for you retired LEOs

[shafter]

I agree. I'd also add that I think it's a bad idea to give retired leos special ccw privileges, unavailable to "regular" citizens. And I am a retired leo after thirty years on the job.

If they took away nationwide carry I would turn in my badge. We spend 20-25 years of their lives sitting in our cruisers waiting for that next call that might well be an invitation to a gunfight. Some officers regularly deal with the absolute worst of the worst on a daily basis. The bad guys know where we live and death threats are common. If something goes down while we're off duty there is an expectation that we'll intervene.

Do I think that there should be national reciprocity for everyone? Absolutely, and I think law enforcement should come out in support of it, but for us LEOSA isn't really a privilege, it's a necessity.

 

[SwampWolf]

QUOTE: "...but for us LEOSA isn't really a privilege, it's a necessity."

No more of a "necessity" than anyone else who might need to carry concealed gun in these times to protect themselves and their loved ones. And I've never thought that any honest, law-abiding citizen's, be he/she retired leo or not, God-given right to carry a gun for self-defense should ever be construed as being a "privilege".

 

[230RN]

I stuck my nose into this thread because many of my relatives are and have been LEOs and Firemen. I was amazed that it was such a struggle to take advantage of this program.

In fact, I had recently talked about it to one of my cousins back in NY who is retired LEO, and he said it was too much of a pain in the neck to get it, then didn't want to talk about it any more.

No wonder.

I guess, especially with the annual "qualification" requirement, it's better to just get a State permit and let it go at that. Just stay out of firearms-unfriendly (or non-reciprocal) States if you can.

My take on this is that the "Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act" was just another good idea that got trashed up by our Legislators to the point that it's essentially meaningless and works a burden on local Departments.

And people wonder why I am pretty much dead set against the federal government tinkering around with federal concealed carry permit laws, i.e., country-wide reciprocity for State-issued conceal carry permits for ordinary law-abiding citizens.

Let the experiences told about here on the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act be lessons to all of us.

Just the viewpoint from a non-LEO concealed carry permitee. I know it's kind of an editorial, but something for the rest of us to keep in mind.

Terry, 230RN

 

[WC145]

Well I just found this on the Mt DOJ website:
"However, because the federal legislation contained no funding to create state or local programs to qualify retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed weapon under this provision, there are few agencies that offer such programs. While some smaller local agencies may qualify their retirees, such programs are not generally available in Montana and few retired officers here are therefore able to carry concealed weapons under this federal legislation."
Essentially, the federal government passed the legislation, they just didn't fund it. So, it is up to the individual states to make the program work. And that's understandable. I just may have to do some politicking and see if there is any interest in our State lawmakers to find a way to provide a means to get us retired guys qualified.

According to this article from last October (which took me about two seconds to find using google) the Missoula County Sheriff's Office is the only Agency offering LEOSA quals in Montana - http://www.kpax.com/story/30287006/...ualify-for-nationwide-concealed-carry-permits - their qual date should be coming right up.

That article is apparently incorrect because I also found this - http://madisoncountymt.gov/508/LEOSAHR-218 - from the Madison County S.O., which says that they're offering LEOSA quals "at various times throughout the year".

I don't know how far those places are from where you live but I guess it doesn't matter. If I were you I'd be calling both of those agencies right away and seeing when I could get a qual date. I have a similar issue in that my old dept was so small that we didn't do our own training, we trained and qual'd with the local S.O.. That hasn't changed so I still shoot with them once a year and the LT fills out the form and I send it in to the Maine Criminal Justice Academy and they issue me my LEOSA Qual Card.

 

[NorthBorder]

WC145, that is what I was hoping to find. I live not so far from Missoula that I can't make the trip. Just not quite retired yet (sigh). Thanks.

 

[GRIZ22]

I'm a retired LEO and I live in and carry in one of those gun unfriendly NE states (NJ).

I don't find LEOSA overly burdensome to comply with. If you fit the term "qualified LEO" in your job description and you have the required time on the job (10 years IIRC) you need to:

1. Have retired ID- most likely your agency will not replace it if you lose it. If this concerns you make a color copy of your ID and have it notarized as a true copy on the back. Lock up your retired ID somewhere. IANAL but that would seem to meet the ID requirement if losing the original concerns you

2. Qualify once a year with the type of handgun you carry- I don't see any obligation of the agency you retired from to qualify you. I knew of one agency that did this and all was well, until someone shot himself in the leg. If the agency lets you qualify on their range or with one of their officers on the clock they may may be held liable directly or indirectly. I can think of dozens of ways this can happen.

