Are LEOs exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?

[thefinger]

Are LEOs exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?

I've seen people mention this on the forums before, but I want to know if its really true. Can a LEO purchase more than one gun from an FFL at the same time? **I'm NOT talking about PPTs or consignments.

[Warhawk014]

yes leo's are not bound by the 1 per 30 day law. leos can purchase as many handguns as their wallets will allow.

[Librarian]

Just so you have the reference, it's 12072(a)(9) (9) (A) No person shall make an application to purchase more than
one pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed
upon the person within any 30-day period.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any of the following:
(i) Any law enforcement agency.
(ii) Any agency duly authorized to perform law enforcement duties.
(iii) Any state or local correctional facility.
(iv) Any private security company licensed to do business in
California.
(v) Any person who is properly identified as a full-time paid
peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2, and who is authorized to, and does carry a
firearm during the course and scope of his or her employment as a
peace officer.
...

[tyrist]

No but the one time I tried it...which was awhile ago I was turned down.

[Trader Jack]

Yes they are exempt from the 30 day deal, they are exempt from the safe handgun list. They are for the most part above the law.

I would love to see all FFL's get together and refuse to sell leo's any firearm not on the "SAFE" list. Refuse to use exceptions for the one in 30 days.

Are they more privileged then Joe citizen? Hell yes. Are they better qualified then Jane citizen? Hell no.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

The State, The DOJ, and the powers that be could not do squats about it.:mad:

[bwiese]

Yes they are exempt from the 30 day deal, they are exempt from the safe handgun list. They are for the most part above the law.

I would love to see all FFL's get together and refuse to sell leo's any firearm not on the "SAFE" list. Refuse to use exceptions for the one in 30 days.

Are they more privileged then Joe citizen? Hell yes. Are they better qualified then Jane citizen? Hell no.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

The State, The DOJ, and the powers that be could not do squats about it.:mad:


I sympathize with your sentiments.

However, many PDs get their guns via large contracts with LE distributors.
Relatively few cops get their duty guns from a gunshop.

If all 700ish retail/consumer FFLs in CA banned LEOs from buying guns at their store, most cops would continue to get them from the LE distributors.

[yellowfin]

Bill hit it before I could, but I would add if we wanted to do something about it that could get done is for us to kick them out of all our businesses, not gun stores. Refuse service to known anti 2A LE down to not letting them get a hamburger, plumbing repair, car wash, car loan, haircut, drink at a bar, etc.

[thefinger]

Yes they are exempt from the 30 day deal, they are exempt from the safe handgun list. They are for the most part above the law.

I would love to see all FFL's get together and refuse to sell leo's any firearm not on the "SAFE" list. Refuse to use exceptions for the one in 30 days.

Are they more privileged then Joe citizen? Hell yes. Are they better qualified then Jane citizen? Hell no.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

The State, The DOJ, and the powers that be could not do squats about it.:mad:


While I agree that the "safe" handgun roster is a ridiculous institution, I don't understand why you would be happy to see businesses refuse to sell off-list handguns to police officers. Most LEOs I know are hardcore 2A supporters, so why punish them? Why not focus your energy on fighting for your rights instead of suggesting that businesses should attempt to further infringe the rights of yet another group of law-abiding Americans-- LEOs.

Personally, I think it would suck if LEOs couldn't buy off-list handguns. Their ability to purchase those handguns puts many handguns back in play for regular citizens like ourselves through PPTs-- handguns that would otherwise be sold to out-of-state buyers. You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.

[silver05]

Yes they are exempt from the 30 day deal, they are exempt from the safe handgun list. They are for the most part above the law.

I would love to see all FFL's get together and refuse to sell leo's any firearm not on the "SAFE" list. Refuse to use exceptions for the one in 30 days.

Are they more privileged then Joe citizen? Hell yes. Are they better qualified then Jane citizen? Hell no.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

The State, The DOJ, and the powers that be could not do squats about it.:mad:

DAMN!!! Don't hate the player, Hate the game! LOL;)

[silver05]

While I agree that the "safe" handgun roster is a ridiculous institution, I don't understand why you would be happy to see businesses refuse to sell off-list handguns to police officers. Most LEOs I know are hardcore 2A supporters, so why punish them? Why not focus your energy on fighting for your rights instead of suggesting that businesses should attempt to further infringe the rights of yet another group of law-abiding Americans-- LEOs.

