Just got back from the Clackamas County Public Safety Range where I did my yearly qualification for my national concealed carry card.

I feel fortunate that I can carry concealed in any of our states, when many of you are fighting government bureaucrats both on the federal and state levels just for the right to have a concealed carry license. I know many juristictions have created a nightmare of procedures for you, and I urge you not to give up the fight. Gun ownership and defending the homefront must be our top objective.

I live in Wyoming, but I go out to Portland (actually Happy Valley) for my daughters yearly family reunion/BBQ (the only time the yuppee cooks).

Anyway I do my yearly LEOSA at the Clackamas County range. Great place. Cost $45 and they furnished the ammo and lamanated card.

Great gun running the program.

I've been carrying since the LEOSA was signed into law (actually had a WY CC permit before that).

Clackamas County has a great no hassle program since I'm out there the same time every year its a good way to go.

I've been carrying under LEOSA since i retired in 06. I meet the state authorized instructor at a local indoor range for the yearly. Total cost $45. for range fee and renewal. Be aware though that some northeastern states are less than friendly when it comes to recognizing LEOSA, tho it seems to be getting better.

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA

Kraig, don't think your OR quals are permitted under LEOSA if you live in WY. It must be the state in which you RESIDE as I understand it...and as do others.

For a fact, last time I qualified the instructor noted they had dq'd a New York resident who attempted to use a friend's Maryland address. That is NOT allowed.

Just trying to keep you legal...and from getting jammed up.

Be safe.

Example(s), please.

This is simply false information.

LEOSA is FEDERAL law...states cannot ignore.

Be safe.

There are many Barney Fife class officers out there who don't know and don't care. You may beat the rap but you won't beat the ride.

That was indeed questional under the 2004 law. The 2010 changes changed that or should I say made it more clear.

As long as the instructor is a quailified LE Instructor in HIS state, he can qualify any Retired LEO regardless of residence.

The orginal 2004 Law didn't include the term "certified firearms instructor" so prior to the 2010 version, I used the local qualification course and had a neighbor, who is a deputy sheriff verify my score. He wasn't an instructor. That dog don't hunt now.

As to the NE or any other location that has problems honoring the LEOSA, that's change quite a bit after some agencies have been having to pay off law suits for false arrest.

There is an outfit in NJ called "Sheepdog Accademy" who goes around the country providing training to police departments and prosicuters on the law in attempts to keep them out of trouble by not honoring it.

To really understand this law, if you carry per LEOSA or deal with officers (retired and active) they provide courses to help you.

You should go to their website for information even if you don't attend their courses. Also they provide the course material if you can't attend.

Helping to train those who protect and serve | Sheepdog Academy

I re-cert'd last month too. My old department runs a spring & fall course and of course I go to each of them. No fee, I just provide the ammo and I can shoot as much as I like, I can even line up with the regulars and shoot their duty qualification course.

As for the general Northeast, it is NOT untrue that certain agencies simply do not recognize a law enforcement officer's federal right to carry. A close friend (NYS Trooper) was cuffed and stuffed in Newark, NJ, for exercising this, and it cost him two days and cost his PBA rep more time than that. Reality is, anti-gun states are just that, even if you are law enforcement.

County as well. Kalifornistan leaves it up to the Sheriff in each county. We have a political appointee that was reelected last time around who is definitely anti armed citizen. If you're not a crony or celebrity we are a "Fat chance of issue" county. It's almost impossible to vote out an incumbent sheriff but we're trying.

Next time maybe.

*
Assuming he was carrying his creds and wasn't doing anything else unlawful, that will be expensive for Newark PD and the officer. The 2010 amendments made clear a lot of things, and one of them was that silly ammo restrictions are not going to apply any more.

I suspect that around here, an officer who made such an arrest would be lucky to only be fired and not prosecuted. (Washington law has for several decades allowed out of state officers to carry on their creds; I think it is mentioned in a 1975 AG's opinion I used for some research on LEOSA for my old agency.) I picked up my retired ID today, in fact.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

You are absolutely in violation of the terms of LEOSA. You must be a RESIDENT of the state in which you qualify.

Not going to debate further...but you are not compliant.

Be safe.

Just went and looked the statute, and The Big D is correct: 18 USC § 926C - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers | LII / Legal Information Institute

BTW: The correct reference is NOT HR218. Once enacted, the correct reference is by the statutory codification. It is 18USC 926(b) for active personnel, 926(c) for retirees.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

The applicable provision of 18 U.S.C. sec 926C(d)(2)(B) is:

(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; or

(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.

So, it looks like it has to be issued by the state of residence or by someone qualified to conduct a qualification within the state of residence.

