SIG Talk banner
1 - 20 of 119 Posts

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has any current or former LEO's here gone through the LEOSA permit process?

This is something I've been wanting to do for awhile but every time I start looking into it I get sucked into an abyss of confusion and red tape. Especially around former LEO getting the qualification done. Which, from what I can gather needs to be done with someone who is currently certified to qualify law enforcement...like a local department. I spoke with my old department and they won't do it due to some perceived liability about how the law is written around a requirement that the qualification be done with the same firearm that the permit holder has to carry under LEOSA.

I'd love to go to a federal/nationwide concealed carry permit but this process seems very convoluted.

Curious if anyone here has had success doing it.

Product World Font Identity document News
 

·
🎖USA Veteran
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
I didn't Know your real name was John Doe :oops:. Whoda thunk😂

Why do LEOSA when HR218 would cover CCW nationally the same as Active Service LEO. Under HR218 you are authorized to carry concealed for any type of weapon you qualified with. i.e. Semi-Auto or revolver or both.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I didn't Know your real name was John Doe :oops:. Whoda thunk😂

Why do LEOSA when HR218 would cover CCW nationally the same as Active Service LEO. Under HR218 you are authorized to carry concealed for any type of weapon you qualified with. i.e. Semi-Auto or revolver or both.
Right. H.R.218 is LEOSA (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act). Probably pretty simple for you because you are still active and qualify with your department. I'm former. I'm still authorized to carry under H.R.218, but seems it's a bit more of a PITA.

Another point of confusion for me is my required years of service are split between USAF Police and civilian LE. I think the application process is different. The government doesn't make anything simple 🙄
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Under HR218 you are authorized to carry concealed for any type of weapon you qualified with. i.e. Semi-Auto or revolver or both.
OK, so you are saying it's as vague as Semi-Auto or revolver. The guy I talked to says the law is written making it sound like it has to be THE gun you qualify with.
 

·
🎖USA Veteran
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
OK, so you are saying it's as vague as Semi-Auto or revolver. The guy I talked to says the law is written making it sound like it has to be THE gun you qualify with.
No it doesn't have to be THE weapon. Only the type. For instance, if you only qualified with a semi-auto, you are only authorized to carry a semi-auto. Although I don't believe anyone would gig you for carrying a revolver or vise versa. However, you could run into "that one guy" that would. Conversely if involved in a FUOF incident it could present a problem depending on the geopolitical area of the country.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
On the rear of the Identification it only states semi-auto, revolver or both. It doesn't discern make, model, or mileage ;)
OK, maybe I misunderstood what he said. But his point was they won't do the qualifications for former LE due to some perceived liability that may or may not even exist. For instance, they qualify me on semi-auto, then I carry a revolver one day and shoot someone. This particular trainer seems to think that the law isn't written in a way to protect the trainer who did the qualification. I think that's rediculous, but if the training entity isn't explicitly protected I guess I can see the hesitation.

Whatever, I'm going to talk to another department. If I get the same BS then I'm over it. I don't need nationwide carry that bad. Some of the surrounding states recognize the state issued one anyway. But of course...the blue states do not.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Wait a minute...it says semi, revolver or BOTH? So I can just qualify both and whatever liability he thinks exists is moot. This guy is a buddy of mine too...im gonna punch him in the neck next time I see him 😂
 

·
🎖USA Veteran
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
Yes, throat punch him 😂. The decision to qualify someone under HR218 is department dependent. For instance I ran across a retired Connecticut State Trooper who's department would not qualify anyone under HR218 because of perceived liability. He did get qualified through a local municipal department, but not his. There are a lot of bureaucrats walking around with cats for testicles.
 

·
🎖USA Veteran Premium Member
Joined
·
9,080 Posts
I haven't dealt with it for 18 years but I can tell you what I know. It does not cover only federal LE but all state, city, county, ect individuals. There is no agency that controls the law and no federal agency issuing the permit to carry. The burden is on the individual to meet the standard for qualifications. Not the states concealed carry permit system, but the written federal law. You do however in most cases just meet the necessary provisions of the state you live in standards. Basically, attend their class and qualify to their standards.

The only real downside of the system that concerned me was carrying in states or areas where the law does not permit it or has a different standard. While you may be legal it is documented that some places just don't care about that law, don't know about it, or just have decided to ignore it. The burden then falls on the individual to defend themselves. You would have the law on your side but it could cost one some time and money to prevail.

I live in Florida and just chose to follow and obtain the State Permit. When traveling I am good through cooperating states and always have the federal law as a backup. I really choose to try to meet the State Laws and not press my case in questionable situations.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Yes, throat punch him 😂. The decision to qualify someone under HR218 is department dependent. For instance I ran across a retired Connecticut State Trooper who's department would not qualify anyone under HR218 because of perceived liability. He did get qualified through a local municipal department, but not his. There are a lot of bureaucrats walking around with cats for testicles.
Exactly what I'm running into.
 

