LEOSA subject to to state magazine capacity laws

O

Oldjarhead

New member
For any retired LEOs out there. If you are concealed carry approved under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, are you bound by state laws on magazine capacity? :confused:
 
If you're not in the union and this was idle curiosity, it depends on the state laws. At least some provided exemptions.
 
yes it does unless there is an exemption in the state law. The NY Safe Act does not have an exemption for retired law enforcement so the 7 round limit in magazines applies to LEOSA. This is something that needs to be addressed by an amendment to LEOSA.
 
Considering LEOSA doesn't exempt you from local carry restrictions, I'd think magazine limits would still be governed by locality. But why risk it?
 
So

should retired LEOs' have more rights than honest citizens?

I don't think LEOs', active or not, should be able to carry more than what honest citizens can.

JMO
 
David Wong, Esq...

The best source for correct(re; "errornet" :rolleyes:) details may be atty; David Wong. Wong wrote a few trade industry articles about the LEOSA & the 2010 updated version signed into law by President Obama.
To my knowledge(not a sworn or retired LE officer), magazine limits are NOT a issue if you meet LEOSA standards & re-quals.
The Federal LE Officers Assoc, www.FLEOA.org or maybe the IACP, www.IACP.org could provide information.
I'll post David Wong's website if I can later on.

ClydeFrog
 
I don't have experience with this personally, but Massad Ayoob briefly mentions it in one of his books. He's covered in LEOSA, but when he travels, and those travels include or may include mag restricted states (I think he mentioned California specifically) he leaves the Glocks at home, and takes a wheelgun and/or 1911.
 
I was asked to pick Massad Ayoob up from Harrisburg Airport one time, he had not traveled with firearms, I was given a Chief Special (and ammo) to give him.

I thought that was strange, he was just as paranoid as I was!
 
Good guy letters...

Author & legal use of force expert, Massad Ayoob wrote a few recent gun press items about how cops & sworn personnel travel in CONUS with weapons.
He wrote about going to New York City & having his PD cut a "good guy" letter for official business. Ayoob said the young NYPD officer at the JFK office was dejected for not being able to snag Ayoob as a gun collar. :D

FWIW, I posted on the forum before how CT's public safety agency is very strict about LEOSA firearm standards, they do not allow any CT law enforcement to use any SAO type pistols. No P35s no 1911a1s no SAAs. ;)

ClydeFrog
 
yes it does unless there is an exemption in the state law. The NY Safe Act does not have an exemption for retired law enforcement so the 7 round limit in magazines applies to LEOSA. This is something that needs to be addressed by repealing the oppressive law in NY.
Click to expand...

FTFY
 
I carry per the LEOSA. I'm no lawyer so I defer to the Sheepdog Academy, which is a group of lawyers, prosecutors, and LE officers, who train Retired and Active LEO's, Local prosecutors 'n such in HR218.

Not just so we know what we can and cannot do per the LEOSA, but to keep local departments, cities, and states from getting sued for the violation of or ignoring the LEOSA.

I haven't studied the material in a while (since this part doesn't affect me) but in places like New Jersey and their "no hollow points" those carrying per the LEOSA where NOT exempt, meaning if we go to NJ we can't carry hollow points.

Again I'm not a lawyer, but I would think if this is true (about the hollow points) then it would be true regarding magazine capacity.

I never really looked into this because I carry a S&W 642 with LSWC's (non-hollow points). Which would mean that I don't have to worry about NJ's hollow point prohibitions or NYs magazine limits.

If I carried a high cap mag or hollow points, I would so some research with the Sheepdog Academy.
 
I haven't studied the material in a while (since this part doesn't affect me) but in places like New Jersey and their "no hollow points" those carrying per the LEOSA where NOT exempt, meaning if we go to NJ we can't carry hollow points.

Again I'm not a lawyer, but I would think if this is true (about the hollow points) then it would be true regarding magazine capacity.
Click to expand...

IIRC the first revision to the LEOSA specifically exempted qualified personnel from local restrictions on ammunition type, meaning that NJ's prohibition on carrying hollow points is unenforceable. That was a matter of personal interest to me, as my cousin lived in NJ, and I had to switch to EFMJs whenever I went to visit him before the change.

