LEOSA Changes...
- Thread starter Autolycus
- Start date
- Status
sounds like a good things to me. if I remember right the current one is 20 years and not as many people to get it after retiring. Is my understanding of this correct and it would apply to military police ( MP's right )? It is about time the military get thrown a bone even if it is just so far the current and retired MP's. I think for the few lucky ones serving your country for 10 years and getting a federal CCW is a nice bonus.
Oldskool thought you made a mistake but checked the link and this will allow
law enforcement officers authorized to possess a fireman in a school zone to include retired law enforcement officers.
Nice that LEOs can possess a fireman in a school zone!
This is like the AMTRAK requiring everyone carrying a firearm on a train to be in a locked box i read elsewhere.
Does anyone in the government proofread anything?
Seriously, I know LEOSA upsets a lot of people but incremental expansion of it can only help the RKBA cause. The wording of the changes are getting more liberal (for us),
who are retired or who separated in good standing after at least ten years of service
The "separated in good standing" would seem to allow someone who was an LEO for 10 years (not retired) and decided to do something else carry under LEOSA.
law enforcement officers authorized to possess a fireman in a school zone to include retired law enforcement officers.
Nice that LEOs can possess a fireman in a school zone!
This is like the AMTRAK requiring everyone carrying a firearm on a train to be in a locked box i read elsewhere.
Does anyone in the government proofread anything?
Seriously, I know LEOSA upsets a lot of people but incremental expansion of it can only help the RKBA cause. The wording of the changes are getting more liberal (for us),
who are retired or who separated in good standing after at least ten years of service
The "separated in good standing" would seem to allow someone who was an LEO for 10 years (not retired) and decided to do something else carry under LEOSA.
gc70
Member
Expansion of LEOSA helps the RKBA cause if you believe that federal legislative permission for concealed carry is a good thing. Whatever is given by Congress can also be taken away by Congress.
Actually, the current version of LEOSA says that retired officers must have a minimum of FIFTEEN (15) years total LE service unless they were retired earlier from a service connected injury, and, NO, neither the current law or the proposed changes give LEOSA coverage to either active or retired military police.
LEOSA is simply yet another example of two sets of laws - one for the sheople and one for those that want us to "respect their authority".
I see zero reason why a retired law enforcement officer should be able to exercise additional rights that a mere civilian cannot.
I see zero reason why a retired law enforcement officer should be able to exercise additional rights that a mere civilian cannot.
Last edited:
glockman19
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2007
- Messages
- 3,700
Agreed...It is becomming us v. them.
It's OK
We're better armed.
jdh
Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,375
Since I'm to tired to do it again I'm going to just copy and paste what I said in a post on another forum with just a few minor edits.
"Let's start with the biggie NFA34, we won't bother to go back to the reconstruction era gun control laws passed by the racist northerners to keep freed slaves from being able to obtain firearms. That is a 75 year history of anti-gun laws. You cannot realistically expect them to all be undone over night. LEOSA 2004 was a small step in the right direction. There have been riders added to other bill this year that would make the "full faith and credit" clause apply to carry permits. Another small step in the right direction if passed. Legal action in the courts including the Supreme Court have been brought and small victories have been won including a SC ruling that the 2nd applies to individuals. A case is in progress in the SC that if ruled in "our" favor will confirm the 2nd does apply to the states not just the federal government. Another step, a bigger one this time but another step on the journey.
To fall into the trap of believing the a victory for one segment of the gun owning public is a dis on the remaining segments thus driving a wedge between the groups is a means to giving the antis a total victory in the long run. Accept them for what they are, steps on the path to victory for all of US. Work to build on those steps and help to insure WE win, not them.
Instead of spewing you hate and discontent, channel that energy towards the ones that have passed the laws and keep on them to undo the damage THEY have done to YOUR Liberty."
"Let's start with the biggie NFA34, we won't bother to go back to the reconstruction era gun control laws passed by the racist northerners to keep freed slaves from being able to obtain firearms. That is a 75 year history of anti-gun laws. You cannot realistically expect them to all be undone over night. LEOSA 2004 was a small step in the right direction. There have been riders added to other bill this year that would make the "full faith and credit" clause apply to carry permits. Another small step in the right direction if passed. Legal action in the courts including the Supreme Court have been brought and small victories have been won including a SC ruling that the 2nd applies to individuals. A case is in progress in the SC that if ruled in "our" favor will confirm the 2nd does apply to the states not just the federal government. Another step, a bigger one this time but another step on the journey.