Personally, I think it would suck if LEOs couldn't buy off-list handguns. Their ability to purchase those handguns puts many handguns back in play for regular citizens like ourselves through PPTs-- handguns that would otherwise be sold to out-of-state buyers. You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.

I have to agree with you............................

[bwiese]

W Most LEOs I know are hardcore 2A supporters, so why punish them?

Let's look at what you wrote, "Most LEOs I know...".

Sure, there are some good LEOs, esp here.

But in larger metro areas there's a clannish "blue team" antigun sentiment.
You can see the cops line up behind the politicians at gun ban events, etc.

These folks keep getting bought off thru their exemptions. Maybe if there's no LE exemption in a future law no LE support for that law will be garnered.

The LEO exemptions are a trivial opening to getting non-Rostered handguns but not that effective given transfer limitations etc.

[DDT]

The LEO exemptions for personal weapons should be challengeable based on equal protection clause of 14th. While their need for specific duty weapons above and beyond those legal for non-LEO to own is arguable there is no legal argument for them to own weapons not available to other citizens when off duty.

[sholling]

While I agree that the "safe" handgun roster is a ridiculous institution, I don't understand why you would be happy to see businesses refuse to sell off-list handguns to police officers.

Because the reason that LEOs are exempt from the roster and the AWB is that their unions demanded exemptions. If their unions had fought for all of us then I'd be supportive. Nothing happens in the state legislature without the blessings of the public employees' unions - nothing! The legislators don't take a leak without raising one finger and waiting for a nod from the unions.

While I fully support most LEOs and I'm grateful for their service, in this I support Barrett and their business practices. If I had gunshop I would refuse to sell an "unsafe" handgun or an "assault rifle", or any non-publicly available ammo to any LEO or LE agency. I would also expect them to come back in 10 days to pick up firearms. However I would happily sell them anything that is available to the general public. And I would honestly wish them good fortune in the job that they do for the public.

Personally, I think it would suck if LEOs couldn't buy off-list handguns. Their ability to purchase those handguns puts many handguns back in play for regular citizens like ourselves through PPTs-- handguns that would otherwise be sold to out-of-state buyers. You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them
So you support strawman transactions as long as a LEO is the strawman?

[dicast]

:D speaking of which I have a none "safe list" hand gun I no longer want it. make me a offer. Springfield xd45 stainless with no mag, since it's hi-cap.

[fairfaxjim]

This coin certainly has two sides! While I agree that we joe citizens (god I really hate all this "joe" crap lately!) do reap an unintended side benefit from the LEO exemption from these BS laws, that in itself is not enough reason to put up with the laws themselves. The exemptions were placed in there to make them palatible to the LE community, period! As Bweise said, they don't need the retail FFL's to get their duty weapons. They did however express dissent with the "Safe Gun Roster" if they were not exempted from it, so the legislature wrote them out of it.

It is also true that the LEO's that calguns members usually see and talk with are pro 2A, and gun enthusiasts also. There are a LOT of LEO's that you won't see at a public range, or in the local gun store, that know only of their training, and that is they can have 'em, we can't! And they (also due to their training) believe they are safer on the street because of it.

I agree "don't hate the player, hate the game," but to change the game, a few players may have to get their special status reduced. Hoping for a crumb from the aristocracy is not my idea of freedom.

[nooner]

if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.If it is illegal it should be illegal, PERIOD. One cannot infringe "special rights" which apply to some and not all. Rights apply to ALL, not some. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[wildhawker]

If it is illegal it should be illegal, PERIOD. One cannot infringe "special rights" which apply to some and not all. Rights apply to ALL, not some. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

While I agree with the tenets of your opinion, history unfortunately shows us otherwise.

Humans are inherently self-preserving; while some would argue to the contrary, I tend to believe that most anti-RKBA from LEO stems from fear and not malice. Driven by fear, California LEO unions have used their substantial political power to protect their dues-paying members (which, as a self-preserving entity in its own right, must show ROI to its members for its continued usefulness and survival) at the constitutional expense of the citizenry.

Unless and until challenged, abusive laws and regulations give entities power to savor their cake while reading Calguns, for example, while we spend considerable energy (and money) fighting the uphill battle through the courts. The anti-RKBA movement understands well that our resources are not unlimited.

Constitutional rights, especially, are not maintained if not practiced. Thank God we have a truly passionate and motivated group of people here who are dedicated to the practice and protection of all our natural rights.

