LEO AW register question

[cousinkix1953]

It's still crazy to spend your own $$$ on a firearm that must be surrendered to your employer when you quit your job. LEAs should finance those purchases if they want to keep the weapons...

[CavTrooper]

It's still crazy to spend your own $$$ on a firearm that must be surrendered to your employer when you quit your job. LEAs should finance those purchases if they want to keep the weapons...

You do not surrender the weapon you purchase on your own.

There is no requirement or law that says you must.

Once a LEO has a legally registered AW, it belongs to him, forever.

[cousinkix1953]

You do not surrender the weapon you purchase on your own.

There is no requirement or law that says you must.

Once a LEO has a legally registered AW, it belongs to him, forever.

Are you BLIND? Law enforcement agencies should purchase those banned assault rifles from their own department's annual budget. Only thieving beauracrats would tell you to purchase those guns with your own personal funds and then demand that you turn them in to the chief (for free) if you quit the force or retire. Save the receipt from the gun shop. Let them buy if from you or go to Hell.

Be it this LEOs assault rifle mess, off-roster handguns or something else: hardly a day goes by, where somebody doesn't point out another glaring example of just how badly those idiot politicians have f---ed everything up...

[scoutpup99]

You do not have to turn in a AW that you purchased and had registered to you. The department can only take back the guns they issue to you from their armory. I am an AW permit holder and do the paperwork so that these types of guns can be registered. The form that is sent to the DOJ is the same blue form that was used during the original registration.

[CavTrooper]

Are you BLIND? Law enforcement agencies should purchase those banned assault rifles from their own department's annual budget. Only thieving beauracrats would tell you to purchase those guns with your own personal funds and then demand that you turn them in to the chief (for free) if you quit the force or retire. Save the receipt from the gun shop. Let them buy if from you or go to Hell.

Be it this LEOs assault rifle mess, off-roster handguns or something else: hardly a day goes by, where somebody doesn't point out another glaring example of just how badly those idiot politicians have f---ed everything up...

What exactly is your problem?

Yes, LEAs should issue their Officers weapons, I wholeheartedly agree. If the agency wont issue it, its because the Officer really doesnt need it. If it was a critical piece of equipment the Officer required to do his job, then the agency would find the money to buy them.

Unfortunately, we have the LEOs, the Chiefs and their unions who work in conjunction with the antis to disarm all law abiding citizens by supporting legislation that violates Constitutionally protected rights of all citizens, the same legislation that specifically exempts THEM from these same laws.

Its a travesty, its disgusting, but it happens and it will continue to happen as long as LE, down to the individual Officer, supports these abuses.

[bwiese]

Lotta accumulated misinformation here.

• An LEO AW registration letter allows a cop to buy/retain a
  personal AW in CA. Whether he's allowed to carry that AW on
  duty or not is a separate issue.

• "Department letters" for LEO AW registration must be signed
  by Chief (or authorized delegate that "speaks for Chief" and has
  signing authority).

• An LEO-registered AW is always retainable by the officer upon
  retirement/separation from dept - whether or not the dept. likes it.
  (If they don't, they shouldn't've issued the letter in the first place.)
  The dept. can't do anything about it; the letter is a one-time thing
  to acquire the AW; trying to 'revoke' the letter will not revoke the
  AW reg (unless the letter were fraudulently generated, officer
  separated from dept for felony/DV, etc.)

• A dept.-issued AW does not need any AW letter; actual dept
  AWs can be acquired by dept and issued for patrol duty etc without
  DOJ BoF drama. (Or even issued as part of ready-response 'take home'
  gear for SWAT types.) These AWs are agency/city/county property and
  are not retainable by cop on retirement/separation. If "gifted" to cop as
  retirement present, it would need to go thru LEO AW registration first.

• These laws were put in place to:
  (1) clean up cops-with-unreg'd-AWs situation (hasn't!)
  (2) budget fix for agencies - cops buy their own AWs, but they
  wouldn't if they couldn't keep 'em. Also, stops drama over
  budget approvals for 'evil guns'.

[cousinkix1953]

What exactly is your problem?

Yes, LEAs should issue their Officers weapons, I wholeheartedly agree. If the agency wont issue it, its because the Officer really doesnt need it. If it was a critical piece of equipment the Officer required to do his job, then the agency would find the money to buy them.

Unfortunately, we have the LEOs, the Chiefs and their unions who work in conjunction with the antis to disarm all law abiding citizens by supporting legislation that violates Constitutionally protected rights of all citizens, the same legislation that specifically exempts THEM from these same laws.

Its a travesty, its disgusting, but it happens and it will continue to happen as long as LE, down to the individual Officer, supports these abuses.

I know! They aren't entitled to confiscate weapons purchased by LEOs with their own money, which is what some of these anti-gun thieves in blue uniforms and gold badges are trying to do. And what's with those general/admiral stars doing on the collars of police chiefs, who have no military service record?

[R1145]

I'm not a lawyer...

...but with due respect to Bill, it seems to me that the PC section authorizes the exception fairly narrowly:

"(f) (1) Subdivisions (b) and (c) shall not prohibit the possession
or use of assault weapons or a .50 BMG rifle by sworn peace officer
members of those agencies specified in subdivision (e) for law
enforcement purposes, whether on or off duty."

