Quote:
Originally Posted by cjrjck
LEOSA can be confusing. There is so much disinformation out there.
|
Yes, it can be confusing...at least to those who do not fall under its provisions, and actively participate in order to remain current. Which is why, in my previous post, I simply laid out the bare minimums that are required for retired officers to remain "current."
However, at its core, LEOSA is just another Federal statute. Like all statutes, it has
elements that comprise its workings. Under the Federal statute, a retired police officer is authorized to carry concealed in any state, along with all U.S. territories and possessions, as long as he/she meets all of the
elements laid out in the statute.
As you correctly state, there is no HR218 (LEOSA) permit. Should a retired officer, carrying concealed under LEOSA, ever be challenged by law enforcement for carrying, he/she merely needs to show a Retired ID card, along with a current qualification certification. Those two documents are their "permit."
Those who do not know the elements of LEOSA should refrain from offering opinions or "facts" about its workings. One of the main components that led to the original passage of HR218 (LEOSA) was its prominence as a "force multiplier." Giving retired officers, who were highly trained and had worked with firearms for most of their working life, the ability to carry weapons anywhere in the country was an idea with merit. It still is. I, for one, have absolutely no problem with retired police officers continuing to carry weapons while they are amongst us.