LEOSA: Qualifications and Covered Firearms

I don't carry under LEOSA, as I'm not a retired LEO...but with all the different interpretations by state, agency, lawyer, etc...why not just get a regular CCW permit to cover yourself? It may not give quite as many rights to carry as LEOSA does, but in most states it's very clear what you can and can't do. I would not want to be a test case for LEOSA if I got into a shooting.

I have a NC and AZ CCW permit. I really only got my NC permit because of the silly permits needed to buy pistols in this state...and with a CCW permit we are exempt from the pistol purchase permit.

If you have any firearms training, such as law enforcement or military, the AZ permit is super easy to obtain. Fingerprints, copy of your firearms training, 1 page CCW permit application filled out, and a $60 money order, and you're good for 5 years. Renewal is $45. Seems much easier than trying to decipher what you can and can't do under LEOSA.

Fox
 
When I am in my home state, which is where I live, I can carry anything I want. When I am out of state on vacation. I just want "a gun", so this is not a big deal to me. I just get the LEOSA with my vacation gun. The rest is irrelevant.
 
Fox4506 said:
I don't carry under LEOSA, as I'm not a retired LEO...but with all the different interpretations by state, agency, lawyer, etc...why not just get a regular CCW permit to cover yourself? It may not give quite as many rights to carry as LEOSA does, but in most states it's very clear what you can and can't do. I would not want to be a test case for LEOSA if I got into a shooting.

I have a NC and AZ CCW permit. I really only got my NC permit because of the silly permits needed to buy pistols in this state...and with a CCW permit we are exempt from the pistol purchase permit.

If you have any firearms training, such as law enforcement or military, the AZ permit is super easy to obtain. Fingerprints, copy of your firearms training, 1 page CCW permit application filled out, and a $60 money order, and you're good for 5 years. Renewal is $45. Seems much easier than trying to decipher what you can and can't do under LEOSA.

Fox
Click to expand...

Actually, despite the different ways that individual states interpret LEOSA (for issuing their own citizens documentation regarding qualifications and / or mandatory training), the rest is contingent on what LEOSA, (the federal law), grants under its authority.

For example, here in NC, if you were to qualify annually with your old agency or department the state would not get involved whatsoever. You'd receive your proof of qualification from that agency to keep with your retired creds and be good to go.

However, in NC, if you don't qualify with your old agency your alternative is to qualify through an instructor who is certified by the NC Dept. of Justice. In my case, a lieutenant with the local Sheriff's Dept.

The link I posted above from the NC DOJ provides a good explanation of the program and how it works...including a chart of where a retired LEO may carry vs. someone with a CCH.

Finally, I've considered getting a state license as well, and may in the future, but it would only be worthwhile if I wanted to conceal carry something I didn't qualify with for LEOSA or wanted to purchase additional firearms. Neither of which is the case at the present time. (The other firearm I carry occasionally but not under LEOSA, a 3" 686+, is open carried on our rural roads or local woods during periods of high bear or coyote activity while I'm out with the dog.)
 
Last edited:
IMO, LEOSA needs to be refined and re-affirmed by Congress. There needs to be no ambiguity as to the unquestionable overriding federal jurisdiction and national (50 state and all US territories) applicability of the law and no question as to the scope and intent of the Act. No state can claim to opt out. Furthermore, there needs to be specific duties and obligations required of (former) employing law enforcement agencies who should be required to either grant LEOSA credentials to former qualified employees or provide a factual, valid reason why the employee is not eligible. There should also be well defined civil remedies written into the law. The last agency to have employed the qualified separated / retired officer should be the agency obligated / required under the act to issue the credential to qualified persons.



 
FWIW, don't travel to Hawaii. They opted themselves out of the federal act. If you want to carry in Hawaii, they require that you pay a fee and apply for a permit. You must register your firearm within a short time of arriving on the island. LEOSA is not encouraged there. I will not be going back.
 
The Big D said:
Huh? :confused:

Your statement is not true...nor could any state opt out of compliance with a Federal law.

Be safe.
Click to expand...

