The federal Permit that we already have is no good. Doesn't make sense to me. why do you think that If we get more of them, that they would be any good ether? In what way does it make sense?
Chubbo

The second amendment is the only license we need to carry. It's good in every state. Any state law that is contrary to this amendment is illegal. The only reason states have ANY gun laws is because WE ALLOW IT.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

why can't they follow the model of driver's license? My WA state license is good everywhere in this country (and most of the world as well) even though the rules vary from state to state in terms of motor vehicle operation. Why must the federal government stick their noses in every corner of our lives when it is not necessary?

__________________
Regards from THE Old Fart

This is exactly why we don't want this. To make the DL legal in all states, each state must meet some minimum requirements and everyone has to go to the DMV and take a test.

This means that states that have constitutional carry would then have to eliminate that and require a test and a license. Do you really want that? I don't.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

ispcapt always says it better that I. His info is always correct.

I find it hard to comprehend how folks who claim to be LEO's and carry per LEOSA don't understand it. It is very simple!

Be safe.

The federal government isn't "sticking their noses in every corner of our lives" in this case, simply because there is no Federal License to Carry, and probably never will be. Something like this isn't even on the government's radar.

Why get upset about something that's never gonna happen?

This is correct. If the feds decided they were going to regulate concealed carry nationwide then they're going to set the standards, just like they did/do with DLs. Do you think their standards are going to be like AZ? Or more like MD, HI, or NYC? Or even more restrictive. Will the fed's standard be "May Issue"?
Be careful what you think you want. What you get may not be anything like what you thought it was going to be.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Ahhh my dear Captain,

You too are incorrect in some regards. Federalli (perhaps inadvertently) was referencing NY Penal Law 265 exemptions vice federal law.

You should have stopped when you said "says nothing at all about such". That, sir, is exactly it, LEOSA is silent on the magazine issue. It does not specifically exempt or allow; there is a huge difference. Much of federal law, unlike most states, is implied or derived authority. Frankly the "regular" capacity magazine possession issue has not been sufficiently determined.

Before, you go off on a tirade, ponder this. When I, as a duly authorized federal agent, am present in the Great State of New York, am I just at the mercy of the Praetorians of the New York State Police that they do not arrest me for carrying my duty handgun? For, I can assure you that, there is no section of United States Code (or the Federal Code of Regulations) that authorizes me to possess such "ammunition feeding devices" that have a capacity over 10 rounds.

How did U.S. Immigration Officers waltz around armed in NY for years when there was no statutory authority to arm them until IIRIRA went into effect in 1997? How about the FBI that did not obtain statutory carry authority until 1934; the Sullivan Act was passed in 1911.

The answer to these is that its implied authority, which is often a difficult concept for persons unfamiliar with federal law, although they should have gone over that at the NA...

If you still cannot conceptualize that, what if (for example) NY, that does not like being usurped by LEOSA, passes a law that says, anyone without a NY Pistol Permit or is not NY Police/Peace officer now have a magazine limit (or firearms capacity) of ONE round? One would think ridiculous......

"Is silent on the issue" certainly does not equal "does not allow" when one is discussing federal laws. In fact, LEOSA does specifically NOT allow certain types of firearms, and by being silent on the issue at least one court has determined that it implicitly allows other (short barreled shotgun).

"Please, read LEOSA. It's very plainly written. Simple to understand."

Perhaps not so...and before you ask yes, yes I do have a JD.

Did you ever hear the joke about what the difference is between a state police captain and God.....

We are talking about LEOSA. Federal law (LEOSA) trumps whatever NY Penal Law says in regards to carrying by LEOs. Nothing else in your post has anything relevant to mag size. LEOSA does not grant any exception to the mag size. LEOSA never mentioned specific types of ammo either. Because some states prohibited HP ammo LEOSA was amended in 2010 in allow HP ammo to be carried under LEOSA.

Did you get your authority to carry as a fed agent from NYS? I think not. There's no doubt a USC.
Since LEOSA wasn't signed until 2004 your references to the FBI statutory authority is totally irrelevant. As is your reference to INS in 1997.


Well, maybe you did read and understand part of LEOSA. None of what you write has anything to do with mag size, which has not been addressed either by LEOSA or the court.

As if that means anything.
Since we're telling jokes. Did you ever hear the one about the feds? You can always tell a fed but you can't tell them much. They think they already know it all.