To fall into the trap of believing the a victory for one segment of the gun owning public is a dis on the remaining segments thus driving a wedge between the groups is a means to giving the antis a total victory in the long run. Accept them for what they are, steps on the path to victory for all of US. Work to build on those steps and help to insure WE win, not them.
Instead of spewing you hate and discontent, channel that energy towards the ones that have passed the laws and keep on them to undo the damage THEY have done to YOUR Liberty."
After 20+ years of working nights, weekends, holidays for low pay and putting up with an untold amount of BS, any LEO with a good record and retired honorably should be given some minor consideration. They are firearms qualified and know the law.
RobMoore
Member
Better to try to bring citizen's rights up than LEO right's down.
Speedo66
Member
Who wants to possess a "fireman" anyway?
Is that for real?
Personally, as a retired LEO, I'd rather possess a firearm.
Why should retired LEOs get special treatment? Weeeelll, maybe, just maybe, because most (not all, not all) have shown by their (closely watched) behavior they have acted responsibly for the last 20 years or so. Been trained annually for the same amount of years. Have the training, knowledge, and ability to take action in a critical situation.
Don't be a hater just because there's no retired citizen bill. ;>)
Is that for real?
Personally, as a retired LEO, I'd rather possess a firearm.
Why should retired LEOs get special treatment? Weeeelll, maybe, just maybe, because most (not all, not all) have shown by their (closely watched) behavior they have acted responsibly for the last 20 years or so. Been trained annually for the same amount of years. Have the training, knowledge, and ability to take action in a critical situation.
Don't be a hater just because there's no retired citizen bill. ;>)
Last edited:
glockman19
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2007
- Messages
- 3,700
It was your CHOICE. no one forced you to take the job. So...Why should you get to be a "special citizen". Us simpletons paid your salary through taxes?
The arogance to think that you deserve preferential treatment because you had a civil service job amazes me. S I guess since I've been in the insurance and financial services industry for over 30 years I should get free insurance and a better return on my investments than you? Doesn't make sense when you look at it that way. Particularly since you were all paid and continue to get health and retirement benefits from us taxpayers does it?
It's OK...the government is going broke and soon enough won't be able to pay for your union negoitated contract. Then what will you all do?
If you think the tax payer on every level is going to stand for the second class status you are sorely wrong.
aren't LEO citizens? NO you are in a class by yourself at the expense of the average citizen who pays the bills. not to mention...LEO's have NO OBLIGATION to protect anyone.
I've carried a firearm under the LEOSA or 2004 since it first went into effect. The only thing I've concluded from that time period is that ALL people should be able to do the same. This law may of had the effect of changing hearts and minds of law enforcement officers to help them join the cause of the RKBA. The elitist whining and class warfare crap is going to benefit nobody but continue to drive a wedge between LE and regular folks. LEOSA wasn't the cops idea, they didn't sign it, they didn't pass it, most of them didn't even know about it AFTER it passed. Give them a break will ya??? There are more people out there with concealed weapons permits now than ever before. You trust (mostly) your cops to carry firearms on duty then stop getting all bent because they are carrying off duty. Most of them were anyhow. LEOSA was meant primarily as a mechanism to standardize the laws when cops carried off duty, not to provide some special elitist privilege the masses couldn't have. LEOSA also effects more than just your local city cops it effect thousands of other LEOs as well including Federal Prison Workers. As more of them become concealed weapon carriers they also join the ranks of people like you who love and respect the RKBA for all. If you keep wringing your hand and gnashing you teeth every time they do you are going to alienate them from you. Class warfare is for the sheeple so stop it.
Last edited:
Anything that extends gun rights is a good thing. Remember that the Second Amendment is just that, an amendment. Amendments have been repealed before. The more forward momentum in support of keeping the Second Amendment the better. The more people out there with guns and the less bad things happening because of gun owners and (ideally) the more catastrophes stopped by us the better.