Big D,

NJ is another one, their RPO permit, which only came into effect around the time LEOSA was enacted, demands certain requirements, mental health check w/ annual renewal, and their qualification course also requires night fire, they emphasize that no hollow point ammunition is allowed.They also have a maximum age limitation.

As we see in the LEOSA, that is not what the federal law says.

Another problem, their twice annual qualification required you to send them a certificate signed by the instructor, listing your specific firearms used for qualification, they issued an annual card ($50.00) that said you met the qualification, but that card has been rejected in a nearby state as not being a "record of qualification."
 
Last edited:
States can and do often rationalize that they can add additional requirements to a federal law. What states can do, is enact their own state version of a federal law (act), but LEOSA should state, in no uncertain terms, that federal law supersedes all related state and local laws and prescribes penalties for state and agency non-compliance. (Historically, California has become too big for its collective britches.)

Here's Hawaii's added LEOSA requirements. Hawaii must have missed the memo about federal LEOSA requirements.
https://ag.hawaii.gov/cjd/files/2013/01/LEOSA-guideline-for-QLEO-926B.pdf

Criminal Justice Division | Law Enforcement Index Page
 
Last edited:
Here in Louisiana, we must pass the Louisiana Peace Officer's Firearms qualification with a score of 70% or better. The firearm that I used is not listed on my qual card.
 
Apples and walnuts!.

Of course, I have. Will send along a linky in just a bit that will help you understand (I hope!) the relationship between state and federal laws.

Be safe.


Steve912 said:
Hmm...heard the term 'sanctuary cities'? Marijuana, in Colorado? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
 
LEOSA

My problem is with the annual qualification. The cost of range time, instructor time and ammunition all adds up. Everyone doesnt get it for free. Being retired I am on a fixed income. It's not that I cant qualify i was a certified police firearms instructor for over 30 years and developed courses of fire and trained thousands of officers. It's the pain in the *** that annual qualifications places on any officer particularly those who have moved or have been retired for a long time in my case over 20 years. Not only am I 1200 miles from my home state I dont know the local cops, chiefs(and I was one) sheriff etc to qualify locally. None of that is required for a state CCW which is good in most states and lasts seven years. While LEOSA has some benefits, too me its not worth the effort. Additionally I personally feel that if a ordinary citizen and there are millions can qualify for a multi-year CCW license with little or no training that license should be accepted as meeting LEOSA requirements for training. Present your retired identification and state CCW and you should be good to go. After all you had many years of firearms training and qualifications. So if a state issued CCW is good enough to give the average resident the right to carry it ought to be good enough for the retired officer. LEOSA needs to be changed to reflect that IMO. (But I know that is not going to happen)
 
Despite the inadequacies of the federal law and the varying ways that states implement the statute, I for one am very pleased that this thread has provided both the opportunity and served as a repository for the discussion of LEOSA as it currently stands, (across the nation), and any future changes that may be engendered going forward.

Let's continue to maintain this thread to the benefit of all that are covered under the act.
 
The Big D said:
Huh? :confused:

Your statement is not true...nor could any state opt out of compliance with a Federal law.

Be safe.
Click to expand...


You can be the test case. I chose not to poke the beast. I will go to normal states to vacation rather than give an anti-gun state my money.

I've carried in 49 states without problem but Hawaii thumbs their noses at LEOSA and require that you comply with their state laws in addition to the federal requirement. They will allow you to carry if you comply with their permit and registration laws. The five day registration is problematic in that only certain PDs are designated as portals of the registration process. They allow registration only a couple days per week. If you are at the end of the line they will close before you get to the window and you will have to try again another day. If you show up beyond the five day window it can be a felony.

Hawaii has nothing that I need to make it worth the hassle of complying with their laws. Call if you want to experience the arrogance of the DAs that will be happy to try and get your bail maximized. I feel as you do that they shouldn't get away with what they are doing but that is the reality of island life. Review the above posted links kindly provided by AimHigher.
 