I ask again - LEOSA has been law for almost 12 years. Still we have supposedly educated LEOs who are incapable of reading and understanding it.

__________________
183rd FBINA

I recall being stopped for an out of state traffic violation not too long ago. They required not only my DL, but also my truck registration and insurance verification; same as here in PA. Thinking about the CCP to DL analogy; do we really want that? I'd certainly prefer to see CCP reciprocity without registration, but I sure wouldn't bet against it when the politicians, lawyers, and insurance companies get around to thinking about this, or are otherwise prodded into doing it. As stated above, we should be careful of what we wish for, and I'm agreeing with Rastoff.

I'm also thinking that $500 NRA Life Membership deal is looking pretty good to me right now. -S2

Good Captain,

You never fail to disappoint.....Stop trying to think about a response and READ what I wrote. Shockingly enough there may actually be someone that is more knowledgeable that you.

I am well aware about all aspects of LEOSA and Federal law in general. I am also very well aware of where I derive my authority. My (very brief) historical analysis is extremely germane, I apologize if you are unable to comprehend it.

Simply put, you are correct that nothing contained in LEOSA specifically allows standard capacity magazines; at the same time nothing specifically prohibits them. Legally we refer to this as "not specifically addressing". There are provisions that LEOSA does address and prohibit. At the same time, federal law contains very strong historical context for implied authority.

This does not constitute legal advice and, I can, with 100% certainty, advise that DoJ or its components are not going to publish an affirmative opinion in the near future. However, all of the armchair lawyers (hint) that think the issue is settled, certainly do not speak from a position of knowledge.

I do applaud you for actually reading LEOSA; I do agree that its shocking how many retired (and active) guys still are unsure of the most basic tenets.

Cap, you cannot tell Fed jokes; we will be forced to come and take your yellow brick back. It will not be pretty......

As a point of order, there is actually a "federal carry permit", in the form of a limited Special Deputy U.S. Marshal designation. I have never heard of anyone that is not a federal judge or Assistant United States Attorney receiving one, and even then it is very, very rare. In most states, it would not be necessary but in historical context 20 or 30 years ago, such was not the case.

Note: To avoid the inevitable response, there are lots of people that get SDUSM designations, just not the sole purpose of carrying firearms for personal protection.

Back in 1985'ish I had the Special Deputy Federal Marshal appointment. As an active duty Army officer, I was assigned to a couple task forces that included local, county, state and federal LEO's. You got an oath of office and the special credentials. With that I carried everywhere including NYC and DC without any issues. Unfortunately the appointment expired after 2 years but I got to keep the credentials, even though they are expired.
I moved on to other assignments, and luckily I have always been able to get a state permit to carry on.
I heard rumors at that time (1985'ish) some politicians received these special deputizations so they could carry in DC. Also, at that time, you could only get it renewed one time giving you a total of 4 years, but I imagine special people got it renewed as often as requested?? Who knows?

I have read LEOSA from top to bottom many times. I agree that it is a very simple, easily read law. Here is the text of the ACT, from the NRA:

LEOSA

LEOSA only has two exemptions, which retired and active officers are expected to follow:

(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).

(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.

There is no discussion of magazine limits, CA approved pistols, NJ approved pistols, etc. If Illinois has enacted a magazine limit, LEOSA pre-empts it, provided the person meets all other qualifications.

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

I certainly would not be surprised that some politicians were made SDUSM back then or even now, I just have never seen it, although I've never really been in a position where I necessarily would. The USMS has significantly professionalized since the 1980's but ultimately they are just the federal catch-all solution for many "designation" needs. I know plenty of task force officers that exceeded four years, so that might have changed.

I have developed a problem that I'v never heard, bitched about before. While residing in the grand state of Florida a few years ago, I gave in, and complied with my wife's wishes, and obtained a Florida concealed carry permit. I had previously, over many years, traveled, and carried handguns in all of the states, but one, i'm not sure of, and also Canada, in motorcycles, autos, and Rv's, and never worried about the lack of one. Well, the last time when trying to send a set of fingerprints to the Florida Folks to renew my FL CC permit, the sheriff's dept. in the state that I reside in now, and was was using to obtain my fingerprints to send to FL, found that I no longer have fingerprints. They along with many other things, such as, Memory, good eyesight, and many others, are long gone, and never to return. Florida renewed the permit that time, but won't ever again. So, even if I wanted to buy the right to carry, that I never needed anyway, I couldn't if I wanted to. So, now guess what I'm going to do for that important permit when it finally expires?

