Expand LEOSA to active duty/retired military?

Suntzu, I agree that the goal is to completely eliminate the infringement on EVERYONE's rights... but realistically I can't see full constitutional defense carry...nationwide including D.C, NYC, U.S. territories(as LEOSA covers) coming anytime soon. Might as well help as many law abiding citizens as we can in the mean time. Qualified military members might be a good place to start now that all LEO's are taken care of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KBSR

Yes to your first question. Everyone is required to qualify at 70%, and our SRT Members (Special Response Team) have to shoot 90%, but of course they try very hard to shoot 100%. Most agents are issued two handguns (primary and backup), or use a personally owned weapon and an issued backup, and a long gun, which could be a Remington 870, an M4 Carbine or an MP5 SMG so qualification takes some time.

Everyone will pass, or their weapons (and badge and credentials) are pulled, which puts them in jeopardy of losing their job. Very few issues in this area. If they fail to qualify, they get a requal, and they can choose to practice between qualifications if need be. We do lose an employee or two from each academy class, for firearms issues, as some of these kids come to the job with zero experience, and just can't grasp it. Having said that, our firearms instructors do an excellent job of training both experienced and seasoned shooters at the FLETC.

I knew Leroy when he was Sheriff, but was working in another state when he took his fall. You know he ran for Sheriff again when he got out of prison right? Actually had a few people vote for him too, which is amazing. I was raised an Air Force brat, and lived on Keesler before we moved to Gulfport. Probably have more friends in common.

Be safe.

---

ot,but my MOS school was Keesler. Spent almost a year there.

Back on topic, I don't think LEOSA should be expanded to include military. I say that as a veteran. In 5 years, I never fired a handgun at all,as it wasn't part of the TOE for my rank/MOS. As others have said, the vast majority of the military will not have experience with handguns.

Mulle... it is now and has been for quite some time required at basic for all military members going through basic or officer indoctrination to qualify on the M9. However that may be the last time a lot of those service members touch a handgun in the military. Obviously as a member of the military who is also a big advocate of defensive carry for many years... I'd like to take advantage of LEOSA... if at all legally possible (Credentials..etc). However I do see the problem in saying that every Officer, Warrant and NCO should fall under this. Ultimately I think it would make sense to petition our Congressional Reps to create some other sort of safety act for "qualified" military members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcpolynikes

Mulle... it is now and has been for quite some time required at basic for all military members going through basic or officer indoctrination to qualify on the M9. However that may be the last time a lot of those service members touch a handgun in the military. Obviously as a member of the military who is also a big advocate of defensive carry for many years... I'd like to take advantage of LEOSA... if at all legally possible (Credentials..etc). However I do see the problem in saying that every Officer, Warrant and NCO should fall under this. Ultimately I think it would make sense to petition our Congressional Reps to create some other sort of safety act for "qualified" military members.

---

So now it isn't for all military but now "qualified" military. Who in your opinion is "qualified"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcpolynikes

Mulle... it is now and has been for quite some time required at basic for all military members going through basic or officer indoctrination to qualify on the M9. However that may be the last time a lot of those service members touch a handgun in the military. Obviously as a member of the military who is also a big advocate of defensive carry for many years... I'd like to take advantage of LEOSA... if at all legally possible (Credentials..etc). However I do see the problem in saying that every Officer, Warrant and NCO should fall under this. Ultimately I think it would make sense to petition our Congressional Reps to create some other sort of safety act for "qualified" military members.

---

that may be so,as I ended active service in 2003 as a Sergeant, but initial qual with m9 doesn't qualify every service member to carry CCW under current laws, IMHO. I would prefer that there isn't restriction on CCW for citizens,as a LEO now.

Well... first being 21 years old, then the rest pretty much mirroring LEOSA's except for the LE part.
 is authorized by the DOD to carry a firearm;
 is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the UCMJ
 meets the standards, if any, established by the DOD which require the service member 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 DOD law from possessing a firearm.(This is where the PTSD/Mental Health bit would come into play... unfortunately a lot of our returning war heroes might have issues here)
I would also suggest some type of concealed carry course taught on base or even an online course would do (the military loves these courses). These would be the things I'd recommend initially. But ultimately the vast majority of service members that want to, could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcpolynikes

Yeah, thanks for the insight and I most def see what you mean. The only way I'd carry under LEOSA is if... and that's a big IF somehow the DON would issue some sort of credentials. In the mean time I am applying for yet another CCW for yet another state which I am currently stationed. It's getting old though. I've also just emailed my 2 Senators and a Congresswoman about my "Military Members Safety Act" idea. Maybe we'll see that coming down the road soon. And I meant "constitutional carry" in the above.