The way I read it, I can qualify if I use the qualification course for the Active Officers in my state, in my case that would be the Anchorage Police Dept.

But to be on the safe side, I'm going to do both, my state's qualification and get the Sheriff's Offices RO run me though Wyoming's.

I am perplexed. When I retired from sunny Florida when I approached the local Sheriff here in my Co. of Pa. I was told that I must qualify with my former agency. That doesn't compute. Now, I have gotten qualified in Pa. and I am going to a retired officers qualification in NY state and when queried as to the legality of the NY quals when I reside in the Keystone state I was told by a retired Sgt. who runs them and gives lectures on the act that I was legal and my card would be honored. I will research this further unless someone more learned here can clarify the issue for me.

It looks like (4) provides options that would be acceptable. It reads, in its entirety:

(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;

I can see how this could be read to mean that you could qualify using the Anchorage qualification in Wyoming. However, you still have to look at the ID requirements. I did not quote subsection (d)(1) in my earlier post, but it says this:

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 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; and

[The part I quoted earlier follows this]

It looks to me like (d)(1) and (d)(2), dealing with ID, mean you should get the certification from the Anchorage PD that you shot their qualifciation, or use the standards set up for Wyoming where you live, and get a Wyoming instructor to qualify you using the Wyoming standards.

Unless you want to go to Anchorage to re-qualify every year, the easiest way would be to use the standards of an agency in Wyoming, because there is no POST-mandated test. So, I would find an agency in Wyoming that would do it, run through their course, and make sure the certification ties into the act.

Bear in mind that this is just my interpretation of this. This all is a big gray area.

badge, the law changed October 12, 2010 to expand the people to which the law applied and to address problems that people were having getting qualified. I don't know when you retired. It may have been good info at the time.

Here in Oregon (left coast) we welcome Honorably Retired Police Officers from any state. In fact, you don't need HR 218 in Ore. Just be a "retired copper" with id to prove it, and you can carry concealed. (some public buildings exceptions)

Ore. Revised Statues (ORS: 166.260) Person's not affected by unlawful possesion of a firearm ORS 166.250: (A) Sheriffs, constables, marshals, parole and probation officers, police officers whether active or HONORABLY RETIRED, or OTHER duly appointed peace officers.

It goes on to talk about military, fishermen, hunters, shooting club members, and other exceptions. The District Attorney in any county in Ore. basically sets the standards of enforcement within the laws of the state. I can honestly say that in my 30 plus years of LE & training, I never heard of an out of state active/retired officer having any problems short of doing something stupid. DUII, or some sort of reckless conduct. We were just trained that the law does not say limited to Ore. LEO's only, and we include our out of state friends.

At my recent HR-218 qualifications, a recently retired State Police Sgt. was present with his retired copper buddy. We talked about this very same subject, and he told me on routine contacts ( including minor traffic stops) if a out of state LEO including retired with id is carrying concealed, their policy is just do what you need to do and then move on. Guns in Ore. is part of heritage and life style.

July 4th of 04 Cheyenne,
MY Independence day. I reckon I'll be fine but I will reread the law. I have heard some horror stories, not war stories, horror stories ref. N>J> coppers arresting brother officers, ( retired ) for CCF. Good grief, what is wrong with these individuals? The law is plain,... clear. You have your retired ID and qualification card your ok. I don't understand it unless the atomosphere pervading NJ is so anti gun and anti carry that they wan't to arrest brother officers. Maybe someone can explain that mindset to me.

Please provide the actual cites where all these arrests have allegedly occurred. Don't want to hear about this guy who worked for another agency who knew a guy who said..... Provide the cite. Until cites are provided they're nothing more than internet BS.
There have been a few arrests however they weren't just blanket arrests because it was a LEO carrying in another jurisdiction. There were circumstances involved in each which put in question if the individual was actually in compliance with LEOSA, nothing at all about an agency ignoring LEOSA.
LEOSA isn't difficult to understand. Even before the 2010 changes it wasn't difficult. Why in the world nearly 8 years later we still have cops who can't read and understand the law is beyond my comprehension. For crying out loud these are the same guys who were suppose to be well versed in the law during their entire careers and now they can't read and comprehend something as simple as LEOSA. The reason is usually not because they can't understand LEOSA but they want LEOSA to say something it doesn't. They want it to say something that fits their particular circumstance and not comply with the statute. Read it and don't read into it. It's really very simple.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Newark airport Captain,.... a state of NJ agency,..... An active NYC Det. Lt.,...... warned by Port Authority not to arrest,.... to no avail. Info obtained by the Det. Lt.s immediate supervisor, Capt. Will that suffice for the sake of our conversation Capt. or do you want me to research it for additional bad arrests. It happens friend. I wouldn't do it. You probable wouldn't I would imagine but some cement heads will.

