Retired LEO carry in NYS

This is a discussion on Retired LEO carry in NYS within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by kelcarry Just mentioning "Blue Brotherhood" bothers me and so does the idea that if you are a retired LEO, it somehow gives ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36
Like Tree11Likes

Thread: Retired LEO carry in NYS

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Just mentioning "Blue Brotherhood" bothers me and so does the idea that if you are a retired LEO, it somehow gives you some kind of "right" to CC without, in many instances, the responsibility to requalify at some age plateau or medical condition plateau (this goes for non-LEOs, as well). Anyone, retired LEO or not, who has a CCWP and is physically unable or limited in the use of their firearm should be required to requalify or at least have the common sense to know that CC is over. Just what I need is to be somewhere and have an 80 year old or debilitated retired LEO present his firearm and start banging away in what may be a very good shoot circumstance but ends up injuring or killing others. As for "Blue Brotherhood"---I find that to be an inexcusable and outrageous comment---once you are retired you are no more and no less than anyone else and getting a pass for whatever reason is downright wrong.
    under hr 218, retired LEO do have to qualify under the same guidelines of the department they retired from.
    You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You are able to say to yourself, "I have lived through this horror. I can take the next thing that comes along." . . . You must do the thing you think you cannot do. Eleanor Roosevelt

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Ex Member Array F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High in Colorado
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by RetCONY View Post
    What really ticks me off is that after 30+ plus years of wearig a badge, I have to go out and PAY for a service that I am entitled to. Probabably every other state takes care of its retired guys. Not NYS.
    Really sucks being a plain 'ole CIVILIAN don't it?????

    Just a guess but were you the kind of cop that would bust a hard working guy with a family for having a little protection under the seat of his truck as he went to work and back through a city where you couldn't protect him???? Ya, it's the law.
    jem102 likes this.

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,863
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    One wonders... do you feel the same way about service men and women... I mean after they do their bit protecting our rights, and all... what thanks are due? You did it, it's over... thanks and all that... now, go get a job, would ya?

    I don't like all cops... don't get me wrong... Prolly don't like all firemen either. But, those that choose to do the work, have (and/or at the very least, been willing to) sacrificed their well being for mine. I respect that. I don't like that retired LEOs can carry a gun in places and states we cannot.

    But, at least they can. And enough of "serve and protect" over a career might just rub off enough on them that they actually save an innocent who would not be saved because they were not allowed to be armed when the retired LEO was.

    But then, maybe this guy's just like the rest of the 47% of Americans who "feel entitled." I don't think so... he earned it.
    I just love it when your eyes are so full of bile that you cannot read what I wrote. If you are in no condition to be CC, whether you be a retired LEO, former military, or just a citizen, you have no business CC. Having a law on the books that does not make this distinction is ridiculous and dangerous. Does that make you feel better? When the thread writer throws out that "Blue Line" stuff, it gets me mad---it insinuates a mindless disregard for doing the right thing and the responsible thing.

  5. #19
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,863
    Quote Originally Posted by mulle46 View Post
    under hr 218, retired LEO do have to qualify under the same guidelines of the department they retired from.
    That is all I am asking for and it should be that way for everyone who has a CCWP. The idea that age or mental stability or whatever should not play into a decision because the law is missing basic common sense and that Blue Line is somehow sacred is ridiculous.

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    I just love it when your eyes are so full of bile that you cannot read what I wrote. If you are in no condition to be CC, whether you be a retired LEO, former military, or just a citizen, you have no business CC. Having a law on the books that does not make this distinction is ridiculous and dangerous. Does that make you feel better? When the thread writer throws out that "Blue Line" stuff, it gets me mad---it insinuates a mindless disregard for doing the right thing and the responsible thing.
    So who decides if you qualify? More importantly, why do we have to qualify to exercise our rights?
    oakchas likes this.
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,331
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    You realize how insane that bolded statement was/is, right? How it does include veterans, people in the military, the elderly, anyone collecting social security/medicare/whatever? It's just a really, really dumb statement to make.
    The bolded statement was a sarcastic quote of a statement made by one of our presidential candidates. And yes, he included those groups, BTW (it's the only way he could come up with that large a number).