[Telperion]

You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.

I shouldn't need to have "the right friends" to buy the handgun I want.

As for the rest of your comments, there are two schools of thought on LEOs and special firearms rights. The first is that LEOs will "pave the way" for further advancements in gun rights, and will lend their support to general public when the time comes. This was the rationale used to sell LEOSA (aka HR218), and I'm still waiting for any reciprocation on nationwide CCW issues. Fool me once ... well actually I wasn't fooled when it happened.

The second is that everyone sits in the same boat, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Equal protection and restriction for all. Since approach #1 hasn't work so well, maybe we ought to try approach #2.

[wildhawker]

Personally, I think it would suck if LEOs couldn't buy off-list handguns. Their ability to purchase those handguns puts many handguns back in play for regular citizens like ourselves through PPTs-- handguns that would otherwise be sold to out-of-state buyers. You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.

I fail to see the equity of a value of "many". While you did not quantify "many", it is reasonable to expect "many" is a mere fraction of the volume of total firearms transactions here in California. How much have these "many" LEO PPTs really contributed to the vibrancy of our community?

Further, would you say that we should "make friends" and donate exorbitant amounts to CLEO election campaigns in exchange for a coveted CCW (in areas like Alameda County, for example) simply because "if we don't, others will" and thus support a quid pro quo system made up of haves and have-nots? Why do we need a roster at all, and why are some granted more rights than others? Four legs good, two legs better...

Lastly, I'm not sure I understand what was intended by your statement "instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights."

We won't gain anything by being unneccessarily antagonistic and combatant, but I seriously doubt that there are many here cut from the cloth to simply roll over and thank master for that which he has so graciously allowed us.

[JSH]

Personally, I think it would suck if LEOs couldn't buy off-list handguns. Their ability to purchase those handguns puts many handguns back in play for regular citizens like ourselves through PPTs-- handguns that would otherwise be sold to out-of-state buyers. You could probably even get some of those guns through PPTs from LEOs if you'd make friends with them instead of trying to incite anger towards them in an attempt to infringe on their rights.

Do you mean LEOs can use un-safe handguns for duty or off-duty carry? No wonder more unarmed civilians got killed by LEOs.

Further, they could purchase as much un-safe handguns as possible then dump them to civilians for making $$$? Is that some kind of corruption?

[nooner]

While I agree with the tenets of your opinion, history unfortunately shows us otherwise.
I was referring to what should be, not the way it unfortunately is. ;)

[wildhawker]

I was referring to what should be, not the way it unfortunately is. ;)

Right with you brother. :D

[Wild Squid]

Most LEOs I know are hardcore 2A supporters, so why punish them?



That's a bunch of bull. Most Leos I know want to bust anyone with any type of firearm infraction, and claim they are "just doing their job". Just because some leos on this board may support us, doesn't mean the vast majority of Leos that get called out to overly loud parties/arguments don't wanna search the whole place and confiscate weapons they deem the occupant is unsafe to own. Yes, I have stopped Leos at my front door thinking they could step foot inside easily without a search warrant. And they always ask do I have any firearms in the house, which I reply NO. My personal experience with them is some would love nothing better than to have you face down eating dirt with a knee on your neck. And I don't even look like a thug.

[cousinkix1953]

Are LEOs exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?

I've seen people mention this on the forums before, but I want to know if its really true. Can a LEO purchase more than one gun from an FFL at the same time? **I'm NOT talking about PPTs or consignments.
Of course! They exempted themselves from the seat belt law and the cell phone "hands free" requirements too.

Their only failure was trying to get excluded from that 1998 Domestic Gun Violence law passed by Congress. "Beat your wife; be disarmed by the police chief or sheriff and then be fired." They aren't much good if they can't carry a firearm under a new federal law. You might recall that dozens of LEOs were fired when this federal law went into effect...

[SkyStorm82]

That's a bunch of bull. Most Leos I know want to bust anyone with any type of firearm infraction, and claim they are "just doing their job". Just because some leos on this board may support us, doesn't mean the vast majority of Leos that get called out to overly loud parties/arguments don't wanna search the whole place and confiscate weapons they deem the occupant is unsafe to own. Yes, I have stopped Leos at my front door thinking they could step foot inside easily without a search warrant. And they always ask do I have any firearms in the house, which I reply NO. My personal experience with them is some would love nothing better than to have you face down eating dirt with a knee on your neck. And I don't even look like a thug.