Cite please. And details.
From what you've given it's impossible to make heads or tails of it.
Who was arrested?
Who arrest them?
What agency?
"Infor obtained by the Det.Lts immediate supervisor"? What info? Where's the info? What's that mean? Absolutely nothing without a cite. So far you're just repeating nothing, not even the story.
Anecdotal stories are no more than internet tales. Strange the FOP and other organizations haven't been screaming about them.
For example, I can provide the story of a local IL police cmdr who was arrested for carrying a firearm by an agency in MO. Not only was he arrested but he was also convicted. Horrors of horrors!!!! He was an active LEO. Covered by LEOSA. Why would any agency arrest an active LEO carrying under LEOSA? And conviction to boot? Oh wait, what about the details of why he was arrested and convicted? Like he was drunk, waving his gun at the resort, physically involved in a fight, and firing off rds near the lake which was occupied by others. Hmmmm. Changes the story a great deal doesn't it. But if all you heard was a local IL LEO was arrested by MO then that puts everyone up in arms. And initially that's the way the story was being spread around the internet. Those low down dirty MO cops dared to arrest an IL LEO cmdr who was legally carrying and protected by LEOSA. Or what about the retiree who was arrested for carrying a firearm on a plane? What dirty airport cops would dare arrest a brother? Didn't matter he was trying to board a plane carrying a concealed weapon which isn't covered by LEOSA. But what's the internet story? Cops arrest a retiree for carrying a gun. Gee, how about the details?
Those of us tho who knew the LEO who was arrested knew the full story but that didn't stop the internet stories from flying.
Without details and cites the stories are no more than tales.
As far as you retiring from FL and living in PA - read LEOSA. It's very clear where you can qualify. Don't try reading in to it. Don't try making it say something it doesn't just because you want it to fit your circumstances. LEOSA is very clear. Others have posted the statute so I won't repost it but it's about as clear as law can be. It's not difficult to understand.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Mr. ISP Capt.
Now I know why I was a union rep. I generally despise management types and know I remember why. Arrogance and that snide, holier than thou attitude you like to flaunt.
See, I was a POLICEMAN. I will not make another agencies mistake a billboard for all to see. Anyone who would ask such a thing either was an IA rat or pushed a desk real hard. So my relating the story to you, gotten from an involved party, ( his Capt. got him out ), isn't enough or am I a liar Capt? You won't get all of the facts here Capt. Not the place. But then again, anyone worth their salt in police work would know that, wouldn't they Capt.
Gee Capt., I have read it it and I will politely disagree with your cut and dried declaration that it is clear. It is open to interpretation like most laws of the land but you bumper chased, right? You want any more pertinent info feel free to PM.

Your pending NY quals whilst you are a PA resident are NOT compliant with LEOSA. That is an absolute. Whomever gave you that false info is wrong, period.

Be safe.

Kraig, you are doing the correct thing in getting LEOSA qualified in your resident state of Wyoming.

To all others...and this is purely to help you avoid big problems...there are essentially two (2) ways to qualify pursuant to LEOSA.

The organization from which you retired/separated can qualify you per their standards.

Or, you may qualify in the state in which you reside according to their standards for off-duty personnel.

Cannot get any more basic than this.

e.g. I am a Maryland resident. My former employer does not qualify retirees. Accordingly, I must qualify per Maryland standards. Specifically, MD requires a "night" course of fire as part of the qualification. Let's say I went to Oregon as another poster stated he did. Does anyone think any range officer would possibly know the prescribed course of fire for each of the fifty (50) states and be prepared to administer those courses? I think not.

Again, my purpose here is to help you avoid problems and potentially cause problems for others. If you fail to pay heed/comply it's all on you.

LEOSA is well settled. It is NOT hard to comprehend.

To badge, I am surely not a cheese eater not am I one to tolerate LEO misconduct. That said, you need to provide specific examples or stop muddying the waters with tall tales.

Be safe.

From 2009 to 2010 I lived in upstate New York, in Chenango County. I checked in with NYSP and inquired as to LEOSA ( at the time I had my LEOSA Card from AZ which would no longer be valid the moment I obtained a NY drivers license ) I was told by NYSP to contact the local S.O. as they did not have a LEOSA. When I contacted the Chenango S.O. in Norwich NY, again I was told no LEOSA. I had to apply for the standard CCW, paid over $200., aanf after about 60 days wait I was issued a standard permit on which "Retired Police" was stamped in red. Mandatory training was waived but I never shot any qual course the 22 months I lived there either. That is not a LEOSA program!!

