[walkinguf61]

A lot of cops don’t know it as “ LEOSA” but it’s original tag of “H.R. 218”.
Sometimes it’s just the difference in terminology.

 

[walkinguf61]

I don't know, I retire in about .45 days, I started all the LEOSA on line stuff, have a date scheduled this spring to qualify, but do I really need it? An Indiana LTCH is about all a guy like me needs, as I don't plan on any vacation trips to non reciprocal states.

The answer is yes. It’s an extra layer of protection. With LEOSA and a permit, you are essentially immune to a lot of the restrictions that permit holders have. I did a quick check on Indiana laws and you guys don’t seem to have a lot of restrictions anyway but you can see how fast that can change.
Besides, you never know when you might have to take an emergency trip somewhere to help family or the wife booked a vacation somewhere .

 

[walkinguf61]

The early HR218/LEOSA cards my Fed co-workers had, didn’t have photos. We discussed it over and over and the rational was, it was easier to carry that card and your qualificatio card than their Credentials which also in some cases had their badge attached. Even without the badge, most retired Fed Crees are HUGE, compared to retired or active for that matter, real police ID’s

The problem with that is that LEOSA required photographic ID issued by your particular agency. No photo, no good .

 

[walkinguf61]

Texas deputy constables have to meet the same peace officer licensing requirements as city police and deputy sheriffs. In the county where I work, there’s over a thousand deputy constables. They have patrol, investigations, K-9s, etc. It’s a totally different arrangement than most other states.

The job that the sheriff , deputy etc varies not just state to state but here, it’s department to department. Some have peace officer power, some have police officer powers and perform different duties

 

[walkinguf61]

My former agency used to issue 2 IDs. One as a Retired ID saying you were Honorably Retired and whether you were authorized to carry a concealed weapon. That ID indicated you were not LEOSA authorized. Then if you met all 18 USC 926 (c) requirements you were issued a second ID that you were LEOSA authorized and that ID looked exactly like the other Retired ID. The only difference being the LEOSA ID had an annual expiration date. It was a mess really.

When I moved to Nevada and a deputy told me the S/O would qualify any LEOSA authorized retired copper and issue them an ID indicating they did the annual qualification. My former agency (California) finally just issued the LEOSA ID if you qualified with them and If you just wanted a Retired ID they would issue that and indicate if you were authorized to carry a concealed weapon BUT..... That authorization was only good for California.

Now, in Texas I go to my local police department and they qualify me using my former agency's qualification protocol and then the Range Master sends an email to my former agency in California saying I qualified with whatever weapon on whatever date and my former agency sends me a new LEOSA ID in a few days. It's a screwed up procedure but so far it works!

Really, on technicality, you might have a problem as to whom qualifies you. But if your former department signed off on it , I guess it’s okay .

 

[walkinguf61]

Subsection (4) and (B) does not make it mandatory that the agency issuing the original LEOSA ID qualify you (see bold print)

§926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).
(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that-
(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property; or
(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park.

(c) As used in this section, the term "qualified retired law enforcement officer" means an individual who-
(1) separated from service in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer;
(2) before such separation, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice);
(3)(A) before such separation, served as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 10 years or more; or
(B) separated from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;
(4) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the standards for qualification in firearms training for active law enforcement officers, as determined by the former agency of the individual, the State in which the individual resides or, if the State has not established such standards, either a law enforcement agency within the State in which the individual resides or the standards used by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State;
(5)(A) has not been officially found by a qualified medical professional employed by the agency to be unqualified for reasons relating to mental health and as a result of this finding will not be issued the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1); or
(B) has not entered into an agreement with the agency from which the individual is separating from service in which that individual acknowledges he or she is not qualified under this section for reasons relating to mental health and for those reasons will not receive or accept the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1);
(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

(d) The identification required by this subsection is-
(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer and indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training as established by the agency to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer; and
(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides or by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State that indicates that the individual has, not less than 1 year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met-
(I) the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the State, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; ora certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met-
(II) if the State has not established such standards, standards set by any law enforcement agency within that State to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.

(e) As used in this section-
(1) the term "firearm"-
(A) except as provided in this paragraph, has the same meaning as in section 921 of this title;
(B) includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act; and
(C) does not include-
(i) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
(ii) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
(iii) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title); and

(2) the term "service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer" includes service as a law enforcement officer of the Amtrak Police Department, service as a law enforcement officer of the Federal Reserve, or service as a law enforcement or police officer of the executive branch of the Federal Government.

Yes, I know the law.
The rub in this example would have been the certificate. They qualify you using your old agency’s standard rather than the standard of an agency of the state you live in.

“a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met-
(I) the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the State, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met-”

The local range guy didn’t do that .


Then the LEOSA card ( not the just photographic ID but the cert was issued by your old department eventhough you didn’t actually requal with them :
From the law:
agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer and indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been TESTED or otherwise found BY the agency to meet the active duty standards.”

But rereading the law — this is part covers you “otherwise found “. As I said, if your old agency says it’s okay, I guess it’s okay.

