Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Police chiefs don't want to arm retired or off-duty officers

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Police chiefs don't want to arm retired or off-duty officers

    web page

    quote:
    Police chiefs don't want to arm retired or off-duty officers
    By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY

    WASHINGTON — The country's top police chiefs are in the middle of a lobbying battle with rank-and-file officers over a plan that would let about 1.5 million retired and off-duty officers carry concealed weapons nationwide.

    Supporters of proposed legislation are casting the officers as a ready militia against any terrorist threat. The plan is under consideration in the judiciary committees of the House of Representatives and Senate.

    Much of the opposition is coming from the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum. They say the plan would undermine local authority and "dramatically elevates opportunities for tragedy," IACP analyst Gene Voegtlin wrote last week in a bulletin to its 20,000 members.

    Police chiefs in Florida, Arizona and other retirement destinations are particularly concerned.

    "It's hard enough to keep track of the people in our own departments, let alone people we don't even know are in our communities," says North Miami, Fla., Police Chief William Berger.

    The Fraternal Order of Police, the nation's largest association of street officers with 300,000 members, says the plan is necessary for a country confronting a high risk of terrorist attack.

    "When the public safety is threatened, (officers) will have the tools to respond appropriately," says Tim Richardson, a legislative analyst for the FOP. "You're talking about a class of citizens who are trained to react and to respond to all kinds of incidents."

    If approved by Congress, the legislation would allow retired and off-duty officers to travel with their weapons outside their home states without fear of prosecution.

    With the exception of machine guns, officers would be allowed to carry firearms as long as they meet annual testing standards in their home states.

    The Law Enforcement Alliance of America, a coalition of police officers, crime victims and citizen groups, estimates that the legislation would apply to about 1 million retirees and 500,000 off-duty officers on any given day.

    "This was a good idea before Sept. 11, but it's a great idea after Sept. 11," says Ted Deeds, the alliance's chief executive officer. "Everything indicates that the next attack is likely to happen in our communities. This (legislation) puts armed, trained people in our communities with the tools to do something."

    Most states require individuals — including off-duty police officers — to obtain permits to carry concealed weapons. Those permits generally do not extend beyond home states.

    Previous attempts at passing a concealed weapons law — including an effort in 1999 — have stalled in Congress. This time, however, supporters say a convergence of factors, including the elevated threat of terrorism in the USA and recent congressional action that would arm commercial airline pilots, could help their cause.

    There also is strong support in the Senate, where 38 members from both parties are co-sponsors. The proposal may face the most opposition in the House. Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., says it would undermine states' authority to regulate gun-carrying privileges.

    A spokesman for Sensenbrenner says the proposal remains a low priority for the committee this session. But Rep. Randy Cunningham, R-Calif., a chief sponsor of the House plan, believes there is more than enough support this time.

    Spokesman Gordon Johndroe says the Department of Homeland Security was unaware of the legislation but would review it.

    The Justice Department is not expected to take any position on the legislation

    Comments?

    [ 03-04-2003, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: PeacefulDragon ]
    "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day. " -- ???

  • #2
    Bill in the current Texas legislature allows retired police officers to carry a concealed weapon as long as they maintain qualification. We'll see if it passes into law.

    Comment


    • #3
      Actually, their point man is Teddy "Submarine Commander" Kennedy. He`s prepared to introduce up to 6 amendments to S253 which will gut the Senate bill. It`s not really surprising since no police dep`t wants to be responsible for your actions out of state.

      The FOP website has a letter/fax/email you can send to Kennedy or your rep. However, last time I checked, the FOP didn`t have the specifics listed.
      Life is like a 3 ring circus and cops have a front row seat. It`s The Greatest Show On Earth.

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't think it is a good idea!
        Retired

        Comment


        • #5
          I think it's a great idea. Why in the world should it be ok for private citizens to carry legally outside their home state and it not be ok for law enforcement officers to do the same? I know that not all states use reciprocity but many do.

          Comment


          • #6
            Deputy757,

            quote:
            Originally posted by Deputy757:
            I think it's a great idea. Why in the world should it be ok for private citizens to carry legally outside their home state and it not be ok for law enforcement officers to do the same? I know that not all states use reciprocity but many do.

            I don't think that private citizens can legally carry in very many states besides the state that issued them a CCW permit. Only a few states I believe allow that.

            My position for opposing this is, that this is another example of the federal government telling states what they have to do. I think it should be the decision of each independent state, not the gestapo federal government.
            Retired

            Comment


            • #7
              Apparently the "top chiefs" consider "rank-and-file officers" to be the same as ordinary citizens. IMO most of the "top chiefs" are a bunch of useless quasi politicians. At least the opinions of the cops that work for a living are being expressed in the article. All too often the opinions of the chiefs are expressed as being the opinions of street officers. I think any authorization to carry a concealed weapon issued by any state should be recognized by any other state. This would NOT be an intrusion by the Federal government. If the Feds issued a permit, it would be an intrusion into state rights. Requiring states to recognize a permit issued by another state makes sense. Could you imagine what it would be like if you had to have a drivers license for every state you wished to drive in?

              [ 03-05-2003, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: Bill R ]
              Bill R

              Comment


              • #8
                Bill,

                quote:
                Originally posted by Bill R:
                Apparently the "top chiefs" consider "rank-and-file officers" to be the same as ordinary citizens. IMO most of the "top chiefs" are a bunch of useless quasi politicians. At least the opinions of the cops that work for a living are being expressed in the article. All too often the opinions of the chiefs are expressed as being the opinions of street officers. I think any authorization to carry a concealed weapon issued by any state should be recognized by any other state. This would NOT be an intrusion by the Federal government. If the Feds issued a permit, it would be an intrusion into state rights. Requiring states to recognize a permit issued by another state makes sense. Could you imagine what it would be like if you had to have a drivers license for every state you wished to drive in?