Last edited:
LEOSA does not prohibit registration. Many states still require retirees to register firearms. States can still require it. You may not like it but that does not mean HI has "thumbed their noses" at LEOSA. Read LEOSA. And when you do read the actual words and not some preconceived belief what you want LEOSA to say. It only exempts from CCW requirements by states/territories.
States/agencies are not required to issue retirement ID nor are they mandated to qualify retirees. Some claim that agencies failing to do so 'thumb their nose" at LEOSA. Not so. If you read the congressional discussions that occurred prior to the passage of LEOSA you will see the intent of LEOSA was not to mandate agencies to do anything and agencies are not liable for retirees. So any court case contesting some people's beliefs of ills with LEOSA the courts would take into consideration the intent of LEOSA by reviewing the legislative intent when the bill was passed.
 
My agency was listing the specific make/model/caliber/serial number of weapon used for LEOSA qualification on the qualification document for a while.

Now, they merely ask if you want to shoot a revolver or a pistol, or both, and then list one or both types on the document if the retiree qualifies.
 
Fastbolt said:
My agency was listing the specific make/model/caliber/serial number of weapon used for LEOSA qualification on the qualification document for a while.

Now, they merely ask if you want to shoot a revolver or a pistol, or both, and then list one or both types on the document if the retiree qualifies.
Click to expand...
Same with ours. The listing of a specific weapon was not intended as a restriction as the only listed firearms you could carry. It was in case you were ever questioned if you qualified with auto or revolver that you could show, for example, an auto and it was a S&W 6904, ser # such and such or a revolver it was a S&W 649, ser # 12345J. Finally the dept decided that was getting to be too much paperwork needlessly retained so now we get a sticker on our retired ID which certifies we qualified during such a month in the current year and a contact number.
Less paperwork = happy range officers.
 
AimHigher said:
Furthermore, there needs to be specific duties and obligations required of (former) employing law enforcement agencies who should be required to either grant LEOSA credentials to former qualified employees or provide a factual, valid reason why the employee is not eligible.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your sentiment, but we're under their thumb for years while we worked there.... I wouldn't want to continue that into retirement. Just send me my check every month, thanks.
 
This is an old thread, but we need to put forward specifics to improve the LEOSA. I retired from federal LE service last summer and had my first LEOSA qual with a municipal police dept here in South Carolina. Fortunately, South Carolina does not split hairs with "type of handgun". I specifically asked that question and they shoot either semi auto or revolver, does not matter. I qualed with my Glock 17, but 99% of the time carry my 5-shot .38 revolver. No fancy qual card issued, just a letter on agency letter head stating that I passed the test with my G17. Folded it up and stuck in my retired Creds case. In my opinion, there are three areas that need legislation to correct LEOSA: 1). Clarify that separate qual with auto or revolver are not necessary to carry the other platform (NRA's position). 2). Specific language that carry under LEOSA exempts from the school Gun Free Zone Act. 3). Specific language that those carrying under LEOSA are exempt from state imposed magazine restrictions. Being retired, I'm now traveling around the USA in a motor home. That is why I chose to carry my revolver because I did not want to worry about magazine restrictions.
 
Last edited:
Improvements to LEOSA:

1) Allow Hi-capacity mags to those covered under LEOSA.
2) Clarify that only need to qual with either auto or revolver, not both.
3) Exempt those carrying under LEOSA from the Gun Free School Zone Act.
 
Last edited:
My county only requires retirees to qualify with one type of weapon, but issues a card that allows for both.

LEOSA is purposely vague to be as inclusive as possible, but what does "type," actually mean? Nowhere in 926c is it defined.
 
Last edited:
LEOSA relies on the definition of a "firearm" from 921;

(3) The term "firearm" means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

From the NRA's FAQ section on LEOSA;

1. Does the agency who qualifies me need to make a record of the make, model, caliber, or serial number of the firearm I qualify with?No. LEOSA does not require the agency to maintain this information. This is a frequent concern given the statute's use of the term "type of firearm." LEOSA authorizes the carrying of a "concealed firearm" of the same "type" the individual receives certification for. As there is no case law interpreting this wording, the word "type" should be read to conform with the dictionary definition; something distinguishable as a variety. Accordingly, "type" of firearm should be read to mean either long gun or hand gun, which would permit you to carry any type of legal long gun or hand gun based on your qualification and not one particular make, model, or caliber. As an action outside of LEOSA requirements, the creation and maintenance of a database may expose the agency to liability, as discussed below.
 