 

[walkinguf61]

This is all it needs to/should be. I carry my retired ID, and the business card LEOSA qual card from my (post-retirement different state's) qualifying agency.

Shaking my head at all this other nonsense about which I'm reading here, such as IL26's qualifying entity contacting his former agency - in another state(!) - with qual record...what?!

Hopefully, they eventually get the law amended do we don’t have to requal.
But the range instructor where he does requal could probably just requal him to the standard of the state of which the retiree now resides.

 

[walkinguf61]

LEOSA was a good idea but people like Ded Kennedy screwed it up because he hated everything LEO or guns. My Dept. would not participate so it did nothing for me. So I have a regular CCW permit which I only have to renew every 5 years. I hardly ever go out of state so that's enough for me. Some county sheriffs here do not require former LEOs to take the firearms training course to renew, but mine does. So I only have to qualify when it's time to renew.

What state do you live in? Did your old department issue photographic ID( active or retired), and do you still have one of those IDs?
If you have that photographic ID, retired in good standing, any range guy who is qualified to requal active officers in the state you live in , can qualify you

 

[walkinguf61]

In SC only active LE firearms instructors can LEOSA qualify retirees. SLED (State LE Division) told me when I tried to become a LEOSA qualifier I couldn't bc I wasn't active.

Is it that the range officer has to be an active LE or that they are employed to qualify active officers by a LE department? We have a similar thing here. But if they are employee to requal active officers by a department, they can do LEOSA. It’s a side business for a lot of firearm instructors who are LE or work for a department. A DA’s office here get a free range/low cost for their investigators to requal on and the instructors ( retired cops but employed as contracted to work for DA’s department) get that LEOSA ability to qualify others .

 

[walkinguf61]

NC. Yes, I have my retired ID and badges. I was already retired when LEOSA passed. I believe at the time you had to qualify with your former agency. Mine would not allow it, too many lawyers and fear of taking responsibility. Then I realized it really didn't mean anything to get qualified every year, and still be limited the same as a regular CCW holder, who only had to qualify every 5 years. It's good for those still working, but not much good for retirees.

The guys who are still working don’t have to requal to be covered by LEOSA.

Too bad that it’s a pain for you to get it done. It has benefits that a CCW doesn’t . LEOSA protects one from local prohibitions like carrying in a place that serves alcohol ( as long as you don’t partake). It’s also the thing that is protecting us from some the crazy laws the anti-gun people are passing in response to the Bruen decision. I know your area seems safe now but your state is turning bluer by the minute

 

[walkinguf61]

NYC does the same thing, although not many people "check in at Precincts".

Huh? NYC does not require one check in for LEOSA like Hawaii does. Not even under the new CCIA law. Furthermore, even Hawaii’s check in is actually a violation of LEOSA. LEOSA makes one immune from state carry laws if one carries in the constraints of the LEOSA provisions. Hawaii can go pound sand if I wanted to carry there. I won’t carry there because I would want to drink on such a vacation .

 

[walkinguf61]

“The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) is a federal statute which allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed firearm in the State of Hawaii IF requirements of LEOSA and State of Hawaii laws are met.”

Gotta appreciate their “IF” in there…

“It is important to note that 18 USC §926B does not supercede Hawaii’s firearms laws.”

Law Enforcement Index Page

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SAFETY ACT of 2004 (LEOSA) 18 USC §926C The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) is a federal statute which allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed firearm in the State of Hawaii IF requirements of LEOSA and State of...

ag.hawaii.gov

The federal law says:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

“Notwithstanding “ means the state law is moot or the dictionary quote of: “in spite of; without being opposed or prevented by:
Notwithstanding a brilliant defense, he was found guilty. She went to the game anyway, doctor's orders notwithstanding”

Hawaii is limited into its control over LEOSA carry. One was to define what is intox as regard to carrying a firearm to any alcohol. Other part goes to their own state requirements for their resident retired LEO to qualify for it.
And third is what is allowed on state/local property .
Anything else is an violation of LEOSA if the carrier is within the confines of the federal law

 

[walkinguf61]

Is the AG in Hawaii even a lawyer? He might as well put "And if your Aunt had balls she'd be your Uncle" in there too.

Whole point of LEOSA is to exempt you from most state restrictions, including those exactly like that one.

Randy

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

Yep. New Jersey just got slapped down for trying to tell its retired cops with LEOSA that they couldn’t carry hollowpoints despite LEOSA’s exemption to it.

 

[walkinguf61]

I never stated that. Active Police Officers are required to check in if carrying in NYC. I worked in a neighboring state and my little cousin is an NYPD Captain. It was pretty common to have to check into a Precinct (most don't).

Negative. I was NYPD. No one has ever just gone to an NYPD precinct just to check in( active or retired) for LEOSA.
I think you are getting it mixed up with checking in a gun ( having the precinct hold their gun ) so one go see a Broadway show or go to Madison square garden who use metal detectors . That we did do. We did that for active NY officers too.