retired leo/ccw

[jemswirl]

Are there different rules between a LEO Dept. Retired carry id vs a civilian ccw?
example where you can carry? restrictions places to carry ect.?

[mossy]

LEOSA is good in all 50 states plus US territories. a CCW license requires Reciprocity. there are other differences but I cant think of them off the top of my head.
should SB-2 be signed into law, carry under a CCW license will become extremely restricted and complicated, SB-2 has exemptions to the restriction for active/retired LEO carrying per LEOSA.

[Rustlin’ Jack]

Are there different rules between a LEO Dept. Retired carry id vs a civilian ccw?
example where you can carry? restrictions places to carry ect.?

In a nutshell, yes, there a number of exemptions written into various penal code sections that allow retired peace officers to carry where a regular CCW licensee cannot.

There are still many locations that are off limits, including Amtrak, post offices, airports, and any business that displays a sign that states no firearms are allowed on their property.

The exemptions in the Penal Code are not listed in one place. If you have a specific interest for a particular location, it would be easier to be more precise in answering your question.

[jemswirl]

Specifically under the new law SB-2, with all the restrictions that they added on for carrying purposes. Does our (peace officer) exemption still apply? Pretty much only place a ccw can carry is their backyard under new restrictions

[mossy]

Specifically under the new law SB-2, with all the restrictions that they added on for carrying purposes. Does our (peace officer) exemption still apply? Pretty much only place a ccw can carry is their backyard under new restrictions

Yes. SB-2 has exemptions for active/ retired LEO. if you search the text of the bill for "law enforcement officer safety act" you can find them all. Seems they wrote that bill in a way that doesn't impact those carrying under LEOSA.

[DORINS9956]

I just found out that there is a difference in the definition of "retired law enforcement officer" in California from that found in LEOSA (Title 18 U.S.C. 926C).

California calls its law enforcement officers "peace officers" and grants them exemptions from CA P.C. statutes that otherwise restrict concealed carry for other non-California officers. Be careful of the wording in the CA P.C. If you want an example, look at CA P.C. 626.9.

[jemswirl]

It's all clear as mud!!!! There seems to be something buried in penal codes to contradict other penal codes.

[RickD427]

It's all clear as mud!!!! There seems to be something buried in penal codes to contradict other penal codes.

Excellent observation. There are many instances where California statutes do not harmonize very well with each other, and where the statutes do not harmonize with their stated objectives. Blame the legislative process, it's not designed to ensure a quality product.

It's even worse between the federal law and California law.

[caliprep]

LEOSA applies to all active or retired local/federal/military law enforcement personnel.

[chsk9]

LEOSA applies to all active or retired local/federal/military law enforcement personnel.

That is not entirely accurate.

https://le.nra.org/understanding-leosa/leosa/

[TrailerparkTrash]

That is not entirely accurate.

https://le.nra.org/understanding-leosa/leosa/

Yeah in a nut shell, caliprep is basically correct. Of course there’s always “fine print” to be found with literally everything, but for purposes of this thread, he’s correct “enough.”

[GizmoSD]

There’s a decent component of local/federal/military law enforcement personnel that either aren?t armed in the course of their duties, don?t have powers of arrest, etc. They would not be covered.

So ?correct-ish? might be safer.

[TrailerparkTrash]

There?s a decent component of local/federal/military law enforcement personnel that either aren?t armed in the course of their duties, don?t have powers of arrest, etc. They would not be covered.
.

Well then those aren’t really full time LE for the purposes of meeting LEOSA requirements. The OP asked about the difference between retired LE carrying and a non-LEO with a ccw. If one isn’t armed during the course of their duties, nor has powers of arrest, then they wouldn’t have anything special other than any regular ccw like everyone else gets and IF… they applied and were approved for one.

Since the OP specifically asked about retired LE carrying vs a (regular non-LE) ccw holder, it’s presumed that LEOSA comes into play with the original question. Yes, with a LEOSA privilege to carry, it’s valid in all 50 states. A regular (non-LE) ccw holder’s permit is NOT valid in all 50 states. On a side note, in California a retired LE does NOT have to acquire a FSC every 5 years in order to purchase a firearm.

[chsk9]

Yeah in a nut shell, caliprep is basically correct. Of course there?s always ?fine print? to be found with literally everything, but for purposes of this thread, he?s correct ?enough.?

IMO Caliprep is not correct "enough". You are either qualified or not, and "...law enforcement personnel" are are not all covered. LEOSA is very specific as to who is covered, and intentionally vague in other areas. Hopefully it is appropriately revised soon.

[caliprep]

IMO Caliprep is not correct "enough". You are either qualified or not, and "...law enforcement personnel" are are not all covered. LEOSA is very specific as to who is covered, and intentionally vague in other areas. Hopefully it is appropriately revised soon.

Yes, the only reason I generalized LE personnel was because I was including enlisted military police on that list, as they're covered under LEOSA through section 807(b). The enlisted guys aren't sworn, but they are included.

Majority of custody staff, detention officers, who are considered "LE personnel," aren't covered under LEOSA.