LEOSA question

Rhode Island has stated it does not recognize LEOSA.So far I have not heard of anyone being prosecuted.
 
pbearperry135 said:
Rhode Island has stated it does not recognize LEOSA.So far I have not heard of anyone being prosecuted.
Click to expand...

LEOSA is a Federal Law, they don’t have the option of not recognizing it. Period, end of story.

I’d also like to see a reference to them not recognizing it too.
 
Steve in PA said:
LEOSA is a Federal Law, they don’t have the option of not recognizing it. Period, end of story.

I’d also like to see a reference to them not recognizing it too.
Click to expand...

You're right, but that doesn't stop them from exploiting the language of the the LEOSA to suit their purposes. I'm not familiar with Rhode Island's efforts, they're on the wrong side side of the Mississippi River. I have followed Hawaii's efforts to also negate the spirit of the LEOSA.

The problem with the LEOSA that allows for such state efforts is that it does not guarantee the ability of LEO's to carry concealed. It only exempts them from state laws (with specific exemptions) that govern concealed carry. Even though these two statement sounds like they're kinda sorta, the same, there's actually a big difference between them.

Hawaii has adopted a strategy of denying visiting LEOs access to the weapons that the LEOSA would allow them to carry concealed. They do this by requiring state registration of the weapons, even for visitors, and by making those registration processes quite cumbersome. The LEOSA exempts qualified visiting LEOs from the concealed carry laws, it doesn't exempt them from the registration laws.
 
HI requires visiting LEO’s with guns to register with the chief of police in each county (island) they visit within 5 days of arrival in that county.

There is nothing in LEOSA that says you have to do this. Who wants to be the test case?
 
pbearperry135 said:
Rhode Island has stated it does not recognize LEOSA.So far I have not heard of anyone being prosecuted.
Click to expand...

Are these representative of what you're thinking?

https://lsc-pagepro.mydigitalpublic...D-XsYtJUgSgtF4fb3TWn-cls-JJQGtuLrBc&ver=html5

https://daiglelawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/LEOSA-state-by-state.pdf

https://www.policemag.com/562012/the-law-and-the-leosa-carry-right

It's against the possibility for some officer, agency, state AG or 'state' to choose to misunderstand LEOSA that I carry legal coverage which specifically covers me regarding such potential LEOSA problems.

You'd think that by now all the states would've had ample time and opportunity to come to terms with LEOSA, but sometimes it takes a court challenge to clarify things. One of the things that may muddy the waters is thinking to try and link CCW licensing and state reciprocity to LEOSA. Also, the definitions (like 'firearms') contained in LEOSA are easily found in federal statutes, not state statutes.

Of course, the other side of this troublesome coin is that some active and retired peace officers may not have received accurate information about LEOSA, and documentation they possess, before traveling out-of-state. Nor might they grasp the restrictions contained in LEOSA.
 
“Of course, the other side of this troublesome coin is that some active and retired peace officers may not have received accurate information about LEOSA, and documentation they possess, before traveling out-of-state. Nor might they grasp the restrictions contained in LEOSA.”

That is and will remain to be the main issue. Most here keep up with court rulings and changes or try to, especially as retired guys. Active Officers are only as informed as their chain of command which is part of a political body for the most part. I remember it taking several years for LEOSA to get be commonly recognized. Nobody wanted to be the test case and rumors flew faster than facts. In New York for instance will all the current law changes and subsequent legal challenges nobody has a clue on how to act. Maybe that is the goal. The Attorney General of Niagara County who is also a Defendant in one of the law suits to be heard at the end of March in Federal Court just clearly stated to the court that he believes that several issues in the new laws are clearly unconstitutional. He requests the court to grant a stay so that no innocent person is convicted and he is forced to enforce such laws until the court has ample time to review them in total.

Thing is, nobody wants to be a test case and caught in the middle of a fight. Sergeant Kowalski from the Nutley PD in NJ may still be under the impression that hollow points are verboten! He is wrong but the inside of that cell is a hard place to defend a case from. Be aware of where you travel, know when you are not in a gun friendly place or not, have legal representation a phone call away. We all have been there but we all also know that guy that will lock up his grandmother to teach her a lesson.
 
fastbolt said:
Are these representative of what you're thinking?

https://lsc-pagepro.mydigitalpublic...D-XsYtJUgSgtF4fb3TWn-cls-JJQGtuLrBc&ver=html5

https://daiglelawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/LEOSA-state-by-state.pdf

https://www.policemag.com/562012/the-law-and-the-leosa-carry-right

It's against the possibility for some officer, agency, state AG or 'state' to choose to misunderstand LEOSA that I carry legal coverage which specifically covers me regarding such potential LEOSA problems.

You'd think that by now all the states would've had ample time and opportunity to come to terms with LEOSA, but sometimes it takes a court challenge to clarify things. One of the things that may muddy the waters is thinking to try and link CCW licensing and state reciprocity to LEOSA. Also, the definitions (like 'firearms') contained in LEOSA are easily found in federal statutes, not state statutes.

Of course, the other side of this troublesome coin is that some active and retired peace officers may not have received accurate information about LEOSA, and documentation they possess, before traveling out-of-state. Nor might they grasp the restrictions contained in LEOSA.
Click to expand...
Yes this is it thanks, I could not remember.
 
fastbolt said:
Are these representative of what you're thinking?

https://lsc-pagepro.mydigitalpublic...D-XsYtJUgSgtF4fb3TWn-cls-JJQGtuLrBc&ver=html5

https://daiglelawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/LEOSA-state-by-state.pdf

https://www.policemag.com/562012/the-law-and-the-leosa-carry-right

It's against the possibility for some officer, agency, state AG or 'state' to choose to misunderstand LEOSA that I carry legal coverage which specifically covers me regarding such potential LEOSA problems.

You'd think that by now all the states would've had ample time and opportunity to come to terms with LEOSA, but sometimes it takes a court challenge to clarify things. One of the things that may muddy the waters is thinking to try and link CCW licensing and state reciprocity to LEOSA. Also, the definitions (like 'firearms') contained in LEOSA are easily found in federal statutes, not state statutes.

Of course, the other side of this troublesome coin is that some active and retired peace officers may not have received accurate information about LEOSA, and documentation they possess, before traveling out-of-state. Nor might they grasp the restrictions contained in LEOSA.
Click to expand...
For the record, the other two are copy--and-paste from the daiglelawgroup one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Legalities For Traveling Armed to Maryland
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
BSA1
BSA1
M
  • Locked
active national guard soldier fired from his job
Replies
16
Views
1K
Mike Irwin
M
Steve in PA
  • Locked
(PA) Two deputies killed serving warrant
Replies
23
Views
3K
Steve in PA
Steve in PA
D
  • Locked
Another armed incursion on U.S.-Mexico border
2 3
Replies
73
Views
2K
Coronach
C
C
  • Locked
Holiday road trip: Carrying questions
Replies
13
Views
1K
mljdeckard
mljdeckard
Back
Top