    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    I just love it when your eyes are so full of bile that you cannot read what I wrote. If you are in no condition to be CC, whether you be a retired LEO, former military, or just a citizen, you have no business CC. Having a law on the books that does not make this distinction is ridiculous and dangerous. Does that make you feel better? When the thread writer throws out that "Blue Line" stuff, it gets me mad---it insinuates a mindless disregard for doing the right thing and the responsible thing.
    No need to throw out the Blue Line/Blue Brotherhood at all... You see, there's nothing in this statement that has any requisites:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    In fact, one does not even have to be a citizen to exercise that right... and can be blind, halt, lame, deaf, and mute.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    That is all I am asking for and it should be that way for everyone who has a CCWP. The idea that age or mental stability or whatever should not play into a decision because the law is missing basic common sense and that Blue Line is somehow sacred is ridiculous.
    Arizona has no restrictions, other than the federal to who may purchase or carry a firearm.

    It is not the "blue line" that is sacred, it is the RIGHT... PERIOD!
    First Sgt likes this.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  8. #22
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,863
    Quote Originally Posted by rottkeeper View Post
    So who decides if you qualify? More importantly, why do we have to qualify to exercise our rights?
    Are you truly of sound mind? So if you are a bit unsound of mind but are that wonderful retired LEO or military man or even a regular citizen and you go out and kill a few people because you see the commies and zombies coming--that's OK because you have "rights". But this is no problem with you--you were just exercising your rights and no one is really qualified to make a determination about you. It scares me to think that you actually believe your poppycock. C'mon now----you mean their is no limit to who can CC once they have been an LEO or military or, for that matter, just a citizen---so your 2A rights trump senility--you are nuts if you believe that. Look--I do not have the answer as to "who decides" but I do have an answer if your conclusion is "let um have their guns"---ridiculous and irresponsible.

  9. #23
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    The bolded statement was a sarcastic quote of a statement made by one of our presidential candidates. And yes, he included those groups, BTW (it's the only way he could come up with that large a number).
    Ah, thought you were saying it seriously. I know he said it, and that's why I had the big *** moment because I can't believe people buy that nonsense.

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,331

    Re: Retired LEO carry in NYS

    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Are you truly of sound mind? So if you are a bit unsound of mind but are that wonderful retired LEO or military man or even a regular citizen and you go out and kill a few people because you see the commies and zombies coming--that's OK because you have "rights". But this is no problem with you--you were just exercising your rights and no one is really qualified to make a determination about you. It scares me to think that you actually believe your poppycock. C'mon now----you mean their is no limit to who can CC once they have been an LEO or military or, for that matter, just a citizen---so your 2A rights trump senility--you are nuts if you believe that. Look--I do not have the answer as to "who decides" but I do have an answer if your conclusion is "let um have their guns"---ridiculous and irresponsible.
    So, what else as regards guns is reasonable and "responsible?"
    6 round capacity? Why not? How about 20-20 vision maybe?

    List your requirements here, let us know how you would restrict the right...
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array First Sgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florence, SC
    Posts
    7,967
    mmmmm......Pass the popcorn please, this is gonna be better than watching the election coverage....
    Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Are you truly of sound mind? So if you are a bit unsound of mind but are that wonderful retired LEO or military man or even a regular citizen and you go out and kill a few people because you see the commies and zombies coming--that's OK because you have "rights". But this is no problem with you--you were just exercising your rights and no one is really qualified to make a determination about you. It scares me to think that you actually believe your poppycock. C'mon now----you mean their is no limit to who can CC once they have been an LEO or military or, for that matter, just a citizen---so your 2A rights trump senility--you are nuts if you believe that. Look--I do not have the answer as to "who decides" but I do have an answer if your conclusion is "let um have their guns"---ridiculous and irresponsible.
    You a seem little too bent out of shape for a constructive discussion, so I'm out, before I digress to the above.
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,331
    Here's a great list of basic limitations:

    You must have at least 20/40 near and far vision in each eye (tested separately). If you require glasses or contacts to meet this requirement, you must wear these at all times while carrying a firearm. You must not be color-blind and you must not have any conditions that interfere with your sight or are likely to interfere with your sight in the future.

