Can LEO's CCW without permit?

[Autolycus]

I know its a law. All I keep noticing is that it seems to be a trend of LE organizations shooting down CCW laws and shall issue laws in different states. Why is that? Hmm?

I have made my opinion clear. If you dont like it then dont participate in the thread. Its simple as that.

I dont feel I have been shortchanged. I feel my rights are being violated. Would you say the same thing to blacks during the Jim Crowe era?

Please explain why the law has merit. I dont see why it does when clearly the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to carry while state laws restrict us from exercising our god given rights.

 

[Mumwaldee]

Either way laws that grant priveledges to some, especially government agents, are unconstitutional.

I have to agree with this, but then again...anything that is promoting carrying can't be all bad. Maybe they can expand it to military retirees and others.

 

[The Amigo]

I am going forum to forum trying to recruit others to our side.

Good luck on your crusade..

The only way the CG is going to authorize/allow anyone to carry is in the performance of their duties, not just because they want to carry "off duty".

Steve The CG is not Issuing permits correct but as I said some commands are issuing letters to People who fill the requirements of an LEO and these letters you can take to some states and they will Issue what is called a public servant CCW. These states issue this to Judges, DA,s or any Person in a Law Enforcement or in a Investigative position. And some states will waiver the $$fees. The letter issued states that the CG has no problem with you getting issued and off duty permit and that you fill the requirements of an LEO while on Official duty.

 

[WC145]

"Title 18 USC Subsection 921 defines the term "state" to include the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and all US possessions excluding the Panama Canal Zone"

Per the excerpt above, LEOSA 2004 allows qualified LEOs (active and retired) to carry in Puerto Rico.
I have read and reread the text and I do not believe that USCG or other military personnel are covered under the law.

 

[The Amigo]

The Coast Guard is unique due to it being the only branch of the US military that has Law enforcement capabilities all the time unlike the other branches of the service. Yes the CG falls under LEOSA 2004
14 US Code
§ 89. Law enforcement

(a) The Coast Guard may make inquiries, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests upon the high seas and waters over which the United States has jurisdiction, for the prevention, detection, and suppression of violations of laws of the United States. For such purposes, commissioned, warrant, and petty officers may at any time go on board of any vessel subject to the jurisdiction, or to the operation of any law, of the United States, address inquiries to those on board, examine the ship’s documents and papers, and examine, inspect, and search the vessel and use all necessary force to compel compliance. When from such inquiries, examination, inspection, or search it appears that a breach of the laws of the United States rendering a person liable to arrest is being, or has been committed, by any person, such person shall be arrested or, if escaping to shore, shall be immediately pursued and arrested on shore, or other lawful and appropriate action shall be taken; or, if it shall appear that a breach of the laws of the United States has been committed so as to render such vessel, or the merchandise, or any part thereof, on board of, or brought into the United States by, such vessel, liable to forfeiture, or so as to render such vessel liable to a fine or penalty and if necessary to secure such fine or penalty, such vessel or such merchandise, or both, shall be seized.
(b) The officers of the Coast Guard insofar as they are engaged, pursuant to the authority contained in this section, in enforcing any law of the United States shall:
(1) be deemed to be acting as agents of the particular executive department or independent establishment charged with the administration of the particular law; and
(2) be subject to all the rules and regulations promulgated by such department or independent establishment with respect to the enforcement of that law.
(c) The provisions of this section are in addition to any powers conferred by law upon such officers, and not in limitation of any powers conferred by law upon such officers, or any other officers of the United States.

 

[The Amigo]

More:
§ 95. Special agents of the Coast Guard Investigative Service law enforcement authority


(a)
(1) A special agent of the Coast Guard Investigative Service designated under subsection (b) has the following authority:
(A) To carry firearms.
(B) To execute and serve any warrant or other process issued under the authority of the United States.
(C) To make arrests without warrant for—
(i) any offense against the United States committed in the agent’s presence; or
(ii) any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the agent has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing the felony.

 

[OH25shooter]

I have made my opinion clear. If you dont like it then dont participate in the thread. Its simple as that.