And how many LEOs do you "know"?

Oh...and it's concrete. Not dirt....get it right.:43:

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Hoping for a crumb from the aristocracy is not my idea of freedom.

With Liberty and Justice For All


I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for a select few. :mad:

[ViPER395]

The following post needs to be reposted, just for posterity.

Let's look at what you wrote, "Most LEOs I know...".

Sure, there are some good LEOs, esp here.

But in larger metro areas there's a clannish "blue team" antigun sentiment.
You can see the cops line up behind the politicians at gun ban events, etc.

These folks keep getting bought off thru their exemptions. Maybe if there's no LE exemption in a future law no LE support for that law will be garnered.

The LEO exemptions are a trivial opening to getting non-Rostered handguns but not that effective given transfer limitations etc.

[Vectrexer]

Yes they are exempt from the 30 day deal, they are exempt from the safe handgun list. They are for the most part above the law.

I would love to see all FFL's get together and refuse to sell leo's any firearm not on the "SAFE" list. Refuse to use exceptions for the one in 30 days.

Are they more privileged then Joe citizen? Hell yes. Are they better qualified then Jane citizen? Hell no.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

The State, The DOJ, and the powers that be could not do squats about it.:mad:



Hell No! That would simply be restricting another section of the population to the same rules. That kind of thinking say you agree with, and are in teh same camp as the idiots link CDNN and other vendor who refuse to sell to California because of our weird laws and regulations.

Better to open up or eliminate the laws, regulations, and so the rest of us can enjoy equal privileges.

[Vectrexer]

Do you mean LEOs can use un-safe handguns for duty or off-duty carry? No wonder more unarmed civilians got killed by LEOs.

Further, they could purchase as much un-safe handguns as possible then dump them to civilians for making $$$? Is that some kind of corruption?


A lack of certification of safety does not indicate an unsafe gun any more than a the lack of certification of sanity proves you are insane. Only the lack of certification.

[p7m8jg]

DAMN!!! Don't hate the player, Hate the game! LOL;)

+1

When I was an LEO I got the benefit. Now that I'm no longer an LEO, (even though still with an affiliated law enforcement agency (non-peace officer)) I don't get the benefit & have to wait like everybody else.

Still, I don't want to prevent my bretheren from being firearm afficionados, if that is their desire. :cool:

[JSH]

A lack of certification of safety does not indicate an unsafe gun any more than a the lack of certification of sanity proves you are insane. Only the lack of certification.

So if CA DOJ can not prove the gun is un-safe, then the gun is safe, should be on the list, right? If CA DOJ tested the gun and found not safe, it should prohibit everybody in CA especially LEOs purchase it from FFL or PPT.

[Librarian]

So if CA DOJ can not prove the gun is un-safe, then the gun is safe, should be on the list, right? If CA DOJ tested the gun and found not safe, it should prohibit everybody in CA especially LEOs purchase it from FFL or PPT.

No, technically if it gets on the Roster it's "not unsafe".

And you know the Roster is not about safety.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=81127

[ke6guj]

So if CA DOJ can not prove the gun is un-safe, then the gun is safe, should be on the list, right? If CA DOJ tested the gun and found not safe, it should prohibit everybody in CA especially LEOs purchase it from FFL or PPT.


The roster works in reverse. All handguns are considered unsafe unless they have been tested and shown to be "not unsafe".

[JSH]

The roster works in reverse. All handguns are considered unsafe unless they have been tested and shown to be "not unsafe".

Thus, DOJ should prohibit LEOs buying and tranfering those "un-test" guns.

[cousinkix1953]

The BATFE sent out an executive order after this 1998 Domestic Violence gun law was passed declaring that wife beaters were not allowed to have guns any more! A copy of this new rule was printed in GUN WEEK at the time. Dozens of people got fired; because they could no longer perform their duties that required the use of a firearm.

Sarah Palin had no choice but firing a state trooper who tazed his children and beat the wife. I was shocked at the left wing anti-gun HYPOCRITES; who complained because she dared to enforce a federl gun control law...

[9M61]

I'm not sure if it was properly answered because I didn't read through four pages, but to answer your question "are LEO's exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?" The answer is, yes and no.

If I have a letter from the department stating that the purchase is for official duty purpose (either on or off duty), then I can go in, buy the firearm and walk out with it. This firearm, purchased with a department letter, does not count towards my "1 per 30 day" rule. So yes, in theory, the next day I could go down to the same shop and buy a different handgun -- wait the 10 days -- and pick it up. I would have at that point, purchased 2 handguns within 11 days.