                The feds don't mandate that each state recognize other states drivers license.

                If the feds issued a permit, it would still be an intrusion into states rights. If a doctor or an attorney decides to move to another state, they must qualify in that state. A PO.S.T. certificate from California doesn't necessarily qualify one for LE employment in another state.

                I say let the states decide who they want carrying a gun in their area.

                Just what we need, another federal agency!
                Retired

                Comment


                • #9
                  Retired, it appears we are in agreement that a federal program to issue permits would be an intrusion into state's rights. OTOH I believe requiring states to recognize permits of other states would fall under:
                  Article IV Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof. . That does not mean that other states would be required to recognize an out of state officer as having any police powers, or be employed as a police officer, only that he could pack a gun. I believe the same should also apply to CCW permits. In all honesty though, I really believe all states should be required to recognize Constitutional Carry like Vermont does.
                  Bill R

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    quote:
                    Originally posted by retired:
                    [

                    The feds don't mandate that each state recognize other states drivers license.

                    If the feds issued a permit, it would still be an intrusion into states rights. If a doctor or an attorney decides to move to another state, they must qualify in that state. A PO.S.T. certificate from California doesn't necessarily qualify one for LE employment in another state.

                    I say let the states decide who they want carrying a gun in their area.

                    Just what we need, another federal agency![/QB][/QUOTE]

                    As far as I know, most states recognize other states drivers licenses. If this has changed please advise me. That even goes so far with certain other licenses. There isn't blanket coverage, but many states practice reciprocity with all kinds of certifications, including gun permits. When I was a teacher, my license would allow me to teach in other states.

                    In our state, retired LEO's can receive a free carry permit, thank goodness. For a bunch of politicos who have no idea what it is like, or have forgotten, to confront armed and dangerous suspects to say that it would be unsafe harkens to the sheepish logic of the left. Oh, if we have fewer guns we will be safer. If guns are illegal we will be safer.

                    That works in a law abiding society. As any of us who work in LE know, we do not live in a law abiding society. Those who are insulated from lawlessness or who have never been victims, lull themselves into a false sense of security. This doesn't even begin to take into account any external threats.

                    God forbid if terrorism begins to reach the levels that it has in Israel. If we started having terrorist shooting and bombings on Main Street USA akin to those in Tel Aviv and Jeruselam, I believe things would change rapidly in the "logic" of our politicians.

                    Otherwise, I fear, we will continue down the trail, being herded like sheep towards a total gun ban. This bill is an attempt to forestall that to one degree.

                    One may argue that the states should have their rights to regulate protected. However, as I see it, it is an infringement of my Constitutional Right. The 2nd has been so picked at with gun permitting, gun carrying, gun selling and gun manufacturing restrictions that the Right is what we have now. A crazy quilt work where an LEO with a valid state issued permit is a criminal if he goes to Chicago out of uniform. Where a citizen with a valid permit travelling to another state either has to violate the law, spend hours researching the destination states laws to see if he can or cannot carry, or simply cannot benefit from his Right.
                    Do your best, do what is right

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      FYI

                      http://www.hr218.com/CCCnavbarabout.htm
                      Do your best, do what is right

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I thought the Civil War cleared up that matter of States Rights, retired?

                        We don't got 'em.

                        Besides, it's obvious that this is more poitical and based on that PC ultraliberal view that "guns are bad" even in the hands of the police, now.

                        If they really don't want Federal intervention, why are they so GREEDY for federal assistance and Federal money. Heck they GRIPE if they don't get moeny from the Federal government-but now they don't want "Federal intervention"?

                        It p's me off that they take this line, and then gripe if they don't get Federal money on this or that, be it hurricane releif, disasters, education, crime fighting, etc. They are ALL so HAPPY to take their money, but now, they don't want their "intervention."

                        Give me a break.

                        It's liberalism and gun control. Pure and simple.

                        Get the history straight-if we have "states rights" then I need to lobby for a few changes that got put on hold in 1861.
                        People have more fun than anybody.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Yeah, I know what you mean.

                          It's not like the Feds make my state accept a driver license from the other 49 states, and Canada. Maybe we should honor only driver licenses from states that accept our states CCW permit?

                          Or that they are using a form of blackmail to force my state to lower DUI from 0.10% down to 0.08%, but only if we want that Fed Highway money

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:
                            Originally posted by retired:

                            I don't think that private citizens can legally carry in very many states besides the state that issued them a CCW permit. Only a few states I believe allow that.

                            retired,
                            According to our state police, there are 21 states that grant reciprocity to residents of KY that possess a CCW. I think it may actually be higher as Vermont is on the "do not" list and as far as I know, they let everyone carry concealed there.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              FWIW: NC currently does not have any recprocity agreements. So, currently, no other state's CCW permits are recognized by NC, and the number of states that recognize NC is smaller than it would otherwise be. However, even without the reciprocity (which will hopefully pass this year!), there are 8 other states that recognize NC CCW permits.

                              [forgot to add: Deputy757 is right. Anyone can carry concealed in Vermont without a permit. ]

                              [ 03-05-2003, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: PeacefulDragon ]
                              "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day. " -- ???

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 5337 users online. 294 members and 5043 guests.

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

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X