Expand LEOSA to active duty/retired military? - Page 6

Expand LEOSA to active duty/retired military?

This is a discussion on Expand LEOSA to active duty/retired military? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by gwgw60 Any citizen that passes the same qualification test that retired LEOs pass should have the same right to carry as do ...

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 113
Like Tree66Likes

Thread: Expand LEOSA to active duty/retired military?

  1. #76
    Member Array CowboyKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by gwgw60 View Post
    Any citizen that passes the same qualification test that retired LEOs pass should have the same right to carry as do retired officers.
    And here I thought that the "qualification test" for the right to keep and bear Arms was being a U.S. citizen. I guess I might be mistaken.

    Quote Originally Posted by gwgw60 View Post
    I was not talking about achieving LEO status, but in demonstrated firearms proficiency.
    Why should this have anything to do with it? What part of "shall not be infringed," says and must "demonstrated firearms proficiency"?

    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Guys, there is more to LEOSA than " firearms profiency" which seems to be the only thing that some seem to be keying on.

    You can teach a monkey to pull a trigger. But the years of practicing and enforcing laws of the land, as well as specialized training in areas that are not directly linked to the application of deadly force, are things that are not taught in " shoot'em up " schools.

    Actually, someone right out of the academy still has alot to learn. That's probably the reason for the LEOSA law requiring at least 10 years of LE duty as a qualifier.

    It seems that there are some who are offended in the ego about not having this umbrella of the law. But regardless of what anyone " feels" , the fact of the matter is that until you have payed your dues, carried the badge, and continually placed yourself in harms way, learned how to handle the public, learn proper procedure for dealing with other Public Safety agencies, and had your family live under the fear of you not ever coming home the next morning, then you are not qualified.

    Call it what you want, it's the law of the land, and all the sour grapes in the world will not make your feet big enough to fill these boots.
    Well, ain't that something that you are so special compared to the rest of us. But I have news for you, I carry a concealed firearm everywhere every day and I have no Law Enforcement or Military background.

    Now I have a great appreciation for what LEOs and the Military do to protect us but in the end I am responsible for my own personal safety and protection.

    YMMV

    Ken


  2. #77
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,929
    that until you have payed your dues, carried the badge, and continually placed yourself in harms way, learned how to handle the public, learn proper procedure for dealing with other Public Safety agencies, and had your family live under the fear of you not ever coming home the next morning, then you are not qualified.
    hmm, I seem to have done most of that. I did not bold the part about dealing with other agencies becuase I don't know what that has to do with life after retirement and the "privelege" to carry a weapon. I did have permission under Title 38 to work with the FBI and US Marshalls, and other LE agencies the last 11 years of my career so does tha count? And I did by a CCW badge for my wife as a joke......

    Look, this is not an ego thing. Every point being made for LEOSA can easily apply to many other folks. I don't want to take away LEOSA, nor expand it under more "Federal" permission type legislations. I want, and I think we should strive for, is to get rid of the stupid permits.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  3. #78
    Senior Member Array mulle46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    hmm, I seem to have done most of that. I did not bold the part about dealing with other agencies becuase I don't know what that has to do with life after retirement and the "privelege" to carry a weapon. I did have permission under Title 38 to work with the FBI and US Marshalls, and other LE agencies the last 11 years of my career so does tha count? And I did by a CCW badge for my wife as a joke......

    Look, this is not an ego thing. Every point being made for LEOSA can easily apply to many other folks. I don't want to take away LEOSA, nor expand it under more "Federal" permission type legislations. I want, and I think we should strive for, is to get rid of the stupid permits.
    or have national reciprocity like drivers licenses.
    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

  4. #79
    Senior Member Array 031131's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    nh
    Posts
    1,023
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyET08 View Post
    So while reading the verbiage in the LEOSA, I was thinking, why would this not apply to active duty military while off duty? Most AD military have extensive training regarding weapon safety, proficiency, and we even train for active shooter scenarios. Now I understand those with PTSD, legal issues and other stuff should be excluded. I think AD should be able to carry concealed in accordance with the LEOSA while off duty. COMMENTS?
    I'm pretty sure that you can't carry on base unless you are a MP. At least that's what I took the sign at the gate saying no firearms to mean (camp Lejeune anyway). I knew a few guys that had a gun or two but it had to be locked up in the armory. That of course only applies to those who lived in the barracks but still I'm pretty sure only MPs can carry on base. outside of base is of course is fair game.

    As suntzu said, there are far more military members who are not in a field related to combat or an mos (like an mp) that would have the training to do so. Most AD military only shoot once a year to qualify then return to their desk, work bench, or what have you. Although there is nothing preventing them for signing up for the appropriate training that they need like a civilian would.