The "department letter" has to be signed by the Chief or someone who has been given the authority by the Chief (or Sheriff) though. Most cops aren't willing to go to their Chief and say "Hey boss can you sign this letter for my new GLOCK because I just bought one a week ago and I don't want to wait 20 more days before I can buy another." So in practice, it really doesn't happen often.

A LEO cannot simply go into a shop and buy a handgun, complete the DROS stuff, wait 10 days, pick up the handgun and order another one right on the spot. He'd have to have a letter for the subsequent handgun. Bottom line, you need a letter signed by the Chief or Sheriff for the handgun to NOT COUNT against your 1 per 30 day rule.

On the roster.... it is correct that a LEO can purchase a handgun which is not on the ridiculous "safe roster" or whatever they call it now. No department letter is needed. You go in to a gun dealer, you say what you want, they order it, you pick it up 10 days later.

[cousinkix1953]

I'm not sure if it was properly answered because I didn't read through four pages, but to answer your question "are LEO's exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?" The answer is, yes and no.

If I have a letter from the department stating that the purchase is for official duty purpose (either on or off duty), then I can go in, buy the firearm and walk out with it. This firearm, purchased with a department letter, does not count towards my "1 per 30 day" rule. So yes, in theory, the next day I could go down to the same shop and buy a different handgun -- wait the 10 days -- and pick it up. I would have at that point, purchased 2 handguns within 11 days.

The "department letter" has to be signed by the Chief or someone who has been given the authority by the Chief (or Sheriff) though. Most cops aren't willing to go to their Chief and say "Hey boss can you sign this letter for my new GLOCK because I just bought one a week ago and I don't want to wait 20 more days before I can buy another." So in practice, it really doesn't happen often.

A LEO cannot simply go into a shop and buy a handgun, complete the DROS stuff, wait 10 days, pick up the handgun and order another one right on the spot. He'd have to have a letter for the subsequent handgun. Bottom line, you need a letter signed by the Chief or Sheriff for the handgun to NOT COUNT against your 1 per 30 day rule.

On the roster.... it is correct that a LEO can purchase a handgun which is not on the ridiculous "safe roster" or whatever they call it now. No department letter is needed. You go in to a gun dealer, you say what you want, they order it, you pick it up 10 days later.

Aren't most of those duty weapons purchased by the LEA in the first place and not by individuals? In that case, they might have a need for a case of new pistols to arm another class of graduating officer cadets.

A lot of handguns are turned in, when people change jobs and retire. The stores were full of used Smith & Wesson revolvers; when the Los Angeles sheriff armed his deputies with a 9mm Beretta in 1995.

Buying guns for personal use are subjected to the same laws as everybody else. It isn't a new law eithrer. The BATFE arrested two Capitola officers in 1978. They were caught buying all kinds of non-duty weapons with department requisitions, selling these firearms to their friends and not paying federal excise taxes on the sales...

[tyrist]

Aren't most of those duty weapons purchased by the LEA in the first place and not by individuals? In that case, they might have a need for a case of new pistols to arm another class of graduating officer cadets.

A lot of handguns are turned in, when people change jobs and retire. The stores were full of used Smith & Wesson revolvers; when the Los Angeles sheriff armed his deputies with a 9mm Beretta in 1995.

Buying guns for personal use are subjected to the same laws as everybody else. It isn't a new law eithrer. The BATFE arrested two Capitola officers in 1978. They were caught buying all kinds of non-duty weapons with department requisitions, selling these firearms to their friends and not paying federal excise taxes on the sales...

The department issues you a single duty firearm. Mine is a Beretta 92FS...I carried it on duty a total of 3 days. The option is given to upgrade weapons on your own dime and most Officers use the opportunity.

[Librarian]

I'm not sure if it was properly answered because I didn't read through four pages, but to answer your question "are LEO's exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?" The answer is, yes and no.

If I have a letter from the department stating that the purchase is for official duty purpose (either on or off duty), then I can go in, buy the firearm and walk out with it. This firearm, purchased with a department letter, does not count towards my "1 per 30 day" rule. So yes, in theory, the next day I could go down to the same shop and buy a different handgun -- wait the 10 days -- and pick it up. I would have at that point, purchased 2 handguns within 11 days.

