There's never been an issue with HR218 with CPD and Cook Co active officers. What CPD and Cook Co were doing impacted their retirees, not active officers. To qualify under LEOSA retirees have to be in some kind of retirement system and they must have left their agencies in good standing. The Cook Co and Chicago retirement systems, which are not LE agencies, would not give the retirees anything to say they left their agencies in good standing saying they didn't know what their status was in their former agencies. Their agencies were saying the retirees were in the retirement system but wouldn't release any further info. It was passing the buck type operation which left the retirees out in the cold. Some think it was a way to prevent retirees from carrying. However, anyone who has ever dealt with any local governmental agency in the Chicagoland area will know this type of run-around is typical of just about everything they do up there. It's pretty much the attitude of "Not my job so leave me alone." I dreaded going up there to do any kind of records check or get info from any of the Chicagoland agencies. Some real mental midgets and don't care attitudes employed by city and county agencies.
I believe the ILETSB has done or is working a way to work around. I haven't kept up with CPD/Cook Co issue so don't know the latest.
In Montana's case they are not ignoring LEOSA. Nothing in LEOSA mandates a state to implement a program for the retirees in a state. LEOSA only says that for retirees to carry then they must meet 7 guidelines and possess photo ID and certification. If a state doesn't have a program in place then retirees would be out of luck. IL was the same way until about a year ago. There was no state standard. A LEO could get out of the academy, spend the next 35-40 years as a LEO and never be required to shoot his gun for any kind of qualification or training. Agencies could set whatever standards they wanted, or none at all, and make the course as easy or as tough as they wanted. After LEOSA some agencies immediately set up programs for their retirees. Springfield, IL PD was one of the first PDs in the nation to qualify their retirees. The ISP started qualifying their retirees within a couple of months after LEOSA was signed. But if an agency didn't want to set up any type of qualification program for retirees there was nothing any one could do. LEOSA doesn't force an agency to do it. There was no state agency who had the authority to set up such a program. It came down to the ISP, Dept of Professional Reg, and the ILETSB, none of which had the legal authority to implement anything but each agreed something needed to be set up. So about a year ago the legislature mandated the ILETSB as the lead agency to qualify retirees. The retiree's former agency can still do it too but if that's not an option then the ILETSB thru the Mobile Training Units can do it. So I can do my retired qual shoot at the ISP at $5 per year or I can go thru the MTU at $100 per year.
At the same time the ILETSB set the minimum annual qualification shoot for all LEOs which is also the minimum qual for retirees. Implementing this minimum standard (and it's really minimal -
www.isp.state.il.us/foid/hr218secondarycw.cfm) got a great deal of resistance from a lot of towns and counties. They did not want to be told they had to qualify their officers and face the added expense of paying for the ammo, training, and range staff. The IL municipalities swing a big stick but in this case the ILETSB prevailed and for the first time ever there's a minimum qualification standard in IL.
As far as flying while armed there are still the same restrictions for active LEOs. It's not that any LEO can just walk up and step on a plane. There's some training required and then there has to be a need. Retirees would be flying like any citizen and would have to check any firearms in baggage.
LEOSA has very few restrictions and allows LEOs and qualified retired LEOs to carry in any state, territory, or WDC, except for certain government buildings or where prohibited by individuals on their private property.
My understanding of HR218 is that anywhere a local off duty cop can carry, so can an out of state cop.