PDA

View Full Version : Retired Out of state LEO legal to carry in this state?


rshoemaker
10-10-2011, 9:45 PM
My uncle is a retired Chief LEO from washington state, is he likely to encountrer any problems carrying here in CA as long as he has his ID that was issued when he retired? He asked me since he is talking about a trip to the state for a visit next spring.

I know that HR 218 is supposed to protect him on the federal level, but will he get any harrasment here in CA?

Spanky8601
10-10-2011, 10:01 PM
As I understand it, so long as he complies with the requirements of HR 218 he is good to go.

paul0660
10-10-2011, 10:05 PM
I don't have time to look it up but pc 12027 and 830.1 and maybe 2 address this. I think he is good, but check............or wait for a better opinion.

eltee
10-10-2011, 10:20 PM
The catch with HR218 retiree carry is that you are technically supposed to have verification that you have qualified (need NOT be in your former employing state) within the past 12 months. Usually you get a secondary card showing the you requal'd.

FLIGHT762
10-11-2011, 8:44 AM
The catch with HR218 retiree carry is that you are technically supposed to have verification that you have qualified (need NOT be in your former employing state) within the past 12 months. Usually you get a secondary card showing the you requal'd.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^is correct. To legally carry in all States the retiree has to have some type of documentation that he / she has
complied with the requirements of HR 218 by qualifying within the year. Agencies do this by issuing a letter, a sticker on the I D or actually on the I D, it can be done several ways.

My agency uses a sticker showing the (year) expiration date on the I D card with the HR 218 wording.

If you Uncle doesn't have the HR 218 wording on his I D card and the documentation of the required qualification, he risks technically carrying illegally.

I make sure my I D card is up to date before carrying in another State.

rshoemaker
10-11-2011, 9:16 AM
I will make sure he has it before his visit.

rshoemaker
10-11-2011, 9:18 AM
Thanks for the help BTW

Tacobandit
10-11-2011, 11:31 AM
Yes he is fine

zenmastar
10-11-2011, 11:46 AM
Where's my eff'n sticker?

While I do appreciate our policemen and women, plus retirees, that do an exemplary while performing their job, I am sick and tired of being treated like a lessor man.

Occupy Wall Street? BS... we need to eff'n occupy the state capitol.

paul0660
10-11-2011, 11:54 AM
Where's my eff'n sticker?

While I do appreciate our policemen and women, plus retirees, that do an exemplary while performing their job, I am sick and tired of being treated like a lessor man.

Occupy Wall Street? BS... we need to eff'n occupy the state capitol.

I agree, but do be aware that it was intended that leos be a special class. They really are not like the rest of us.

rshoemaker
10-11-2011, 12:10 PM
HR 218 should be taken to court on an equal protection issue. I have no problem with off duty and retired LEO carrying all the time, I do have a problem with us lesser subjects not being able to.

NoHeavyHitter
10-11-2011, 12:57 PM
While I do appreciate our policemen and women, plus retirees, that do an exemplary while performing their job, I am sick and tired of being treated like a lessor man.

You need to just get over it and accept who your masters are.

MAC USMC
10-11-2011, 7:31 PM
The issues are not related whatsoever. The idiotic CCW laws ARE NOT in place to provide a pathway for lawful concealed carry by legitimate citizens. The laws are deliberate, intended impediments to block good citizens and prevent the issuance of a CCW permit.

HR218 is an excellent law which eliminates much confusion and over-regulation of firearms possession by retired police officers nationwide. New York City PD, in the past, arrested out of state officers, confiscated their firearms and refused to return them based merely on a city ordinance. I can now carry a concealed firearm in ALL FIFTY STATES. With an extensive career in police work I have put many individuals in state and federal prisons. There is little doubt that some would like to retaliate. HR 218 gives me the legal means to protect my family and myself which never existed in the past.

If some have a concern about this protection they have other issues as well regarding law enforcement personnel.