I retired from a PD in Alabama, but live in Virginia. I worked in an adjoining county for over 7 years and got to know the sheriff very well. I have done my LEOSA qualification with that agency for several years now.

The card issued by the sheriff's office reads that I have met annual firearms training and qualification standards established by the SO to carry a concealed handgun, valid one year from date of issuance.

I have a lifetime permit from Alabama, a permit from Virginia and my LEOSA. I've also been known to wear a belt and suspenders. :)

"If you have any firearms training, such as law enforcement or military, the AZ permit is super easy to obtain. Fingerprints, copy of your firearms training, 1 page CCW permit application filled out, and a $60 money order, and you're good for 5 years. Renewal is $45."

My five year VA permit costs $15. I'm actually exempt from the fee as a retired LEO, but the county needs the money. :)
 
Well, thought I'd jump in here, not with anything new, but I just had the pleasure of qualifying with my old Department today at their new (still under construction) range. They could not have treated me any better. I first qualified with our old service gun, the Glock 23, and then they asked me if I wanted to go through with any other guns. I just happened to have my Smith and Wesson 640-1 Pro Series in the Jeep, and said sure. I did better with the 640 than the Glock!! In fact I aced the course with it. I have to admit that I didn't have any .357 with me, but had a box of 158 gr standard .38 spl. I had not planned to shoot it, but I'm glad I did. They recorded both my guns, so I have qualified with both a revolver and a semi., although we do not interpret LEOSA to require that.

I'm pretty happy, because I have to admit that I was a little nervous about shooting...I've been retired 20 years now, and even though I still shoot frequently, it's a different kind of shooting, and don't have range commands, and buzzers going off, and timed fire, and different positions, distances etc. but when I got there, everything fell into place, and I shot pretty good.

I'm a belt and suspenders guy, and I have a current WV permit, a current FL permit, and my LEOSA credentials as well. Not to mention that here in WV we now have "constitutional carry", so I guess here at home I'm covered 4 different ways.

Best Regards, Les
 
Last edited:
Nice going, Les. I'll be heading out with the sheriff's office for my yearly qualification in a few weeks.
 
California has a history of ignoring certain aspects of obscure federal laws and essentially, will threaten to sue an individual or entity that California determines is not complying California's arbitray spin on the law - regardless of what the actual federal laws says. As an example, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), is one of the areas of law that CA will decide what federal provisions it will follow - if any.
 
Last edited:
AimHigher said:
California has a history of ignoring certain aspects of obscure federal laws and essentially, will threaten to sue an individual or entity that California determines is not complying California's arbitray spin on the law - regardless of what the actual federal laws says. As an example, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), is one of the areas of law that CA will decide what federal provisions it will follow - if any.
Click to expand...

Sounds a lot like NJ in that regard. (From things I've been hearing since, oh, the 80's.)
 
blues7 said:
Sounds a lot like NJ in that regard. (From things I've been hearing since, oh, the 80's.)
Click to expand...
Yes, and CA, NJ, NY and more will absolutely go ballistic with lawsuits if/when National CCW Reciprocity becomes federal law.
 
Don't forget Massachusetts. We take a back seat to no one when it comes to creative interpretations. Last July our attorney general ruled that all the AR 15-pattern guns that were bought with the blessing of the state since 2004 were illegal to sell and own, and therefore a felony, but she wouldn't prosecute. For now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Another LEOSA qualification…
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
5K
Reloader Fred
R
L
Qualification day at my former PD
Replies
6
Views
800
lppd4
L
T
LEOSA qualification 8/29/24.
2
Replies
55
Views
5K
Muss Muggins
Muss Muggins
cmansguns
Some lady cops can sure shoot!!!
Replies
13
Views
1K
jeffrefrig
J
biku324
Not Pleased in NM
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
steelslaver
steelslaver

Latest posts

Back
Top