessary measure to enhance public safety and preserve the integrity of law enforcement agencies. However, some concerns were raised regarding the potential implications for novelty badge collectors and businesses that produce such items, emphasizing the need for a clear distinction between unauthorized and authorized badges.

Contention

A notable point of contention within the bill revolves around the definition of an unauthorized badge. The legislation explicitly states that certain badges intended for novelty purposes, which do not explicitly name a law enforcement agency, are exempt from the prohibitions outlined. This allows for some level of flexibility, but it raises questions about enforcement and interpretation in practice, which could impact how the law is implemented and adhered to in various contexts.