  5. #80
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,527
    Wow, this thread has really gone down hill.
    It is surely true that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Nor can you make them grateful for your efforts.

  6. #81
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,140
    "I want, and ibthink we should get rid of the stupid permits".

    I understand, and agree to a point. However, I do not think that everyone is competent to carry a firearm. I believe that there should be some qualifying training that at least gives the basics of safety for carry.

    I have seen too many numbnuts who carry even with a CCW permit that I do not feel comfortable being around while they are handling a weapon.

    And, I have seen a few fatalities in military service by carelessness and stupidity.

    And yes, this can be applicable to LEO's as well, but in the grand scheme of things, I believe the ratio of incidents that occur with seasoned, experienced officers are quite low compared to the national average.

    And, since this thread is about active and retired military, when I think back on the mentality of 17, 18, and 19 year old service members I served with in the military, I definitely don't think they should be allowed to carry around the public.
    A few beers, in a topless bar, and a few handguns is a recipe for disaster with overblown egos and testosterone. Mix in the over consumption of alcohol, and it's hard to tell what could happen.

    I'm not painting them all with the same brush here, but who has the ability to say who is who?

    I remember a few years back when there was no concealed carry at all, for anyone. I'm glad that it's available now. But, before firearms became so popular with every Tom and Dick, things were a little quieter. Now you hear of some Dummy having accidental discharges in Walmart.

    Sometimes I think you can cook the goose too much.
    Hopyard likes this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  7. #82
    Senior Member Array royal barnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wendell, N.C.
    Posts
    605
    As I stated earlier, I'm a retired LEO and I should have the same privilege as every other law abiding citizen in this country. No more no less. Nationwide reciprocity is the answer and what we all should be fighting for. For those who are constantly digging my state for it's restrictive concealed carry laws you are right to some extent but we honor concealed permits from the other 49 states. Does yours?
    Hopyard likes this.

  8. #83
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    "I want, and ibthink we should get rid of the stupid permits"..................................

    And, since this thread is about active and retired military, when I think back on the mentality of 17, 18, and 19 year old service members I served with in the military, I definitely don't think they should be allowed to carry around the public.
    A few beers, in a topless bar, and a few handguns is a recipe for disaster with overblown egos and testosterone. Mix in the over consumption of alcohol, and it's hard to tell what could happen.

    I'm not painting them all with the same brush here, but who has the ability to say who is who?

    Sometimes I think you can cook the goose too much.
    First there are no 17, 18 or 19 year olds that meet the requirements of the LEOSA, must have ten years of experience. Second most states require a person to be 21 years of age to receive a weapons permit. Third, I don't know of many states that allow people in that age group to drink legally. Fourth, I do also believe 17, 18 & 19 year old military members act the same as their civilian counter parts.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  9. #84
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,140
    5th- since you served from 53-77 you should know that age is no barrier to service members who want to drink in off base establishments.
    6-we are talking about military service extension to LEOSA in the thread which could possibly circumvent the 21 year rule state law if obtained under a Federal jurisdiction for that purpose.
    And...
    7- yes 17,18,19 year old service members act just like their civilian counter parts, except, they have a constant paycheck in their pockets, and a new found sense of freedom, which is exactly the reason it's not a good idea.

    Blessed to be a Plt Sgt to some extra special young men that I admired and loved, I will never forget all the nights awoke at zero dark thirty, to come and get them out of trouble for being a little immature.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  10. #85
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,929
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    5th- since you served from 53-77 you should know that age is no barrier to service members who want to drink in off base establishments.
    6-we are talking about military service extension to LEOSA in the thread which could possibly circumvent the 21 year rule state law if obtained under a Federal jurisdiction for that purpose.
    And...
    7- yes 17,18,19 year old service members act just like their civilian counter parts, except, they have a constant paycheck in their pockets, and a new found sense of freedom, which is exactly the reason it's not a good idea.

    Blessed to be a Plt Sgt to some extra special young men that I admired and loved, I will never forget all the nights awoke at zero dark thirty, to come and get them out of trouble for being a little immature.
    When did soldiers begin to be allowed to drink under 21? Forgive me for asking but that would be new (realtively new). Back in the 80's the military drinking age in CONUS was that of the state. It was a change that as far as I know is still in affect today. You haven't been supplying underage folks with booze have you?

    I remember having to get platoon sergeants and other NCO's and officers out of trouble for being a little immature

    If they are getting drunk with a weapon they are breaking the law.

    And I thought LEOSA you had to have 10 years in as a LEO so I would assume that would apply to military so you would not have 17-20 year olds being eligible.