The qual course can be the one your agency used or one used by any LE agency in the state. NJ has a permit for retired police officers that has more stringent qualifications requirements then a regular carry permit. You have to qualify twice a year. Yes, I am well aware that it's impossible for someone not in security or protection work in NJ to get a carry permit but that's not the topic of this thread.

The qualification for LEOSA has to be done by a certified firearms instructor. A NRA pistol instructor, a LE or concealed carry instructor, or any firearms instructor with a certification from a legitimate entity (not the close cover before striking school of firearms instruction) will do. I don't see any liability the instructor can encounter. They are just saying you qualified.

The form of certifying the qualification is not specified. I've seen cards, letters, etc. Once again if this concerns you that much get it notarized. The form should state the type of action of handgun should be specified. To cover all bases I qualify with a revolver, SA semi, and DA semi.

The process of carrying under LEOSA is not overwhelming.

I have carried and have zero reports of problems in gun unfriendly states in the NE. They are aware it's a Federal law.and applies everywhere in the US.

I also feel their should be nationwide reciprocity for concealed carry just like a drivers license. Let each state decide what places they want off limits.

 

[Averageman]

If they took away nationwide carry I would turn in my badge. We spend 20-25 years of their lives sitting in our cruisers waiting for that next call that might well be an invitation to a gunfight. Some officers regularly deal with the absolute worst of the worst on a daily basis. The bad guys know where we live and death threats are common. If something goes down while we're off duty there is an expectation that we'll intervene.

Do I think that there should be national reciprocity for everyone? Absolutely, and I think law enforcement should come out in support of it, but for us LEOSA isn't really a privilege, it's a necessity.

And if that courtesy was given to Military Veterans?
"We spend 20-25 years of their lives sitting in our cruisers waiting for that next call that might well be an invitation to a gunfight. Some officers regularly deal with the absolute worst of the worst on a daily basis."
Isn't just for Law Enforcement anymore.
I'm just saying that you're not the only bunch at the point of the spear.

 

[scaatylobo]

HUGE FAN of LEOSA

I have been retired for 9 years,and I travel and truly believe that my HR218 is a great way to feel safer.

I have arrested and put away many people,for DECADES ,if not life !.

I have met a few in the past few years and they all LOOK FOR THE GUN.

Yes,it is well concealed ----- but they look.

SO, if you don't see a great reason for HR218,then I suggest you arrest a few real felons and have them tell you " I will see you later ".

Been there,done that !.

I have no problem doing my yearly qual's with revolver,pistol,and "sporting rifle" .

I am safer,in my not so humble opinion,thanks to the peace of mind ----- if not the Glock.

I travel a good deal out of state too.

 

[armoredman]

Averageman, truth. LEOSA doesn't cover most correctional officers, either. I don't leave the state, plus I won't LIVE long enough to retire, so I carry three ways, on the badge, on the CCW permit I also have, and under Constitutional Carry. I misspoke - I may visit Begas again, who know recognizes AZ CCW permits. Las Vegas PD was VERY surprised ADC wasn't covered under LEOSA, and I have to stop some of my younger no-necks from getting in trouble thinking it does cover them.

You see them how long? I see them all the years you put them away. People ask "Why do you carry a gun?"
I say, "Because I look Pure Evil in the eye every day, and Evil gets out on parole Tuesday."

BTW, I have had multiple murderers threatene me that they will see me later after I have them locked down - they do, the next day. And the next, and the next, and the next...

I apologize, re read the post comes off snarky. I stand behind it, but I recognize what LEOs do day in and day out, and it's a tough job that you guys do very well, salute.

Besides, I need you - I'd go out of business without you!

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

Interesting that some states feel the need to insert themselves into the process. Ohio does not. The process is as simple as Griz asserts.

 

[Speedo66]

Nothing that any state proposes can overcome what is written in the federal law.

NJ may have a peace officer permit, but it is not required for anyone covered under LEOSA to have any type of permit if they follow all that's required under it.

 

[Steve in PA]

NJ still restricts retired LE living in NJ from carrying HP ammo, even though HP ammo is allowed under LEOSA. Of course, if someone were to take it to court, LEOSA would prevail.

Active LE (resident and non-resident) and retired LE not living in NJ are allowed to carry HP ammo.

