LEOSA (HR218) Retired

[Old Deputy]

Hopefully, some of you are an expert on this. A retired friend of mine from Oregon, now lives in Southern CA. He is fully qualified under HR218. Oregon automatically allows all retired LEO to CCW. He contacted the local Sheriff's Department for a CCW and was advised it was a waste of his time and money, since he is qualified under HR218. They confirmed with the Oregon Agency he was authorized and qualified him at their S.O. range, no cost. Although he has the retied identification and the CA Sheriff's Office qualified him, and issued the qualification card, he's a little nervous (you know how us old cops get a little paranoid of the system). What are your thoughts is he going to have any problems, especially in the LA area?

[El Gato]

Hopefully, some of you are an expert on this. A retired friend of mine from Oregon, now lives in Southern CA. He is fully qualified under HR218. Oregon automatically allows all retired LEO to CCW. He contacted the local Sheriff's Department for a CCW and was advised it was a waste of his time and money, since he is qualified under HR218. They confirmed with the Oregon Agency he was authorized and qualified him at their S.O. range, no cost. Although he has the retied identification and the CA Sheriff's Office qualified him, and issued the qualification card, he's a little nervous (you know how us old cops get a little paranoid of the system). What are your thoughts is he going to have any problems, especially in the LA area?

As long as his agency issued him a card... he is good 2 go....
I am in charge of the retired officers for our dept. and we simply issue them an ID card that says ccw approved and the us code with an expiration date (one year out)...no problems to date...

[alex00]

The CA DOJ used to have an FAQ posted on their website about the LEOSA. The gist was that California honored the LEOSA, and took it at face value. I can't speak to the LA area, but if your friend carries the proper ID, can prove he is currently qualified with the weapon type carried, and meets the qualifications of LEOSA then he shouldn't have any problems at all.

Tell him not to worry about carrying on the LEOSA.

[Ron-Solo]

He's good to go.

[BigDogatPlay]

Have to agree on good to go.

So long as the agency endorsed ID is in force and on him when he carries, no worries.

[eltee]

I am a labor rep and consultant for LEO's. Some organizations I rep have had issues with HR218, esp. if the dept. head was opposed to LEOSA (and nationwide, many are). I have also discussed with some LEO's the benefits of getting a civilian CCW even though LEOSA entitles them to carry. Here is a brief overview of that recommendation:

RETIRED LEO HR218 CCW PERMIT vs. Civilian CCW PERMIT

While an honorably retired LEO who meets the conditions established in the Federal Law Enforcement Officers' Safety Act (LEOSA) also known as HR 218 can carry a concealed firearm, there are compelling reasons for a retiree to get (instead of or in addition to) a state issued civilian Concealed Weapons carry permit (CCW).

When carrying as a retired LEO, you MUST identify yourself as such when you are involved in a firearms situation. This is often not ideal. People, discovering you are affiliated with a "deep pockets" government agency (former employer) may be more motivated to sue or make an anti-cop issue out of it. When you ID yourself, local law enforcement may "call home" to your former employer, to confirm your identity or to make a "courtesy notification" to your former chief / sheriff. Bear in mind that many chiefs / sheriffs oppose and disagree with HR218, and getting a phone call about you being involved in a firearms related incident out of state may create problems.

For California retirees who only carry within California, your retired badge and "CCW endorsed" retiree ID are sufficient to carry and you only need to requalify every 3 years. If you don't want to carry out of state, this is sufficient.

If you want to carry out of state under HR218 (which permits carry in all 50 states) you must requalify annually. This does not need to be done through your former agency, you can do it virtually anywhere. This protocol enables retirees who have moved away to avoid the hassle and expense of returning to their employing agencies once a year for requals. If, for example, you retired from LAPD but now live in Orlando, Florida, you can have the Oceola County Sheriff requal you and receive a pocket sized verification document to that effect in order to comply with the LEOSA.