    Doesn't LEOSA already circumvent CC laws and reciprocity for the states?
    Last edited by suntzu; February 1st, 2013 at 07:55 AM.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  11. #86
    Lead Moderator
    Array rstickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    21,977
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    until you have payed your dues, carried the badge, and continually placed yourself in harms way, learned how to handle the public, learn proper procedure for dealing with other Public Safety agencies, and had your family live under the fear of you not ever coming home the next morning, then you are not qualified.
    Somebody better send me a nationwide permit if that is the criteria you are going to use.

    I can just about assure you that after 19 years in military bomb disposal, a lot of it in the Washington DC area, I can more than qualify under the criteria above, meeting all of it, probably more so than most "beat cops". If that were a list I could put a check after EVERY item.
    suntzu likes this.
    Rick

    EOD - Initial success or total failure

  12. #87
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,929
    Quote Originally Posted by rstickle View Post
    Somebody better send me a nationwide permit if that is the criteria you are going to use.

    I can just about assure you that after 19 years in military bomb disposal, a lot of it in the Washington DC area, I can more than qualify under the criteria above, meeting all of it, probably more so than most "beat cops". If that were a list I could put a check after EVERY item.
    Yoou forgot the badge part...I evidently need one also.
    K18C252G.jpg
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  13. #88
    Lead Moderator
    Array rstickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laurel, MD
    Posts
    21,977
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Yoou forgot the badge part...I evidently need one also.
    K18C252G.jpg
    Nope! My avatar is the "Master Explosive Ordnance Disposal BADGE", one of the three variations I wore for about 19 years!
    Rick

    EOD - Initial success or total failure

  14. #89
    Senior Member Array KBSR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Gulf Coast, MS
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    I hope I am not reading your post incorrectly. But it appears that you are saying "we have ours, now you need to try to get yours"........LEO's and retired LEO's are not a special class of folks and should not enjoy different priveleges and rights as the rest of us folks.
    You are not reading my post incorrectly Sir.

    What I was trying to say, and probably didn't say very well, was that retired law enforcement saw a definite need for this law, and worked very hard to make it happen. These things don't happen over night. If retired military want a similar law passed, they'll have to do the same work to get it passed, as they don't (as I read it) qualify under this law.

    And with all due respect, I do believe LEO's and retired LEO's ARE a special class of folks, who have served their community, and have, as a collateral affect of that service created some enemies that never forget, and therefor, the LEO's and retired LEO's deserve the protection of continuing to carry a weapon, anywhere and everywhere for their protection.

    I think our 2nd amendment gives us all that right, but as we know various liberal legislators have seen fit to change and/or limit that in their jurisdictions. This is why retired LEO's have lobbied and worked to create a work around for these jurisdictions.

    You see, when you deprive someone of their liberty, in the course of your duty, many of these people hold grudges. Despite our best efforts, some of these felons do, on occasion regain their freedom. It wasn't personal for me, but it damn sure was to them. Very few if any servicemen in our military have these same concerns.

    Be safe.
    " But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself... Baa." Col. Dave Grossman on Sheep and Sheepdogs.

  15. #90
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,929
    Quote Originally Posted by KBSR View Post
    You see, when you deprive someone of their liberty, in the course of your duty, many of these people hold grudges. Despite our best efforts, some of these felons do, on occasion regain their freedom. It wasn't personal for me, but it damn sure was to them. Very few if any servicemen in our military have these same concerns.

    Be safe.
    Sorry, you are not a specail group of people in so far as needing protection. A wife that is in fear of her hubby and had a restrainning order is in as much fear and in fact a direct fear for her life than the off chance in retirement a LEO is going to run into a guy wanting to do him in. You can extend your logic to anyone who has a personal enemy, to the jurors on trials, the witness's the judges and the lawyers.

    Also: what is more likely to happen: A person is on a vacation (LEO). What are the odds he will be attacked by a person he has known in the past or by a random violent crime? I would say a random violent crime which can happen to anyone. How many officers have had to use their weapon to thwart off a felon that they ran into in another state which they do not live? Now, compare that to people visiting other states that have been attacked and could not defend themselves because they could not bring their weapon to that state. Betcha the latter number is higher. I like numbers, not anecdotal stories.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 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

2013 leosa
,
dod leosa 2013
,
dod leosa opinion
,
dod police leosa 2013
,

leosa 2013

,

leosa 2013 military

,
leosa 2013 military police
,
leosa concealed carry ex military police
,

leosa military police

,
leosa military police 2013
,
leosa texas
,
military police leosa 2013
Click on a term to search for related topics.