Need carry advice..

[samsbolt390]

My dad is 72 and is former Nj PD. due to circumstance he has had to take a security job in Stockton in a rough area. Being concerned for his own safety he is thinking about carrying concealed (no ccw) in case of an emergency. Rather go to court then the grave. Any thoughts or advice/warnings. Thanks in advance Sam.

[Tacit Blue]

I think if hes retired he's covered under H.R. 218 and can carry whever he'd like if I'm not mistaken. As long as he carries his old credentials from the dept he should be fine. However if the security job is unarmed, and the employer doesn't have the liability insurance for that. He's putting himself at risk for a major civil suit. But I guess that's better than being 6 feet under.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act

[samsbolt390]

He does carry his "retired" Badge and has only shown it to SPD when they talk/bs to pick up someone from one his shop lifting or trouble calls, so a few guys do know he is retired pd. because I don't know what "credentials" should he procure?

[Tacit Blue]

It should be his agency I.D with the words "retired" on it. If I'm not mistaken. So your Dad's case it should say "NJ Police retired" with his name and etc. Badges aren't 100% acceptable in terms of demonstrating a status of a peace officer. He'd also have to take LEOSA training and obtain a permit.




Read more here on the states website:

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/leosanew

Just to clarify I'm not a Peace Officer, I'm a Security Professional who has somewhat of a knowledge of this stuff. I'm sure somebody else could better explain it.

[tyrist]

If he is working as a security guard for a company he has to have a gun card to carry a firearm when working.

[003]

While LEOSA may be applicable and a means for your father to legally carry a concealed weapon in California, I suggest you do a bit of internet research and confirm that your father does in fact meet the requirements. Just because he was “former NJPD” using your words, does not in and of itself automatically mean he qualifies under the requirement of LEOSA (the original HR218, and the undated S 1132).

If he does qualify and meet the requirements as to the number of years of active service and the other requirements, he will still have to meet the annual firearm qualification requirements. There is NO course or class required as mentioned above, and there is no permit required; but he will have to shoot annually, and carry the appropriate documentation.

Do the research and read both the original bill HR 218, and the second bill S 1132 that modified the original requirements and made the annual qualification requirements easier to meet.

Please understand, my comments only reflect the requirements to legally carry a concealed firearm in California, as allowed under LEOSA and in no way should be interpreted as giving him the ability to carry a concealed weapon while working as a security guard.

Lastly, I strongly urge you to do your own research, and not rely on the information posted here, as some of it is just clearly wrong.

[Tacit Blue]

While LEOSA may be applicable and a means for your father to legally carry a concealed weapon in California, I suggest you do a bit of internet research and confirm that your father does in fact meet the requirements. Just because he was “former NJPD” using your words, does not in and of itself automatically mean he qualifies under the requirement of LEOSA (the original HR218, and the undated S 1132).

If he does qualify and meet the requirements as to the number of years of active service and the other requirements, he will still have to meet the annual qualification requirements. There is NO course or class required as mentioned above, and there is no permit required; but he will have to shoot annually.

Do the research and read both the original bill HR 218, and the second bill S 1132 that modified the original requirements and made the annual qualification requirements easier to meet.

Please understand, my comments only reflect the requirements to legally carry a concealed firearm in California, as allowed under LEOSA and in no way should be interpreted as giving him the ability to carry a concealed weapon while working as a security guard.

Lastly, I strongly urge you to do your own research, and not rely on the information posted here, as some of it is just clearly wrong.

I guess it's not so much as a " permit" but he'd have to qual at a agency. Somebody had mention that some agencies didn't want to part take in activities with( qualifying) LEOSA, so they used private or retired law enforcement firearms instructors to conduct their shoot. I think thats where I misunderstood the training phrase, they just follow the depts "course of fire" and sign off.

[003]

"I guess it's not so much as a " permit" but he'd have to qual at a agency."

Yes exactly
__________________

[BigDogatPlay]

Peace officer status does not equate to ability to lawfully carry as a security guard in California. If in security uniform carry must be exposed and licensed.

That said if it's really that sketchy there and if he does fall under LEOSA and has qualified then carrying concealed is something he will have to do his own risk analysis on.

[samsbolt390]

Thanks everyone, it's something we will have to look into and discuss.

[762.DEFENSE]

If he is working as a security guard for a company he has to have a gun card to carry a firearm when working.

That's only for an exposed firearm, a concealed weapon isn't covered under that permit.

[762.DEFENSE]

If the above fails, why not try and get a CCW through Stockton PD using his experience and prior service for justification for the concealed carry?

[CaptMike]

He doesn't need a ccw if he was a law enforcement officer in NJ. LEOSA covers his ability to carry. Being able to conceal carry for work as a security guard "may" have some issues and they need to lookm into that.

[003]

SUMMARY OF LEOSA as ammended by S 1132 10/12/2010

"Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Improvements Act of 2010 - Amends the federal criminal code to include a law enforcement officer of the Amtrak Police Department and the Federal Reserve or a law enforcement or police officer of the executive branch as a qualified law enforcement officer eligible to carry concealed firearms. Expands the definition of "firearm" to include ammunition not expressly prohibited by federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act.

Revises the definition of "qualified retired law enforcement officer" to: (1) include officers separated (currently, retired) in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer; and (2) reduce the years-of-service requirement for such officers from 15 to 10 years. Revises: (1) requirements for firearms certification for such separated officers to allow firearms training in accordance with the standards of the officer's former agency, the state in which such officer resides, or if such state has not established training standards, standards established by a law enforcement agency within the state or those used by a certified firearms instructor; and (2) mental health requirements for such officers."

[samsbolt390]

According to what he's told me and I'll need to do some research myself (more net savvy ) he qualifies at 10 years service 62'-72' but upon his inquiry a few years back he was told that the vital statistics and records building burned down?? It was a small town (Kearny NJ) but I'd be surprised..?