·
🎖USA Veteran
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
HR218 is Federal Law and covers all states. Qualification standards are the same as those for active officers for the state/department issuing the identification. A civilian CCW permit is only as good as reciprocity that is offered by other states. HR218 holder does not have to depend on reciprocity. HR218 has been adjudicated at the federal judicial level and found not only legal for all states as it relates to HR218 bearers, but also in not lacking the necessary qualifications as it's written with the requirement of active duty qualifications in mind, As one has to qualify every year to the states LEO standard in order to maintain the HR218 protections and identification.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,048 Posts
No it doesn't have to be THE weapon. Only the type. For instance, if you only qualified with a semi-auto, you are only authorized to carry a semi-auto. Although I don't believe anyone would gig you for carrying a revolver or vise versa. However, you could run into "that one guy" that would. Conversely if involved in a FUOF incident it could present a problem depending on the geopolitical area of the country.
This depends on the state you live in. In North Carolina it is required that the officer/retired officer qualify with the exact weapon he/she carries.

Pertinent NC General Statute

§ 14-415.26. Certification of qualified retired law enforcement officers.
(a) In lieu of obtaining a permit under this Article, a qualified retired law enforcement
officer may apply to the North Carolina Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards
Commission for certification. The application shall include all of the following:
(1) Verification of completion of the firearms qualification criteria established
by the Commission. (emphasis added).


NC Administrative Code (NC Education and Training Standards Commission Rules)


12 NCAC 09H .0102 MINIMUM TRAINING SPECIFICATIONS
(a) Each qualified retired law enforcement officer must qualify with each handgun he/she will carry in accordance with the standards outlined in 12 NCAC 09E .0105(1) and 12 NCAC 9E .0106 (a), (c), (e), (f) and (g), which shall be incorporated in classroom instruction and firearms qualification on the firing range utilizing the course of
fire from the A Specialized Firearms Instructor Training Manual. (emphasis added).


The NC Law is actually in conflict with the Federal Law as LEOSA says firearm and NC only allows Handgun.

Our left wing idiots don't let little things like laws or the Constitution get in their way.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
HR218 is Federal Law and covers all states. Qualification standards are the same as those for active officers for the state/department issuing the identification. A civilian CCW permit is only as good as reciprocity that is offered by other states. HR218 holder does not have to depend on reciprocity. HR218 has been adjudicated at the federal judicial level and found not only legal for all states as it relates to HR218 bearers, but also in not lacking the necessary qualifications as it's written with the requirement of active duty qualifications in mind.
^^^^^This. I was just typing similar.
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
This depends on the state you live in. In North Carolina it is required that the officer/retired officer qualify with the exact weapon he/she carries.
Ah, Ok. I guess that's what he was talking about. And probably why so many departments are hesitant to qualify former LE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
792 Posts
written around a requirement that the qualification be done with the same firearm that the permit holder has to carry under LEOSA.

Under HR218 you are authorized to carry concealed for any type of weapon you qualified with. i.e. Semi-Auto or revolver or both.

Two comments posted. Right, #1 not correct. If so, I would only be allowed to carry an S&W Model 10, in.38 which is no longer available. #2. Correct. Any type weapon of weapon and it must be noted on the card. It you qualified with a Colt 45, it must be listed as Colt 45. You cannot carry and S&W .38. Now if you qualify with both the Colt and S&W and it is so noted, you are good to go. Some states have different rules and you must follow them if you live in and retired from that state. I live in SC and carry under 218. I carry what my state stipulate (actually anything you qualify with is ok). there fore I can carry in any state. As far as ammo goes, my State authorized and allows Hollow Points. NJ does not allow their Officers under 218 Hollow Points, but since my State allows it, I can, under 218 carry in NJ. New York City is a different animal all together. Don't ask. All screwed up.
 

·
🎖USA Veteran
Joined
·
6,698 Posts
With the NC rule in place it is vague and subject to dual interpretations. In reading the above, I don't see it saying, "exact" but each handgun meaning type. In a federal court case and I'm not certain it was NC it was determined by the court that every weapon was not only overly burdensome on the individual, but the entity issuing the permit. NC having a more liberal streak than people realize may have intentionally fogged the issue. Until it is challenged in court, not state but federal then that fog will continue to cause confusion. Then again, NC may just be the east coast version of California
 

·
🎖USAF Veteran Premium Member
P226 Legion LE, P229 Legion LE, P229, P220, P224, P320 X-Vtac, P320 X-Carry Pro, CZ TSO, CZ SP-01
Joined
·
941 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
With the NC rule in place it is vague and subject to dual interpretations. In reading the above, I don't see it saying, "exact" but each handgun meaning type. In a federal court case and I'm not certain it was NC it was determined by the court that every weapon was not only overly burdensome on the individual, but the entity issuing the permit. NC having a more liberal streak than people realize may have intentionally fogged the issue. Until it is challenged in court, not state but federal then that fog will continue to cause confusion. The again, NC may just be the east coast version of California
The vagueness of how the law is written is part of the problem. The way its interpretated is another part. As Bayern said, it's all screwed up 😂

As far as NC, yeah it's an odd state. We have a liberal governor, and a conservative legislature for the most part. And many people don't realize that NC has 3 big metro areas and with that comes demacratic rule.
 
1 - 20 of 119 Posts
Top