If you want to carry out of state but not under HR218, you need to obtain a civilian CCW and abide by the restrictions and reciprocity of that CCW as provided by the state of issuance. It is common for retired California cops to obtain a CCW from Nevada or Utah. These CCW's have reciprocity with other states, but not all other states. If you intend to travel armed in one of the states that DOES NOT offer reciprocity with your CCW, and you do not meet the conditions of HR218 you may be in violation of that state's laws.

The major benefit of obtaining a civilian CCW is that you have the option of not declaring your former LEO status if you are carrying concealed and an issue arises. Bear in mind, also, that those agencies that oppose the LEOSA may have some fine print in their policies that deny any responsibility for your actions involving a firearm as a retiree. If someone decides to sue you or an agency decides to charge you, you may not have the protections you had while employed as an LEO.

This association recommends that you consult with your insurance carrier / broker to determine if you are covered and, if so, to what extent if you are sued due to an incident connected to your carrying a firearm. This association strongly recommends that all active duty, reserve and retired members consider an "umbrella policy" that is connected with your existing insurance that covers you for at least one million dollars for "all perils" including shootings. We also recommend that you review any Legal Defense Fund coverage you have through your association or privately acquired to determine if you are protected in the event of a CCW related civil and / or criminal charge.

Please note that this is not legal advice. I am not an attorney nor do I play one on TV or on this internet site. This is merely posting of a previous association communication I crafted. Posting of this does not constitute a recommendation or endorsement by any association or organization or me. It is for your review, perusal and consideration. Always check with legal counsel and insurance professionals with expertise and licensure when making decisions of a legal nature or involving insurance.

[Old Deputy]

[Fire in the Hole]

I'll use myself as an example. Prior to 2004 HR-218, I applied and received an OR, NV, UT, and FL CCW, in addition to my active Peace Officer ID card. My CA CCW rights were strictly Intrastate. That's why I had the 4 others. I could have easily obtained a CA CCW from my local SO, had I wanted to. But that would have been supurfulous. Now, subsequent to HR-218, I have let the others expire, as even being retired, my retired ID card, plus my HR-218 card, which I must qualify for annually, gets me good to go in all 50 states plus Washington D.C.

[Old Deputy]

[retired]

My former dept. issues a ccw to their retired personnel good for 5yrs. I have that, plus the HR218 in case I go to states that don't honor Ca.'s ccw (Nevada being one). I went to the Area 53 shoot this year and carried both.

My former dept. says since I have the HR218, I don't need to have the dept. issued one if I don't want to. I want to because I don't want to be in a position wherein I have let my HR one expire due to forgetfullness (I've done that twice now). This way, I still have my 5yr. one and won't have any problems in state.

[eltee]

One of the other issues with HR218 is "Peace Officer" status vs. "Law Enforcement Officer" status. In California, peace officer is a penal code and P.O.S.T. legal / technical designation whereas the federal LEO descriptor includes California LEO's who are not, by state codification, considered Peace Officers. Some California law enforcement agencies only allow retirees to requal once every 3 years, which would put a retiree OUT of compliance with HR218 on the 366th day after his/her most recent requal. The retiree in this case must privately get requal'd on his own.

Fortunately in my agency, the active and retiree ID's cards actually say that the bearer meets the requirements of the LEOSA.

Re. the OP, IMHO he is good 2 go. Most agencies sent out memos and fliers when HR218 was implemented. If he is concerned, he can pull up the Calif. DOJ postings on HR218 and maybe print one out and keep it in his glove box but I can't see it being a problem for an out of state retiree with creds to CCW. I know some folks around here that retired from out of state agencies and CCW w/o problems or concerns.

[Old Deputy]

Thanks

Thanks for the input, it cleared up all the questions.

[alex00]

I found the link to the old CA DOJ LEOSA PDF. Click
This should help answer any questions your friend may have.

[MikeGrasso]

What are your thoughts is he going to have any problems, especially in the LA area?

The Los Angeles Police Department just went through a training cycle to update retiree's cards to conform. The word is out amongst the Divisions and as long as your retired ID conforms and is within date you have nothing to worry about.

Mg