Who issues CA LEOSA cards?

[wtactraining]

From the AZ website:The certificate must be carried along with the retired officer's credentials when carrying a concealed firearm.

Again your agency owes you a LEOSA card make them issue you one.

Actually they can and many do. In fact the wording of the LEOSA law requires retired officers to qualify in their state of residence.

For example, if the OP lived in AZ, he would do this:

http://www.azdps.gov/Services/Concea...s/LEOSA/About/

[dustoff31]

From the AZ website:The certificate must be carried along with the retired officer's credentials when carrying a concealed firearm.

Again your agency owes you a LEOSA card make them issue you one.

The retired officer must carry his retired ID, of course. That card may or may not indicate the agency approval to carry. For example, some federal agencies and Chicago PD come to mind. They simply will not do it. They will provide you with a retired ID card, but they will not include any authorization to carry or qualification statement. Nor does LEOSA require them to.

That's why LEOSA provides the either/or option.

From LEOSA

(d) The identification required by this subsection is--

(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer and indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training as established by the agency to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or

(2)(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that indicates the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer; and

(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides or by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State that indicates that the individual has, not less than 1 year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met--
(I) the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the State, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or

(II) if the State has not established such standards, standards set by any law enforcement agency within that State to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.

[wtactraining]

If you read the start of this thread his agency didn't issue him a LEOSA card they are working out the retired vs separated language. I doubt they gave him a separated ID card of any kind. Must Federal agencies that issue separated ID cards make them LEOSA cards. This is very new to Federal agencies allowing separated and retirees to carry on the agency vs retirees carrying on state CCWs. I know LEOSA has been around since 2004 but some Federal agencies are very slooow to get with the program.

The retired officer must carry his retired ID, of course. That card may or may not indicate the agency approval to carry. For example, some federal agencies and Chicago PD come to mind. They simply will not do it. They will provide you with a retired ID card, but they will not include any authorization to carry or qualification statement. Nor does LEOSA require them to.

That's why LEOSA provides the either/or option.

From LEOSA

[dustoff31]

If you read the start of this thread his agency didn't issue him a LEOSA card they are working out the retired vs separated language. I doubt they gave him a separated ID card of any kind. Must Federal agencies that issue separated ID cards make them LEOSA cards. This is very new to Federal agencies allowing separated and retirees to carry on the agency vs retirees carrying on state CCWs. I know LEOSA has been around since 2004 but some Federal agencies are very slooow to get with the program.

Yes, I was about to edit my post to reflect that.

I think you and I are in overall agreement, just using different terms. i.e LEOSA Card vs. ID Card vs. annual qualification.

[wtactraining]

I never said anything about qualifications. I totally understand that they need to happen in your home state. I just feel his best bet is making his agency issue his card being that he is coming from a Federal agency. But yes overall I think we both are on the same page.

Yes, I was about to edit my post to reflect that.

I think you and I are in overall agreement, just using different terms. i.e LEOSA Card vs. ID Card vs. annual qualification.

[mej16489]

I just feel his best bet is making his agency issue his card being that he is coming from a Federal agency.

There is no 'best bet' about it. In order for him to carry under the provisions of LEOSA; he must have the proper credentials from the agency from which he retired/separated.

[Ubermcoupe]

I think you have to be retired. I know a lot of 'former' cops who for one reason or another left before retirement. They got nothing for 10, 15 or more years of service.

Being a Fed, do you not get something for 10 years and being 55?

I believe that was further clarified in the latest revision:

c) As used in this section, the term "qualified retired law enforcement officer" means an individual who--

(1) separated from service in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer;

(2) before such separation, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice);

(3)(A) before such separation, served as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 10 years or more; or

(B) separated from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;

(4) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the standards for qualification in firearms training for active law enforcement officers, as determined by the former agency of the individual, the State in which the individual resides or, if the State has not established such standards, either a law enforcement agency within the State in which the individual resides or the standards used by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State;

(5)(A) has not been officially found by a qualified medical professional employed by the agency to be unqualified for reasons relating to mental health and as a result of this finding will not be issued the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1); or

(B) has not entered into an agreement with the agency from which the individual is separating from service in which that individual acknowledges he or she is not qualified under this section for reasons relating to mental health and for those reasons will not receive or accept the photographic identification as described in subsection (d)(1);

(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

As long as they were separated in good standing, and meet the other requirements, they should qualify under LEOSA.
If you have friends that meet that criteria I would suggest they get in touch with their former POA/PBA/Association and see if how they can get an endorsement.