In other words, the LEO can have an AW on or off duty for law enforcement purposes only. Common sense seems to indicate that once a LEO leaves the department, the exemption is no longer valid.

Likewise, the registration requirement allows the LEO to register the AW when the department authorizes the LEO to have an AW:

" (2) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall not prohibit the
delivery, transfer, or sale of an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle
to, or the possession of an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle by, a
sworn peace officer member of an agency specified in subdivision (e)
if the peace officer is authorized by his or her employer to possess
or receive the assault weapon or the .50 BMG rifle. Required
authorization is defined as verifiable written certification from the
head of the agency, identifying the recipient or possessor of the
assault weapon as a peace officer and authorizing him or her to
receive or possess the specific assault weapon..."

So, a LEO can get an authorization from their department to obtain and register an AW for the purpose of law enforcement. When the purpose of law enforcement is no longer being served, the DOJ probably has a case that the AW can no longer be lawfully possessed.

I'm a LEO and pro-gun, but I think the provision in the law was intended for smaller departments with volunteer or reserve officers who provide their own weapons.

[GuyW]

There are thousands of lawfully possessed machine guns throughout the state

Not in this state, brother.

There are thousands of lawfully possessed machine guns throughout the ...country.

I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't over 100k papered machine guns in free America...(anyone have a cite to a good #?)
.

[ke6guj]

I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't over 100k papered machine guns in free America...(anyone have a cite to a good #?)
.

IIRC, the number of transferable MGs is around 250,000. that number was gleamed from ATF records that are released occasionally.

[DANGERCLOSE]

how many rifles can you register over a given period of time, is there a limitation? can a shotgun like a benelli m4 w/ collapsible stock be purchased with a letter. i only ask because our agency uses numerous types of weapons and if possible i would like to get 3 complete different firearms to represent the variety such as m4(6920), mp5 (ca94), benelli m4, and maybe an ar10. thanks for your time guys.

[paladin4415]

how many rifles can you register over a given period of time, is there a limitation? can a shotgun like a benelli m4 w/ collapsible stock be purchased with a letter. i only ask because our agency uses numerous types of weapons and if possible i would like to get 3 complete different firearms to represent the variety such as m4(6920), mp5 (ca94), benelli m4, and maybe an ar10. thanks for your time guys.

If your agency will write the authorization letters, I don't think the DOJ cares how many you register.

[bwiese]

...but with due respect to Bill, it seems to me that the PC section authorizes the exception fairly narrowly:

" (2) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall not prohibit the
delivery, transfer, or sale of an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle
to, or the possession of an assault weapon or a .50 BMG rifle by, a
sworn peace officer member of an agency specified in subdivision (e)
if the peace officer is authorized by his or her employer to possess
or receive the assault weapon or the .50 BMG rifle. Required
authorization is defined as verifiable written certification from the
head of the agency, identifying the recipient or possessor of the
assault weapon as a peace officer and authorizing him or her to
receive or possess the specific assault weapon..."

So, a LEO can get an authorization from their department to obtain and register an AW for the purpose of law enforcement. When the purpose of law enforcement is no longer being served, the DOJ probably has a case that the AW can no longer be lawfully possessed.

No they can't. That would be an underground regulation. Authorization is merely triggering event, and there's no restriction on continuity. AW registration is not retractable (except for seizure for illegal activity, felon-in-possession, fraudulent registration letter, etc.) AW registration is for life.

Outside of permitted AW matters and exempt agency use, relevant crime is possession of an 'unregistered AW'. The dept letter triggers AW registration. A dept simply does not have the power to de-register a (DOJ) state-registered gun purchased by the officer, with reliance on the guarantee the reg can't be cancelled.

I'm a LEO and pro-gun, but I think the provision in the law was intended for smaller departments with volunteer or reserve officers who provide their own weapons.

LEO AW registration was added in 2001? 2002?. Intention is fairly irrelevant - However part of the intention was 'cleanup' to stop cops getting busted. (I believe Perata was part of this cleanup.) The funding/ budget issue was also a consideration.

[Ron-Solo]

Not in this state, brother.



I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't over 100k papered machine guns in free America...(anyone have a cite to a good #?)
.

If you're going to quote me, pleaes do it accurately. My sentence said there were thousands in the state AND counrty, all in one sentance, which is true. There are a lot in the state, but I don't have any figures on the totals. I know one guy, who is fully licensed, who personally has over 100. I'm sure there are more like him. The only thing he has more of than guns, is money.......

The point of my whole comment was that LEGALLY REGISTERED MG's AND AW's are seldom, if ever, used in crimes.

Aloha!

[gunrun45]

Were does it state that you must turn in your AR if you quit your department? Is this some departments policy? I didn't see it any were posted on DOJs website. Has anyones dept. Here have policy that you must turn in your AR when you quit? Just wondering, no one in are dept. Ever said we had to I've only read it here

The issue does not lay in the hands of any STATE law. The confusion comes from the FEDERAL AW ban that has now sunset and no longer effects anyone except historians...

During the time of the ban, if you left your dept, you were required to return any high cap mags or AW's that you had aquired during the ban on letterhead. It was a totally different ball of wax back then.

You department can not legally TODAY mandate that you return high cap mags or reg AW's that YOU purchased on your own dime.