Question for LEO's

[ls2monaro]

Actually......I wasn't kidding, and not sure why its odd. I COULD get the 10 day waiver letter, but have never bothered.

I think he was referring to you buying a neutered rifle when most agencies authorize the "raw". I understand some agencies still don't and it's too bad their respective leo union doesn't push for it.

I have done the 10 day wait myself a few times and regret it each time lol!

[Invisible_Dave]

Also exempt from the 1 every 30 day rule.

[IrishJoe3]

I think he was referring to you buying a neutered rifle when most agencies authorize the "raw". I understand some agencies still don't and it's too bad their respective leo union doesn't push for it.

I have done the 10 day wait myself a few times and regret it each time lol!

Oh. Yeah. I'd LOVE a RAW, buuuut, thats not going to happen

[CBR_rider]

I don't get a RAW either at my department because I am issued an AR-15.... She doesn't get to come home with me and stays in the safe at work. And I have never bothered getting a letter to avoid the 10 day waiting period. And I don't buy more than one handgun every 30 days...

So other than the fact that I can buy magazines of any capacity and off roster guns straight from the local gun store my experiences are pretty much like every other legal gun owner in this fine state.

[CalCop]

Do you really need a letter to get an AR?

There's always this:
In the case of People v. Drew Peterson, Case No. 08 CF 1169 (Oct. 1, 2010), by Judge Richard Schoenstedt of the 12th Judicial Circuit of the State of Illinois. Question: Whether or not the defendant, a police officer, could be charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon given the implications of the Federal LEOSA legislation passed into law in 2004. Will County prosecutors in May of 2008 had charged Mr. Peterson with felony unlawful use of a weapon, contending he had illegally modified the rifle (Colt Sporter) by shortening the barrel. Judge Schoenstedt said LEOSA precluded charging the defendant with the felony weapons charge.

In his opinion, the judge wrote that:The State is essentially requesting this Court to assume or infer that the drafters intended to provide immunity only for State sanctioned weapons. http://www.policelawblog.com/blog/20...ns-charge.html

So, here we have a modified AR which is a felony to possess in gun-hating Illinois. The judge says LEOSA makes the state law null and void for cops. Anybody wanna be the California test case? ...I don't.

[cr250chevy]

I find that really odd.

Many have to wait 10 days for my guns. Many too must have a bullet button. Many too must have 10 Round mags in their AR.
Some can go threw the hoops of getting the 10 days waived but its not worth the labor...

Contrary to popular believe, LEOs are NOT exempt from most gun laws as many people believe.

There is ZERO chance of many not getting a personal "Patrol Rifle."

The ONLY benefit some get are that the roster does not apply, nor does the high capacity mag ban.

This isn't that great tho due to the LACK of INVENTORY at gun stores for LEO exempt stuff. Why would they carry a on hand stock of something that only a small percentage can buy?

[AR15Man]

off-roster guns and full capacity mags no longer require a letter...just your ID.


Policy Change Regarding State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers
"Effective immediately, peace officers who have legislative authority to carry and use firearms may, without a letter signed by the head of their agency or the agency head's designee, purchase non-rostered handguns and/or large capacity magazines. The peace officer must present a valid peace officer identification card and the dealer must retain a copy of the identification card on file. (PC 12132 & 12133). A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078)."
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/exemptpo.php

Does anyone know when this CA. AG Policy Change was issued.

It states "effective immediately" but on the website isn't date stamped.

Thanks