    Ears, Nose, Throat and Balance

    Your hearing must be good enough to hear a person speaking in a normal conversational tone six feet behind you. You must not have any ear, nose, throat or mouth problems that are likely to interfere with speech communication or cause vertigo.


    Mental Health and Substance Abuse

    You must not have any mental condition that gives you hallucinations or causes "grossly bizarre" behavior. You must have no history of substance dependence or must demonstrate that you have totally abstained from using the substance in question for the past two years. Substances include nearly any potentially addictive or mind-altering chemical (including alcohol) except for tobacco and caffeine.

    Seizures and Heart Disease

    You must not suffer from epilepsy or any other seizure disorder which could impair your safe use of a firearm. You will be disqualified for many serious heart diseases, including (but not limited to) angina pectoris, myocardial infarction or other "coronary heart disease that has required treatment." A permanently implanted cardiac pacemaker will also disqualify you, as will a replacement valve or transplanted heart.

    Diabetes and General Condition

    If you have diabetes that must be controlled using insulin or similar product, you will be disqualified. In general, to become a weapons permit holder you must not have any condition which could cause you to suddenly lose consciousness, become disoriented or otherwise lose your ability to handle a firearm. These requirements are not exhaustive, and some conditions may not permanently disqualify you from carrying a weapon if you are otherwise qualified (in some cases, the examining doctor may defer judgment on a condition to a higher authority).

    maybe we could add to these?
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  14. #28
    Senior Member Array kb2wji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,082
    Quote Originally Posted by First Sgt View Post
    mmmmm......Pass the popcorn please, this is gonna be better than watching the election coverage....
    Well that wont be hard. Crashing your new Ferrari is better than watching the election coverage.

  15. #29
    Senior Member Array boscobeans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    upstate new york
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by RetCONY View Post
    Here's the problem, there is no statute in any New York State law that mandates that a law enforcement agency qualify its retired officers. Because it is not required, they won't do it. That being said, can I still carry under HR 218? It seems to me that I should be able to, after all , it's the States fault that they don't. My options are:

    1. Get a carry permit from Utah or Florida.

    2. Carry anyway, and if an Officer questions me, hope that he has common sense and respects the Blue Brotherhood.

    What do you think?
    Permit from any other State is no good in NY.

    Western NY ?? Depending on the county it should be no problem for you to apply and get a permit. ?

    Just wondering.

    bosco

  16. #30
    Senior Member Array royal barnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wendell, N.C.
    Posts
    569
    I'm not going to get into the argument whether retired officers should have the right to carry where others cannot but I'm not aware of any state CCW permit that requires yearly qualification. LEOSA requires qualification by your department's regular course. For me, in N.C., it would mean a 50 round course ranging from 3 to 25 yards, both day and night. If this were the case for all CCW permits, many would not apply and many who did would not be able to qualify. If a retired LEO covered under this bill fails to requalify due to age, infirmity, etc. his permit is not renewed. Not the case with standard CCW permits anywhere in this country.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

carry concealed firearm new york hr218

,
do leos need a permit to conceal a firearm in ny
,

do retired nys leo need a pistol permit

,

how to qualify in ny state retired leo

,

national retired leo permit and ny gun law

,

new york ccw application chemung county

,
nys gun law amendment re: retired leos
,
nys retired leo concealed carry
,

powered by mybb exercise helps people with medical conditions

,
retired leo working security in new york
,

right to carry retired leo ny

,
www.nys gun laws for retired law enforcement
Click on a term to search for related topics.