Yes, you have made your opinion clear. So has the President of the United States. Guess what young man, you've been overruled. You sound like an angry person with a chip on his shoulder regarding (in this case) the right of retired LEO's to carry concealed. Since America has freedom of speech, it also allows the freedom to leave. Maybe you would feel more at home elsewhere. Great Britian perhaps, cops don't even carry sidearms, that should make you happy. Maybe you should remove your anger energy from the internet and funnel it towards a more positive source. Take your pick, the choices are vast in numbers. But my guess is you feel safer and more secure in a room at the computer keyboard. I hope the rest of the young American gunowners generation are not as angry as you. But I do agree with one of your statements, I choose not to participate in this thread any longer with you.

 

[Autolycus]

Glad to hear it OH25Shooter. Sounds like your an elitist who only believes that the Bill of rights applies to some people. Exactly my point about leaving. If my freedom to speak my mind and demand equal rights bothers you then your free to move to China or North Korea where only trusted members of the government are allowed weapons. I hope the rest of the young gun owners are angrier and will help me get an unconstitutional law reappealed. Thats what its about isnt it? Why dont you support the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

 

[gc70]

HB218 is divisive; LEOs have national CCW while mere citizens don't.

National organizations that purport to represent the LE community oppose national reciprocity. Those organizations are the voice of law enforcement if the masses of LEOs do not speak up. While some LEOs actively support national reciprocity, too many are willing to take the benefits of HB218 and keep quiet.

Gun owners have been divided by HB218 and one of the most credible voices for CCW and national reciprocity - the masses of LEOs - has been diminished.

-----

I am not a student and am substantially over 25, if that helps profile readers assess the validity of my arguments.

 

[The Amigo]

Can LEOs CCW without a permit?

I believe the question was simple and merits an answer the thread was not started for other topics or your personal opinion. It would be nice if we kept it civil and stayed on topic. If u feel u need to start a thread to state your opinion feel free but frankly you seem to repeat your self over and over and its getting old. Im not sure where u get the idea all LEOs are out there to get u but believe me some of us are not bad people as you have tried to prove on most of your post. I can sense a a tread lock coming here soon..

 

[Steve in PA]

Prior to HR218 more states recognized your non-LEO CCW than they did a LEO's credentials, so don't spout off about how "mere citizens" are getting the shaft.

The CG isn't going to authorize everyone in a blue jumpsuit to carry when they are not actively engaged in doing their job.

 

[Autolycus]

Steve in PA: You still did not need a permit in most states if your a LEO. So we still get the shaft.

 

[Autolycus]

Double post.

 

[Autolycus]

For everyone who wants to discuss the right to carry for LEOs and the priveledge for non-LEOs: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=273829

 

[gc70]

Prior to HR218 more states recognized [strike]your[/strike] non-LEO CCW than they did a LEO's credentials...

That is probably because state, county and municipal LEO credentials generally had no off-duty legal standing in other states prior to HR218.
Federal credentials have always had national standing.

... so don't spout off about how "mere citizens" are getting the shaft.

No problem if you feel superior to, and entitled to more off-duty privileges than, the average citizen.

Further discussion carried to the new thread.

 

[Steve in PA]

Yeah, and your CCW more than likely had no qualification requirement, no knowledge of ANY deadly force laws, etc.

 

[pacodelahoya]

Why dont you support the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

Because it only applies to us serfs...er...us citizens.. Some people are above the law you know.

 

[F4GIB]

Yeah, and your CCW more than likely had no qualification requirement, no knowledge of ANY deadly force laws, etc.

Only in Pennsylvania and the few other states that require NO training at all to get a CCW permit. Not in Arizona, Minnesota, or Texas, to name a few states.

I know the self-defense law and I can shoot my state's police qualification twice in the time allowed and pass it on both targets. There is nothing secret or difficult about general police firearms training.

 

[Steve in PA]

There is more to police officers qualifying than shooting a basic qual course. And any firearms instructor will make the qualification course a challenge. I never have my shooters qual on a course that someone's grandma can pass.

 

[Autolycus]

Well thats great. However can you point out where in the 2nd Amendment it says we even need that training?

The point is that it is your job and if you mess up you put yourself, the department, and the city at risk for lawsuits. If I mess up I am the only one going to be sued. So its an investment that the taxpayers make so that we have to pay less when their are lawsuits after a shooting.