Jared1981
10-11-2011, 8:47 PM
If some have a concern about this protection they have other issues as well regarding law enforcement personnel.

Ummm no. Many people dislike LEOSA (HR 218) because it creates a class of elite people. No one forced you to take a police job and it isn't even on the list of the top 10 most dangerous jobs.

Be honest about it, I wish more cops would, they always assume everyone is anti cop because more and more people are questioning their royal treatment (LEOSA, generous retirement etc). Other people would like to protect their family and I fail to see how a cop in Tom's River, New Jersey is really afraid they are going to meet a perp they arrested while they are in Haleakala National Park in Maui, Hawaii.

This is coming from someone who will have LEOSA privileges when I retire. Right now I carry under a different federal law.

BTW, cops in New York City who were being arrested pre-LEOSA were not being arrested under a city ordinance, they were being arrested under Penal Code 400.00

New York State has complete preemption on handguns.

dantodd
10-11-2011, 8:55 PM
The one caveat your uncle should be aware of is that LEOSA doesn't exempt him from the ban on magazines over 10 rds. He needs to leave any magazine over 10 rds. at home. Bringing them in is a violation of CA Penal Code 12020

12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:

(1)...

(2) Commencing January 1, 2000, manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, or lends, any large capacity magazine.(3) Carries concealed upon his or her person any explosive substance, other than fixed ammunition. (4) Carries concealed upon his or her person any dirk or dagger.However, a first offense involving any metal military practice handgrenade or metal replica handgrenade shall be punishable only as an infraction unless the offender is an active participant in a criminal street gang as defined in the Street Terrorism and Enforcement and Prevention Act (Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 186.20) of Title 7 of Part 1). A bullet containing or carrying an explosive agent is not a destructive device as that term is used in Section 12301.

(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to any of the following:
.
.
.
(20) The sale to, lending to, transfer to, purchase by, receipt of, or importation into this state of, a large capacity magazine by a sworn peace officer as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 who is authorized to carry a firearm in the course and scope of his or her duties.


So, while an active duty officer can import a large capacity magazine there is no carve out for retirees.

taperxz
10-11-2011, 9:05 PM
The one caveat your uncle should be aware of is that LEOSA doesn't exempt him from the ban on magazines over 10 rds. He needs to leave any magazine over 10 rds. at home. Bringing them in is a violation of CA Penal Code 12020




So, while an active duty officer can import a large capacity magazine there is no carve out for retirees.

Unless he purchased them here prior to the ban.:D

dantodd
10-11-2011, 9:08 PM
Unless he purchased them here prior to the ban.:D

He would have had to purchase them before the ban AND possessed them in CA before the ban to be able to legally re-import them.

rshoemaker
10-11-2011, 9:16 PM
Hey carrys a 1911 so no real issues there.

taperxz
10-11-2011, 9:18 PM
Hey carrys a 1911 so no real issues there.

Really? Hmm i have a 30rd mag for mine. Just sayin

rshoemaker
10-11-2011, 9:18 PM
The issues are not related whatsoever. The idiotic CCW laws ARE NOT in place to provide a pathway for lawful concealed carry by legitimate citizens. The laws are deliberate, intended impediments to block good citizens and prevent the issuance of a CCW permit.

HR218 is an excellent law which eliminates much confusion and over-regulation of firearms possession by retired police officers nationwide. New York City PD, in the past, arrested out of state officers, confiscated their firearms and refused to return them based merely on a city ordinance. I can now carry a concealed firearm in ALL FIFTY STATES. With an extensive career in police work I have put many individuals in state and federal prisons. There is little doubt that some would like to retaliate. HR 218 gives me the legal means to protect my family and myself which never existed in the past.

If some have a concern about this protection they have other issues as well regarding law enforcement personnel.


I dont think any one has an issue with you being able to protect your family, its just they want the means to protect theirs as well.

a lot of people are just tired of being less equal than others.