I'm not sure if the same clause would exempt a qualified person from the NY 7-rd limit, though, especially inasmuch as on-duty NY LEOs aren't exempted. It doesn't matter to me, anyway, as I carry an XDS with a 5-rd magazine. :p
 
should retired LEOs' have more rights than honest citizens?

I don't think LEOs', active or not, should be able to carry more than what honest citizens can.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that, but that's not what this thread is about. I would encourage you to start another, perhaps more open-ended thread, discussing the merits of "professional courtesy" that states, counties and municipalities extend to current and former LEO's, as well as the philosophical underpinnings of LEOSA itself.
 
Law enforcement should not be exempt so long as the state feels that an individual does not require more than that amount to defend themselves. It may actually prevent bystanders getting hit as often. Follow Cuomo's advice and start using revolvers using the two shot than assess tactic.
 
Although I feel that the New York Safe Act is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord, and should be repealed at once, it really doesn't affect me personnaly at this time. Being selfish about the matter, I have been forced to change my every day carry piece from a 9mm SIG 226 to a .45 acp SIG 220.
Somehow, silly me, except for the size and weght difference, I don't feel at all handicapped.
I truly feel sorry for those that don't have something else to fall back on, but I see a rapid return to major popularity of J & K frame Smiths. 125 gr. .357s are nothing to sneeze at.
So, as I see it, NY has three things it must do in the immediate future.
1. Get rid of the SAFE act
2. Throw those idiots in Albany out of office
3. GET RID OF CUOMO
 
ClydeFrog said:
FWIW, I posted on the forum before how CT's public safety agency is very strict about LEOSA firearm standards, they do not allow any CT law enforcement to use any SAO type pistols. No P35s no 1911a1s no SAAs.
Click to expand...

:confused:

Connecticut, last I knew, had a state police department and 169 municipalities, most of which had their own police departments that do not report to the State Police. So I don't see how the State Police could in any way dictate what officers from the municipal departments can or can't do.

Secondly, I don't recall that there were any "firearm standards" in the LEOSA. Got a citation?
 
Hmmm --

From the always-reliable Wikipedia:

2010 amendment

In 2010, LEOSA was amended by the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Improvements Act of 2010[2], which specifically extended coverage to include law enforcement officers of the Amtrak Police, Federal Reserve Police, and law enforcement officers of the executive branch of the Federal Government.[2] The provisions for disqualification on mental health grounds and the provisions regarding qualifications to carry a firearm were amended, and the number of aggregate years for retired officers was reduced from fifteen to ten.[2] Coverage was also expanded to include military law enforcement personnel.[2] In addition the definition of a firearm was expanded to include any ammunition not prohibited by the National Firearms Act of 1934. This was done to exempt qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from the prohibitions against carrying hollow-point ammunition that is in force in New Jersey (except for their peace officers and active federal law enforcement officers) and a few other locations.

2013 amendment

In 2013, LEOSA was again amended by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2013, effective January 2, 2013 after President Obama signed Public Law 112-239 (H.R. 4310).[3] Section 1089 of the NDAA contained language which further clarified that military police officers and civilian police officers employed by the U.S. Government unambiguously met the definitions in the original Act. The definitions of "qualified active" and "qualified retired" law enforcement officer include the term "police officers" and expanded the powers of arrest requirement definition to include those who have or had the authority to "apprehend" suspects under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Senator Patrick Leahy, a key sponsor of the bill, remarked "The Senate has agreed to extend that trust to the law enforcement officers that serve within our military. They are no less deserving or worthy of this privilege and I am very pleased we have acted to equalize their treatment under the federal law". He further stated "The amendment we adopt today will place military police and civilian police officers within the Department of Defense on equal footing with their law enforcement counterparts across the country when it comes to coverage under LEOSA."
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
 
Alabama Shooter Quote:
yes it does unless there is an exemption in the state law. The NY Safe Act does not have an exemption for retired law enforcement so the 7 round limit in magazines applies to LEOSA. This is something that needs to be addressed by repealing the oppressive law in NY.

FTFY
Click to expand...

i agree with you on that and have been doing my part to do just that in NY. calling legislators, writing, demonstrations, contributing to legal efforts to overturn the law.
my sentance was poorly written. the fix that is needed in LEOSA isnt specific to ny but for the many states that have limited their magazine capacities with ny the most egregious example of that so far with 7.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top