Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NYC HR218/LEOSA- peace officers

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I called one of those "gun lawyers" that specialize in things like this for fun to see what he would say. He said the same exact thing I thought. You can get your permit taken away if you don't follow it's restrictions,, but under HR218, legally you are covered. He said NYPD may give you a full carry permit, especially if you have been at your job for a long time and have been carrying for work and provide them with all your credentials and proof of status, etc.....Of course if you give him 10,000 he would assist you lol.

    Comment


    • #47
      Demand a list of cases that the attorney won. Most of the time hiring an attorney to fight pistol permit cases in NYC is a waste of money and time.

      Comment


      • #48
        LEOSA also lets you carry your own weapon off-duty if I am correct
        Former Police Officer (Injured LOD)
        USAF VETERAN 2004-2012
        "The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day."-LTC Grossman
        Emergency Services Dispatcher, APG MD

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by 4GodnCntry View Post

          CountyCorrectionOfficer- you're wrong. You stated " Correct, Lt. LEOSA HR 218 pertains only to the carrying of a handgun nationally. Nothing is stated about purchasing or possessing a pistol according to the statues." HR 218 doesn't only pertain to carrying nationally. It has to do with allowing a qualified LEO to carry a firearm. THATS IT. If you meet the definition, you are qualified. HR 218 does not state that it does not apply to the state that you live in. You're always posting about stuff you have no idea what you're talking about.

          TrueGuardian- You're wrong. HR 218 does NOT list any requirement stating it "allows a LEO whose department's policy authorizes or doesn't restrict the LEO from carrying off duty," as you put it.

          THIS IS WHAT HR 218 STATES:

          A “qualified active law enforcement officer” is defined as an employee of a government agency who:
          -is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution or the incarceration of any person for any violation of law;
          -has statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under the Uniform Code of Military Justice;
          -is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
          -is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency which could result in suspension or loss of police powers;
          -meets the standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;
          -is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance, and -
          -is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing a firearm.

          With that being said, HR 218 does NOT say that in order to be a qualified LEO, that your agency must allow off duty carry. All it states is that in order to be a qualified LEO, you must be authorized to carry a firearm. With that being said, if you are hired as a LEO and authorized to carry a firearm to fully execute your job's duties, you are a qualified LEO. Obviously the other remaining bullet points must be met, but it has NOTHING to do with off duty carry.

          https://www.fop.net/legislative/issu...8/hr218faq.pdf
          Just for the fun of it, LEOSA states "you must be authorized to carry a firearm". If you are NOT authorized to carry a firearm OFF DUTY, could that be interpreted to take you out from under the blanket of LEOSA?
          My comments are my personal opinion and are based on my life experiences and training. They are not to be construed as legal advice in any form as I am not an attorney. Should you act on any of the information I provide in my comments, you do so at your own risk!!

          Comment


          • #50
            My reading of LEOSA is that it permits a LEO to carry the type of weapon his agency qualifies him to carry.

            Comment


            • #51
              Is it really worth trying to justify being LEOSA qualified when you agency imposes restrictions? If you get caught up in anything where a police officer or supervisor reasonably believes that you are not covered under LEOSA and you will be arrested. Then you will have to fight for everything and your own agency most likely won't back you since they don't allow officers to carry on the peace officer status.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by chiefjack View Post

                Just for the fun of it, LEOSA states "you must be authorized to carry a firearm". If you are NOT authorized to carry a firearm OFF DUTY, could that be interpreted to take you out from under the blanket of LEOSA?
                It shouldn't be interpreted that way.. My post previously explains word for word what LEOSA requires. I am a big supporter of LEOSA, but with that being said, I am still a supporter of guys on the job getting pistol permits for a couple different reasons.

                First off, its easier (in my experience) to sign consent from one person's permit to another person if that second person also has a permit. Signing from permit to a badge seems to confuse the Clerk's Officer (at least in Monroe County.)

                Secondly, if/when you retire and plan on working some sort of private security gig, that company may require a pistol permit for you to perform your duties (regardless of your Retired Police Officer status.)

                Third, if something happens to you (killed/pass away), I feel like it may be easier to sign pistols over to another person's permit if you yourself has a permit, I may be wrong because I've obviously never dealt with this, but it seems like it would be easier to find pistol permit records and sign a gun over to a family member that way. Compared to if a LEO bought a pistol in say Arizona without a permit, moved to NYS and died. I feel like the Clerk's Office may have some issues with that. You'd be able to overcome it, but it would be easier if you just invested in a permit in the first place.

                Fourth, If something happens drastically and you unfortunately lose your job prior to retirement, you lose your status as a police officer, thus requiring you to carry pistol's on a permit.

                I am a big supporter of LEOSA, especially when it comes to traveling outside of your home state. But I also believe getting a permit, at least in New York State, makes things a lot easier.

                I also don't understand why guys would be so against getting a permit compared to carrying on your tin. Its not like you'd get denied a permit if you're already on the job. At least not in Upstate lol.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Firearm transactions are now governed by the notorious safe act. Transactions between LEOs were easily handled by recording them on 10 cards or "C" Forms. Survivor of a deceased pistol owner, permit or otherwise, has 15 days to surrender the weapon to the local police/sheriff for safekeeping until estate resolved. Also, remember that any permit can be withdrawn by the issuing authority for any reason. So getting canned for something serious can cost your job and your permit.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Dinosaur32 View Post
                    Firearm transactions are now governed by the notorious safe act. Transactions between LEOs were easily handled by recording them on 10 cards or "C" Forms. Survivor of a deceased pistol owner, permit or otherwise, has 15 days to surrender the weapon to the local police/sheriff for safekeeping until estate resolved. Also, remember that any permit can be withdrawn by the issuing authority for any reason. So getting canned for something serious can cost your job and your permit.
                    Lt., That happened to someone in my agency--that is getting canned for something serious--excessive force. Then getting his pistol license revoked thereafter.

                    Comment

                    MR300x250 Tablet

                    Collapse

                    What's Going On

                    Collapse

                    There are currently 5334 users online. 303 members and 5031 guests.

                    Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                    Welcome Ad

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X