The "department letter" has to be signed by the Chief or someone who has been given the authority by the Chief (or Sheriff) though. Most cops aren't willing to go to their Chief and say "Hey boss can you sign this letter for my new GLOCK because I just bought one a week ago and I don't want to wait 20 more days before I can buy another." So in practice, it really doesn't happen often.

A LEO cannot simply go into a shop and buy a handgun, complete the DROS stuff, wait 10 days, pick up the handgun and order another one right on the spot. He'd have to have a letter for the subsequent handgun. Bottom line, you need a letter signed by the Chief or Sheriff for the handgun to NOT COUNT against your 1 per 30 day rule.

On the roster.... it is correct that a LEO can purchase a handgun which is not on the ridiculous "safe roster" or whatever they call it now. No department letter is needed. You go in to a gun dealer, you say what you want, they order it, you pick it up 10 days later.

I think your information is out of date.

DOJ says Policy Change Regarding State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers

Effective immediately, peace officers who have legislative authority to carry and use firearms may, without a letter signed by the head of their agency or the agency head's designee, purchase non-rostered handguns and/or large capacity magazines. The peace officer must present a valid peace officer identification card and the dealer must retain a copy of the identification card on file. (PC 12132 & 12133). A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078).

But PC 12072(a)(9) specifically exempts (v) Any person who is properly identified as a full-time paid
peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2, and who is authorized to, and does carry a
firearm during the course and scope of his or her employment as a
peace officer.from the 1 in 30 days rule. So long as s/he is willing to wait the 10 days, such a LEO could buy as many as s/he could afford.

[cousinkix1953]

The department issues you a single duty firearm. Mine is a Beretta 92FS...I carried it on duty a total of 3 days. The option is given to upgrade weapons on your own dime and most Officers use the opportunity.

Which makes sense to me. The Beretta belongs to the department. It must be turned in when you retire or move to another LEA. The guns you buy with your own money are yours to keep just like any other piece of private property.

The sheriff issues the Glock around here and the city PD is armed mostly with a .40 caliber H&K pistol...

[Seesm]

So I may have missed it as I blazed over the posts... When did this go into effect anyway? There are soo many stupid laws... Did I mention that ever? :) Just kidding I know I have mentioned that...

I say if you legal to own and want to buy let em buy...

[eta34]

I'm not sure if it was properly answered because I didn't read through four pages, but to answer your question "are LEO's exempt from the 1 handgun per 30 days rule?" The answer is, yes and no.

If I have a letter from the department stating that the purchase is for official duty purpose (either on or off duty), then I can go in, buy the firearm and walk out with it. This firearm, purchased with a department letter, does not count towards my "1 per 30 day" rule. So yes, in theory, the next day I could go down to the same shop and buy a different handgun -- wait the 10 days -- and pick it up. I would have at that point, purchased 2 handguns within 11 days.

The "department letter" has to be signed by the Chief or someone who has been given the authority by the Chief (or Sheriff) though. Most cops aren't willing to go to their Chief and say "Hey boss can you sign this letter for my new GLOCK because I just bought one a week ago and I don't want to wait 20 more days before I can buy another." So in practice, it really doesn't happen often.

A LEO cannot simply go into a shop and buy a handgun, complete the DROS stuff, wait 10 days, pick up the handgun and order another one right on the spot. He'd have to have a letter for the subsequent handgun. Bottom line, you need a letter signed by the Chief or Sheriff for the handgun to NOT COUNT against your 1 per 30 day rule.

On the roster.... it is correct that a LEO can purchase a handgun which is not on the ridiculous "safe roster" or whatever they call it now. No department letter is needed. You go in to a gun dealer, you say what you want, they order it, you pick it up 10 days later.


Not correct. LEO are exempt from the 1 in 30 rule. I don't agree with it, but that is the current law.

[sholling]

Not correct. LEO are exempt from the 1 in 30 rule. I don't agree with it, but that is the current law.
Perhaps the poster is a reserve LEO? As far as I know a full time LEO is also exempt from the 10 day wait. Has this changed?

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Better to open up or eliminate the laws, regulations, and so the rest of us can enjoy equal privileges.

The Second Amendment is not a mere privilege but a right!

[Librarian]

Perhaps the poster is a reserve LEO? As far as I know a full time LEO is also exempt from the 10 day wait. Has this changed?
"A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078). "

But yes, LEO are exempt from 1 in 30.