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA

AZretired, to be clear no state nor organization is mandated to provide LEOSA qualifications. However, they must abide by it in dealings with those who are qualified.

Be safe.

LEOSA was amended to cover retired officers that live in states that are "anti-gun"; it allows certified firearms instructors to run retired officers through firearms qualification courses to meet the annual training requirements.

There is a website from Illinois that covers the law and provisions very well.

You still aren't answering the question of providing the cite. You posted something that was not understandable and near jibberish and expect it to be taken as gospel. If you expect to be taken seriously then post the cite. If not then your "message" means nothing.
If you don't like it then it's not my fault. It has nothing to do with rank. It has to do with competence. Something you didn't answer.
BTW, no one called you a liar. I'm just asking for a cite instead of some internet tale that was incomprehensible. Hopefully when you were working your reports were better written. Since you can't or won't provide the cite then I can only assume you don't have it and you're just repeating tales. Another has asked you to provide details and you still haven't. You appear to have a hangup about rank. Again, that's your problem.
Since you don't know me then you have no idea about my career. BTDT and the t shirts were worn out a long time ago. And while I was a POLICEMAN I was able to read and comprehend statutes. And when asked to provide details I could provide the appropriate and related cites.
Maybe those arrests you alluded to were made by cops who were equally as inept at reading and understanding the statute. You may be proving your point without even realizing it by demonstrating the incompetence of those who are unable to read and comprehend.

__________________
183rd FBINA

While I am not above piling on command folks, especially FBINA grads and even worse, troopers, I have to agree with ISP Captain here. He is asking for a clear and understandable description of the facts of a case to support the allegation that an agency is not honoring LEOSA. The information provided was ... impossible to follow, at best.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

I sure hate to see these interactions fall to derision and name calling of fellow LEO. I wasn't a trooper but have been to the funerals of some that were, and were killed in the line of duty. When working I had many situations when regardless of the color of uniform, shape of badge, or markings on the patrol car I was very glad to see them show up. Trooper, officer, or deputy they're all "Policemen", in my eyes, unless I'm personally shown otherwise by their actions.
Sorry to interject, off topic, but I felt the need to say it.

__________________
SWCA #1917

Very well said!

I was tweaking his nose. I don't seem to have the option to use smilies in the text.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

Suspect he wan't talking about you, Doug M.

Be safe.

I thought that was the case Doug M. I've nothing against " jerking a guys chain", we've all (or at least I've) done it. It's the vicious, purposely disrespectful attacks that are, in my opinion, uncalled for.

__________________
SWCA #1917

Gentlemen.....


"1. We ask that you conduct yourselves as ladies and gentlemen. Civil Discourse and Courteous Behavior shall be the norm."

"2. Remember- opinions will differ. Get over it. State your opinion calmly, and allow others to state theirs. Discussion will be fine, but there is no need to take a thread into a verbal fistfight or shouting match."

"3. Do NOT descend into personal attacks on a member."

LEOSA has been put to the test in court in several cases, including New Jersey and New York. One case involved a Coast Guard Petty Officer; the local PD "determined" that LEOSA did not apply to a Coast Guard member; his attorney successfully had the case thrown out.

With the amendments made in 2010 to LEOSA strengthened the rights of the retired officer; specifically to assist officers in jurisdictions and states that are reluctant to provide the annual training and certification.

Some jurisdictions don't give a rat's A double SS about their retired officers rights to carry concealed under LEOSA, San Francisco for example banned handgun ownership in the city proper.

LEOSA court cases, although few in numbers, end up favorably for the retired officer involved.

I wasn't complaining about the lack of qualifications, rather New York's total lack of recognition of LEOSA. In Arizona, you qualify and AZDPS issues you a card stating the date of qualification. Same in New Mexico. In both cases there is a small admin fee of $20 plus whatever an instructor charges for the qual, if anything. Plain and simple I for one did not wish to be test case in NY. Since I could not get a police qual done, I wasn't about to test the waters by carrying on my retired ID only. I'm just hoping that when I travel back there later this summer they will recognize my Arizona Leosa card.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA

there are ny departments such as Rockland and Suffolk county PD that are conducting LEOSA qualifications for retirees. otherwise there are qualified police instructors who are doing it privately. the nypd put out an informational bulletin to its members about LEOSA and who qualifies. to say that Leosa is not recognized in NY state is incorrect.

Things may have changed since I left NY almost two years ago. But that was the situation when I left.

Sent from my Ally

__________________
Support your Police, & NRA