 

[GRIZ22]

Steve in PA, I saw a policy letter by the NJ AG saying active and retired LEOs from out of state carrying under LEOSA can't carry hollowpoints, same as those that live in NJ. The same letter states retired LEOS living in NJ have to get the NJ RPO permit.

I agree LEOSA trumps all this NJ bs but did you see something in print about out of state carrying under LEOSA carrying hollowpoints?

NJ law allows out of state LEOS on official business to carry hollowpoints.

 

[Speedo66]

LEOSA was drafted to define some areas in HR218 that were ambiguous, or needed to be added, such as allowing a civilian instructor qualified to administer testing to active duty officers to test retired officers.

One of the provisions in LEOSA defines legal firearms for officers impacted by this act, to include ammunition. LEOSA says ammo not prohibited by Federal law is legal to be carried, that should preempt NJ law, the Feds have no problem with hollow points.

Here's a quote from LEOSA:

(e) As used in this section, the term "firearm"--

(1) except as provided in this subsection, has the same meaning as in section 921 of this title;

(2) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act;

The act goes on to say machine guns and silencers are not included, fair enough.

 

[Steve in PA]

Yes, LEOSA trumps NJ law......but.......NJ still says no to retired officers living in the state and wanting to carry HP ammo. A retired officer would have to get arrested, pony up the money for a lawyer and hope to fight their way through the courts.

 

[c1ogden]

NJ may have a peace officer permit, but it is not required for anyone covered under LEOSA to have any type of permit if they follow all that's required under it.

You are correct IN THEORY. The state tells us that if we live in NJ that we must purchase the state permit every year. This is not NJ's first round of disobeying a federal law that they do not agree with (the Firearms Owner's Protection Act is routinely ignored). As the state police (who issued retired cop permits) will tell you, "yes we know that you will (theoretically) eventually win in court but do you have a quarter million $ to spend when you become the test case?"

Active LE (resident and non-resident) and retired LE not living in NJ are allowed to carry HP ammo.

Steve in PA, I saw a policy letter by the NJ AG saying active and retired LEOs from out of state carrying under LEOSA can't carry hollowpoints, same as those that live in NJ. The same letter states retired LEOS living in NJ have to get the NJ RPO permit.

This is the original AG's letter that came out when LEOSA was first enacted - http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcj/agguide/pdfs/hr-218.pdf

There was a separate letter (that I can't find right now) that pointed out that the statute outlawing hollowpoint ammo specified that it doesn't apply to "law enforcement officers" and that since the statute didn't specify "NJ law enforcement officers" that any active duty LEO may legally carry hollowpoint ammo. The state still maintains that retired officers, resident or not, may not carry hollowpoint ammo. When the subject is brought up the state cops who enforce these rules give you a very hard-nosed "Do you have the money to be the test case?" I don't think they're being dicks about it as I've found these guys very helpful and supportive, I feel they are just trying to keep us out of trouble.

The qual course can be the one your agency used or one used by any LE agency in the state.

IIRC, if you live in a different state than the one you retired in you have the option of returning to your agency and using their qual course or using the state standard course in your current state of residence if it has one, or using the course of any local agency in your new state of residence if they don't have a statewide standard. Here in NJ we can't go back to our former employer as the AG prohibits agencies from qualifying retired officers, whether their own or from other agencies or states.

 

[silversport]

Similar in Illinois...must requalify every year at at State approved class and must pay for the ID/permit/tax whatever you want to call it...

Bill

 

[Steve in PA]

(b) ACTIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.—
(2) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of 22 the National Firearms Act;

(c) RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.-
(B) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act


The above is copied from the 2010 Amendment to LEOSA which in plain english means hollow point ammunition is 100% legal to be carried in NJ for both active or retired officers covered under LEOSA since is in not prohibited by Federal law.

I'm an active LEO in PA and I routinely go to NJ while carrying my department issued hollow point ammo. It is the only ammo I am authorized to carry. This is why the above changes were made to LEOSA.

 

[MarkDido]

"Yes, LEOSA trumps NJ law......but.......NJ still says no to retired officers living in the state and wanting to carry HP ammo. A retired officer would have to get arrested, pony up the money for a lawyer and hope to fight their way through the courts."

And the Safe Passage section of FOPA allows you to travel through hostile territory with a firearm with brief stops for food or gas. New York (not the state) chooses to ignore that particular law on a regular basis.