Not to start a war here, but I think you're being a bit unfair. The men and women in law enforcement and the military don't it for the benefits (besides maybe the GI Grant). They sweat and toil so that people like us can watch hours of mindless reality TV if we so choose to. Even if you're talking about the guy who cooks on a Carrier or the guy who answers your call at the local PD, they're part of the machine that keeps the social framework we all enjoy.
Yes cops have to enforce bad laws, yes Soldiers, Airmen, Marines, and Sailors have to sometimes fight in mismanaged, pointless, or purely political conflicts and yes there are abuses of power... withstanding those instances (which are few and far between in the grand scheme) I can't see how or why someone would sneer at their hard work.
You're very right, they were never drafted, they signed up on their own inkling. They chose that path over whatever other options or endowments they might have had. That's why people feel they should be rewarded.
I can say a lot more on this subject, but instead I'll just say that I'm grateful to the people out there keeping us all safe on a daily basis. I've been blessed to know a lot of former military as well as current and former police and neither is an easy job. And also, if anything else, they distrust the government more than anyone else. They have/had have a front row seat to the stupid things our crappy-but-better-than-the-rest-bureaucracy has/has had to offer.
Not to start a war here, but I think you're being a bit unfair. The men and women in law enforcement and the military don't it for the benefits (besides maybe the GI Grant). They sweat and toil so that people like us can watch hours of mindless reality TV if we so choose to. Even if you're talking about the guy who cooks on a Carrier or the guy who answers your call at the local PD, they're part of the machine that keeps the social framework we all enjoy.
Yes cops have to enforce bad laws, yes Soldiers, Airmen, Marines, and Sailors have to sometimes fight in mismanaged, pointless, or purely political conflicts and yes there are abuses of power... withstanding those instances (which are few and far between in the grand scheme) I can't see how or why someone would sneer at their hard work.
You're very right, they were never drafted, they signed up on their own inkling. They chose that path over whatever other options or endowments they might have had. That's why people feel they should be rewarded.
I can say a lot more on this subject, but instead I'll just say that I'm grateful to the people out there keeping us all safe on a daily basis. I've been blessed to know a lot of former military as well as current and former police and neither is an easy job. And also, if anything else, they distrust the government more than anyone else. They have/had have a front row seat to the stupid things our crappy-but-better-than-the-rest-bureaucracy has/has had to offer.
I should have more rights than any LEO because I went to college and already have a better salary than they ever will, thus making me more important as a citizen. Why should a bunch of beat cops who could barely make it out of high school and make a living mostly sitting around eating donuts and issuing speeding tickets have more rights than me: the smart, educated, savvy american businessman/lawyer/doctor/etc.?
...see how that works when the pretentious pendulum of unjust stereotypes and condescension swings the other way? And this thread is a prime example of that poor attitude from the many various segments of the gun-owning/using community, and it is why the anti's still exist in the first place. And if they ever truly win, this will be why.
IBTL
...see how that works when the pretentious pendulum of unjust stereotypes and condescension swings the other way? And this thread is a prime example of that poor attitude from the many various segments of the gun-owning/using community, and it is why the anti's still exist in the first place. And if they ever truly win, this will be why.
IBTL
Holy crap I almost puked reading the first part of your post RP88, I'm glad you weren't serious. I believe our point is that we are all equal and I agree with that. My problem is that folks attack people who carry under LEOSA when we should be getting them on our side. The antis love to split us up and pit us against each other. It does nothing but further their cause. Passing any law arming citizens is a good thing. You will find a lot more LEO that believe that after LEOSA than before.
Good one. I had a conversation in a bar a few years ago with some folks about concealed carry and one of the guys (whom I did not know) was a cop. He used the same argument that you use above. I laughed in his face and told him that I was better trained and spent more time around firearms than 99% of the cops out there. This guy came unglued - he told me that "he better not ever catch me carrying or I would be sorry". Needless to say he didn't like the way the rest of the conversation went.
So, LaBulldog, are you saying that if I've had the same job for 20 years and have no criminal record and have been "trained", that I should get to carry too? Hope so. Btw, most cops don't spend nearly as much time with firearms as the folks here on this board. And I'd say that many "citizens" know the law as well as, if not better, that many cops.
I'm not down on cops here, btw (except those that think there is a class system and it is "us" against "them"...), yet this entire thing smacks of political favoritism and two sets of rules. One for us and one for them. I'm sorry, I can never get my arms around that.