I don't understand a word you wrote with the exception of carrying a handgun into Canada, which without the proper paperwork completed in advance, and regarding the proper, Canada allowed handgun, is a huge mistake. Could you clarify why you don't have fingerprints?

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

yes it certainly does but Democraps wont let it happen

If you illegally carry a loaded handgun in some states, such as NY, Massachusetts or NJ, you are completely insane. Other places, not such a big deal.

Your fingerprints are not gone, they just need to put a little more effort into taking them. There is "stuff" they put on the pads to make them printable.

L-2
I have lived in Arizona for many many years . There is NO requirement for a permit to either conceal or open carry .

You apparently haven't lived there that long, it was only July 2010 when the CCW permit became optional and the CCW has only been widely available since 1994.

Muss:
It seems that I'v lost even more than I thought. I must have lost the ability to write understandably in the American English language. No, Muss, I can't explain why that my fingerprints have gone, and in the same token, I can't explain why a lot of my memory, strength, good eyesight, and sex drive etc. has gone ether. I would guess that being eighty five years old on my next birthday would have a lot to do with the reason, but, I'll leave that up to you to figure out. By the way, I should clarify the time period that I was talking about carrying firearms, CB radio etc. into and out of Canada. It was back in the early 1950-60. Things were not so wonderfully complex, or taken so deadly serious on many matters, like that, back then. Hopefully you can understand a few of those words, if not, it wasn't important anyway.
Chubbo

You're right. I no longer care . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

EdnAZ:
The employs of the largest sheriff's department in the capitol City, of my State explained to me that there was absolutely nothing that could be done to obtain my fingerprints, I took them at their word. Your statement that I am completely insane, is completely correct. I probably will never visit the States that you mention again, but you can add the rest of them to the list, of ones that I am prepared to defend my right to own, and bear arms in. I so very much admire Charlton Heston's statement, that his guns would have to be pried out of his cold dead hands. I intend to follow his lead. Thankfully he never had to defend his, and hopefully I will never have to defend mine, but make no mistake, I will!!!

Never thought that you would, but thanks for your thoughts?

I agree with PALADIN on this one, especially his No. 5.

__________________
I Cor. 10:13 "1611KJV"

Many people shared similar sentiment regarding Shall Issue before it swept the country. Heck, Illinois is now issuing gun carry permits. Now THAT's inspiration for gun carry freedoms even in darkest anti-gun corners of America.

Before Shall Issue came to Tennessee in the 90s, handgun carry was largely viewed as a criminal activity and for law enforcement. Today, a whopping 560,000 Tennesseans have a handgun carry permit, one of the largest percentages of adult populations among the states.

Constitutional carry is in nine states, Idaho being the most recent in March of this year. According to what I've read, legislative efforts to pass constitutional carry laws are underway in nearly two dozen states.

Stay vigilant... keep the faith.

I find your observations to be very relevant. I always find it amazing that most people appear to fail to remember that just a (relatively) few years ago, concealed carry by non-leo's was virtually unheard of in the vast majority of the country.

While I think that we will not see any significant gains anytime soon in the traditional "anti" states, the last couple of decades have been remarkable. Of note, the shift in attitudes from that of firearms being for hunting and sport to that of personal protection is significant. The massive amount of annual gun sales is a good indicator that firearms are not going to lose popularity anytime soon.

Yes indeed, gun carry for average Joe is a relatively new practice. We went through a period of doubt with Shall Issue, many opponents warning of blood running in the streets and all that. But now that most folks have a family member, friend or co-worker who carries, the general uneasiness and fear has largely subsided.



I see Constitutional carry as phase two and natural progression of Shall Issue. Still lots of doubt about Constitutional carry... opponents warning of blood running in the streets and all that. But as the number of Constitutional carry states grows and more folks get used to the idea, and particularly if politicians see it as personally helpful to their careers... Coinstutuional carry may take less time to sweep the country than Shall Issue did. Never know...



Here is a great animated map showing the nation morphing from May Issue to Shall Issue, and now Shall Issue to Constitutional Carry. We're off to a good start.



Concealed Carry Animated Map