---

I like this idea!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by suntzu

No disrespect but I think it is a stupid idea. The goal is to eliminate the infringement, not make up classes of folks that are deemed "special"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcpolynikes

Suntzu, I agree that the goal is to completely eliminate the infringement on EVERYONE's rights... but realistically I can't see full constitutional defense carry...nationwide including D.C, NYC, U.S. territories(as LEOSA covers) coming anytime soon. Might as well help as many law abiding citizens as we can in the mean time. Qualified military members might be a good place to start now that all LEO's are taken care of.

---

My thought exactly! Then after we get this passed we should do the "Mothers of Small Children Safety Act" and after that one we can do the "Old Men With a Bad Hearts Safety Act."

And so on. One step at a time.

Ken

p.s.; Some of you may think I am being sarcastic, I am not. I am strongly in favor of nationwide Constitutional carry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royal barnes

I could get the LEOSA permit but, after reading all the fine print, it is not worth the yearly quals and only being able to carry the gun I qualify with or at least one similar. That fine print also says you must abide by all applicable state laws. Sort of muddies the water. My state CHP is good in 38 states. The others are ones I won't travel to anyway. I won't expect special privileges until ALL qualified U.S. citizens get them.

---

First, qualifying yearly is more than most CCW permits require, which is good. Second, regardless you need to abide by all applicable laws of whatever state you happen to be in at the moment. Third, I qualify with both a revolver and an auto so I can carry whatever I want. Last LEOSA is a privilege that I earned with 25 years of my life.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by azretired

First, qualifying yearly is more than most CCW permits require, which is good. Second, regardless you need to abide by all applicable laws of whatever state you happen to be in at the moment. Third, I qualify with both a revolver and an auto so I can carry whatever I want. Last LEOSA is a privilege that I earned with 25 years of my life.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

---

In Bold: Really now. I did not know it is considered a privelege to exercise an inherent right to bear arms which is not prohibited by the Constitution. Dang, where is the "scratching my head" emoticon?

I goggled LEOSA 2012 and read the entire required qualifications that had to be met and I found one, dated 2 Jan. 2013, that does appear to allow ex military policemen to qualify:


have statutory powers of arrest or to "apprehend" for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as of 2 January 2013)

chuckusaret.... the question is not whether active or ex military "civilian" police officers qualifiy (AKA Civilian Military Polic). That was indeed the reason for the latest Jan 2nd update LEOSA. The question now because they specified UCMJ apprehension powers is whether that implies all DOD commissioned officers, warrant officers, NCO's and petty officers since we all have limited LE powers under the UCMJ Art 7b rule 302. It will depend on how the DOD interprets the law. Which again is the issue and has been since the law was first established in 2004. It is still vague and open for interpretation by each agency.

I wan't to start out by telling you I'm a vietnam vet 1968-1969 drafted not volentary. I am not interested in protecting the general public. We vets have paid for our freedoms and for some the price was verry high. My welcome home was being called a baby killer at the airport by a rich collage kid. I should have every right that any police officer has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcpolynikes

chuckusaret.... the question is not whether active or ex military "civilian" police officers qualifiy (AKA Civilian Military Polic). That was indeed the reason for the latest Jan 2nd update LEOSA. The question now because they specified UCMJ apprehension powers is whether that implies all DOD commissioned officers, warrant officers, NCO's and petty officers since we all have limited LE powers under the UCMJ Art 7b rule 302. It will depend on how the DOD interprets the law. Which again is the issue and has been since the law was first established in 2004. It is still vague and open for interpretation by each agency.

---

I like, many senior NCO's and company grade officers, did perform a limited number of apprehensions of AWOL personnel and did perform prison chase duties during our time in service but, IMO, would really push the intent of the program. But, In my opinion, after reading the law, it does infringe on our rights.

I have to agree with SunTzu and I quote; "the goal is to reduce the infringement, not make up classes of folks that are deemed "special".

I earned my right to continue, as did millions of others, to bear arms under the 2nd amendment to the Constitution by my 24 years in the military protecting that right.

I was in the Marines, long time ago, and we did train on firearms quite a bit. I have to admit though, there are lots of active duty military folks who do not. Not everyone in the military is a "snake eater", so I don't think this should apply to them. JMHO.