All I have ever asked my political representatives for is the same ability to protect myself and my loves ones as they themselves enjoy. That's it. Trust me for who I am and how I've lived my life vs. who you think I am and what you think I might do.
This thread appears to going into a cop bashing mode. Most of the arguments are on the "their no better than me" line of thinking. No one thinks cops are, I/we have a certain amount of life experiences through our chosen profession that no one else has. The same thing applies for military personnel.
So yes we chose the line of work we are doing however, that line of work was filled with various experiences most of the population doesnt have.
Its much more than how much time you spent on the range, some of the best shooters on my PD are some the worst cops. Concentrating too much on the tools and not enough on the trade.
I suppose it comes down to maybe, just maybe a retired cop, might just know when to engage and when to be a witness. Maybe a retired cop has the skill set to observe and use tactics to the best possible advantage, maybe not. I will submit that there is so much more to it than "shoot, dont shoot" scenarios.
Im not against CCW or open carry in fact I wish it was a federal law so the states like mine (Illinois) couldnt restrict the RKBA, but in the meantime you can bet I will take any and all tactical advantage I can.
Rant over, hope I made some sense
So yes we chose the line of work we are doing however, that line of work was filled with various experiences most of the population doesnt have.
Its much more than how much time you spent on the range, some of the best shooters on my PD are some the worst cops. Concentrating too much on the tools and not enough on the trade.
I suppose it comes down to maybe, just maybe a retired cop, might just know when to engage and when to be a witness. Maybe a retired cop has the skill set to observe and use tactics to the best possible advantage, maybe not. I will submit that there is so much more to it than "shoot, dont shoot" scenarios.
Im not against CCW or open carry in fact I wish it was a federal law so the states like mine (Illinois) couldnt restrict the RKBA, but in the meantime you can bet I will take any and all tactical advantage I can.
Rant over, hope I made some sense
RobMoore
Member
I said "Better to try to bring citizen's rights up than LEO right's down."
glockman19 says
Try actually responding to what I'm saying instead of taking the cheap route of picking at the wording. I'm reminded of liberals wanting people to be more PC.
glockman19 says
and is ignoring the actual message in order to focus on the nomenclature. Poor argument technique. Yes LEOs are citizens, but saying "citizen" and "LEO" gives a clear enough picture about which group I'm refering to doesn't it?
Try actually responding to what I'm saying instead of taking the cheap route of picking at the wording. I'm reminded of liberals wanting people to be more PC.
This thread, like so many that has anything to do with LEO's, is going down THAT road.
No matter what the subject line there will be a number of people here using this as their opportunity to bash LEO's, after 18 years of doing this I suppose I should no longer be suprised. Have at it everyone, Im done with this thread.
Im glad the info was provided by the OP, Il print it out and inform my PD about it so they can pass it on to the troops.
No matter what the subject line there will be a number of people here using this as their opportunity to bash LEO's, after 18 years of doing this I suppose I should no longer be suprised. Have at it everyone, Im done with this thread.
Im glad the info was provided by the OP, Il print it out and inform my PD about it so they can pass it on to the troops.
gc70
Member
I also dislike cop bashing - so don't invite it. Saying "LEOs are no better than average citizens, but ..." is like waving a red flag in front of a bull; you will get a reaction.
Quiet
Member
hmmm...
I know some retired MPs that will like this change.
It looks like there might be changing the provision for weapons qualification too. The wording, like usual, is wonky but it looks like a retired or separated officer can take the state's police standard qualification course. This would help with agencies that dont have any intention of helping retired officer qualify.
NMPOPS
Member
This is my first post on this forum, didn't want to start this way but felt I needed to. First, I retired after 25 years in Law Enforcement, been shot at, kicked beat on, too many stitches to count. So yes, maybe I do deserve LEOSA. Second, I paid for my life and health insurance just like you and I pay for it now in retirement. Third, my state retirement fund is funded by members not taxes. Yes, my employer did contribute just as yours may have to a 401K. Last, my mother in law is retired from Verizon and gets phone and cell phone rates cheaper than the rest of the public and auto industry employees can buy cars cheaper that you or I. Lots of people get breaks and privledges not just cops. I chose my job just like you chose yours. And very last, Lots of cops have college educations.
- Status
