CCW & Retired LEO's?

[Kjay]

I can understand current LEO's being allowed to carry concealed. However, I'm wondering why retired LEO's are afforded much the same privilage? The Law Enforcement Safety Act of 2004 seems to even allow for such nation wide. Would seem that once the LEO retires he/she becomes a civilian. What am I missing?

 

[Pilgrim]

Kjay

Politicians find it very useful to have the law enforcement "lobby" on their side. Therefore when the politicians write weapons control laws, invariably they put in an exemption or exclusion for law enforcement officers. Since any law enforcement officer with a modicum of intelligence realizes he or she will be retired someday, the law enforcement "lobby" insists on CCW for retirees.

The Peoples' Democratic Republic of California has for a long time permitted retired peace officers CCW without having to go through the typical CCW application process. The way the penal code is written, it is almost automatic that CCW will be granted unless the officer retired to avoid being fired or retired because of stress disability affecting mental judgment.

The retired PDRK CCW authorization is contained in an endorsement on the retired officer's picture ID card that says he or she is a retired peace officer.

There is a problem in the retired PDRK peace officer CCW process. There is no state requirement for the retired officer to "qualify" with his weapon. When I go in to renew my ID card every five years, the Sheriff does not inquire if I can still shoot my piece accurately and safely. However, if I want to use my retired ID to carry nationally per H.R. 218 signed by President Bush, I need some certification from either my former employer, or the state in which I reside, that I meet state standards for CCW carry.

I have asked the sheriffs in Idaho, where I reside, and in the PDRK where I worked, for a certification letter to satisfy H.R. 218. Both sheriffs have told me they are waiting for the state to set standards for retired peace officer CCW. So, until someone makes up their mind, I have to count on my Idaho citizen CCW and my PDRK retired ID CCW to carry me through in states that recognize the two state's CCW licensing.

So, to answer your question, retired LEOs aren't treated as civilians because your elected representatives chose to treat them differently when it comes to CCW licensing.

 

[WT]

Retired LEO's sometimes run into dissatisified clients who bear a grudge. The LEO may not remember the face and name but the convicted felon sure remembers the cop who put him away for x number of years.

Besides, retired LEO's have a better RTC union than do civilians.

I suspect this thread will go downhill pretty fast.

 

[pax]

WT ~

I hope you're wrong about the thread going downhill.

To my way of thinking, the provision for retired LEOs being able to carry was about the only really redeeming feature of the nationwide LEO CCW law.

Retired LEOs are, as the first poster pointed out, ordinary citizens just like the rest of us.

If this law is to function as the "foot in the door" it was reportedly supposed to be, it's a good thing that it allows at least a few ordinary citizens to carry. It will make it easier for the rest of us to lobby for laws allowing us to exercise the same "privilege."

pax

 

[Hkmp5sd]

The only problem is that when some groups get their "foot in the door," they tend to lose interest in fighting for the others. I hope that doesn't turn out in this case.

 

[EghtySx]

Retired LEO's are civilians. Active LEO's are civilians. Somehow though, LEO lives are more worth protecting than other civilians. Where did this distinction come from? How are they different than the rest of us?

 

[gc70]

Bravo, EghtySx. Besides having a big and vocal union, just why are LEOs different?

I work for the federal government, but I am not a "sworn law enforcement officer" within the definition of LESA2004, so I am SOL as far as CCW.

I perform investigations, develop evidence, and testify in court to put BGs away; I have been involved in criminal cases involving everything from small-time BGs to organized crime.

Remind me again why LEOs need CCW rights to defend against BGs with a grudge and I don't.

 

[Monkeyleg]

I've been torn between the "foot in the door" position and the notion that retired LEO's will lose their interest in pushing for CCW.

Based on emails I've been getting from some retired officers, I think the latter argument wins. Once some of these officers get their certification, their interest in the cause is going to wane.

 

[Molon Labe]

I'm wondering why retired LEO's are afforded much the same privilage? The Law Enforcement Safety Act of 2004 seems to even allow for such nation wide.

Yep. And in my opinion the law is patently unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment.

 

[El Tejon]

Molon, and how would that be???

 

[Mark in California]

Concealed Carry

Police are not the only people who have dangerous jobs, but seem to be the only ones who are allowed any sort of protection from its dangers.

I worked 17 years as a Messenger in the Armored Transport Industry. Unlike police we are targets night and day for years on end. We have something the BG's want. Unlike police, the BG will seek us out for nothing else than who we work for. Not only on the clock, but off the clock as well. From the time we start working for the company until years later we are a target for anyone who is serious about taking the company down. Even four years after leaving the company I am still known to the public as a armored guard.

Under California law, while on duty, we can carry any conceable weapon we wish and do not need a CCW. Off duty you are totaly on your own. Luckly I live in a county that issues CCWs. Everyone I worked with had a CCW. At times worked with people out of San Franisco, and the only one in the company that had a CCW was a secretary in the office.

This is just another industry that is dangerous as police work. There are many more like.

 

[Kharn]

El Tejon:
I would assume he is talking about equal protection under the law, you cant treat citizens differently.

Kharn

 

[TheFederalistWeasel]

I’ve got buddies who are Firefighters; they refer to non-public servants as civilians.

You see if some of you here would stop and think about it, it’s a category, nothing more. We as a whole are PUBLIC SERVANTS, we work for you the PUBLIC, the CIVILIANS of this country, just like the military and we are paid by tax dollars just like the military, we provide a service to the tax payers just like the military.

Our mission is different but the goal is the same, to serve you.

Evidentially this point falls short of some here and on other gun forums.

Some here need to just get over the idea that LE is a privileged class, well guess what so is the military and a cruder example so is Wal-Mart (employees get perks we don’t).

Everyone wonders where this Us vs. Them mentality comes from, amazing ain’t it, just look at this thread…

 

[artherd]

Retired LEO's sometimes run into dissatisified clients who bear a grudge. The LEO may not remember the face and name but the convicted felon sure remembers the cop who put him away for x number of years.

I agree, LEOs face even more reason to be armed than the average joe. Of course, so do I (business owner, high profile target, have pissed off several people to the point of verbal death threats, etc.)

I've got no problem with the other retired civilians carrying, so long as *I* can carry under the exact same protection afforded by the law.

 

[mike45]

As a retired police officer (well, semi retired) I enjoy being able to carry. I also support concealed carry for qualified individuals. Even now, the qualification for the department I work for is about 4 hours long (2 times a year). As a police officer over the years, if I said something offensive or rude (even off duty), the person could file a complaint with my police department and I would be held accountable. I lost track of the number of loud mouth jerks I have had to listen to in various gun stores over the years. Most of them have never enen put their name on the dotted line. (Arm-chair commandos).

How many non-police (I'm trying not to use the word "civilian") have been brought in to answer quesions about what they did... have you ever been sent to see the dept. shrink to be certified crazy enough to be a cop but not crazy enough to do something crazy...

I know some fine individuals who have a carry permit. I also know some who have never been examined under pressure, and are questionable at best.

mike