[Dr.Lou]

In 2010, Obama changed the qualification requirements for retired LEOs under LEOSA (Title 44USC, Sec 926c. You no longer have to qualify in the state you retired in, you can qualify in what ever state you live in as long the person conducting your annual qualification is a certified law enforcement firearms instructor. You can use the course of fire from your dept or an accepted course of fire used by agenicies in the state you currently reside.

During the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the standards for qualification in firearms training for active law enforcement officers, as determined by the former agency of the individual, the State in which the individual resides or, if the State has not established such standards, either a law enforcement agency within the State in which the individual resides or the standards used by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State.

[AR15Man]

Thanks for the responses, I'm in Sacramento.

When I talk to the USSS contact person, he has no idea how individual States handle LEOSA, all the States do it differently apparently. He just tells me that the Service can't get their act together and not to expect a card for years..... He is just as frustrated as I am, and quite a few others on the list as well.
Rusty

Congrats making it 10 years!

You might want to become a member of FLEOA, (if not already) and contact the FLEOA Counsel. From what I've been told they've dealt with similar LEOSA card issues.

http://www.fleoa.org/member.aspx?id=52

[RickD427]

Actually they can and many do. In fact the wording of the LEOSA law requires retired officers to qualify in their state of residence.

For example, if the OP lived in AZ, he would do this:

http://www.azdps.gov/Services/Concea...s/LEOSA/About/

Dustoff,

There is no requirement for the retired officer to qualify in their state of residence. They may also meet the requirements of the law by qualifying with their former agency, even if in a different state.

[dogrunner]

Retired Florida LEO/CLEO here. As stated there is NO requirement that qualification be done in one's employing jurisdiction.

My agency regularly qualifies former out of state retirees..........at least two of our own have relocated to the N.C. area and do so there...........the option is the retired individuals call.

Florida being a magnet for northeasterners addressed the issue early on....might be enlightening for some of you to read our AG opinions on the FDLE website.

All that aside, you really gotta feel for the SS fella with the credentials issue.......incidentally, I recall a thread on Police Mag. dealing with federal officers......might be worth a check for OP.

[CaptMike]

some departments love to make things difficult for their retired officers

[Dark Cobra]

This is a Mess . . .

Well, I've read this entire thread and many others like it elsewhere. It is clear to me that since this is a Federal Law it is going to have to be the Federal Government that course corrects this mess . . . not all these individual idiot states. Problems are being encountered all over the country with this law because it just wasn't drawn tight enough and sadly relied on the good faith of the state and local officials to fairly take things the rest of the way. We can see that was a blunder.

I'm not foolish enough to believe Obama will fix anything. At this point all we can hope for is a more sympathetic next President who fixes this once and for all so that no local entity can touch it. The language needs to be simple, definitive and direct and read as follows:

"Any current or retired in good standing law enforcement officer who received annual firearms training after ten years or more of service WILL be issued a nationwide (including New York City and Chicago) concealed carry I.D. card directly from the Federal Dept. of Justice upon submission of proof of retirement and certification of reasonable firearm competency from any local range master."

End of Story. If the Federal government truly intended for us to have this nationwide right then THEY should be the ones issuing these permits. We need to get these state politicians and pencil pushing bureaucrats out of this altogether. Enough is enough. Yes, I know Federal bureaucrats aren't much better but it is the Federal government that supposedly wanted this and it should be them who makes it happen. Personally, any honest law abiding citizen should have full nationwide carry rights under our 2nd Amendment if ya ask me.

[Tripper]

There is no 'best bet' about it. In order for him to carry under the provisions of LEOSA; he must have the proper credentials from the agency from which he retired/separated.

Not quite true
The agency he retired is of course the desired process, but, there is alternatives.

Best is, have the retirement credentials from the agency retired, the issuing agency is simply providing the annual qualification, (Part b I think)

FBI for example do not issue LEOSA although the do issue a 217 card (I think that's the one) which is their retirement credential, but not their LEOSA part. Any agency 'can' issue the qualification part. It's a matter of finding an agency willing to do it, the recent changes, covering more 'officers' make it somewhat difficult for an agency to refuse, as those agencies do not issue LEOSA at all, thus refusing pot issue could be a federal rights issue.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tripper]

Yes, reading the AG opinion is a good idea



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk