Retired Ca LEO's and CA GUN LAWS question .

[ap3572001]

I am not there yet but will be there soon.

Once CA LEO is retired, what will be their situation when I comes to CA gun laws?

(Roster, magazines etc)

Thanks You

[CaptMike]

You can keep what you have already purchased but you become joe citizen after retirement. Purchase all that you want and will want before you retire.

[P5Ret]

^ What he said, with the addition of you can keep the mags you have until the liberals get that mag ban they want and everyone except active duty looses their mags.

[RickD427]

There's no more special treatment after retirement, except for your state and LEOSA CCW privileges.

As previous posters have stated, you're able to retain magazines that you lawfully acquired during your service. There's no provision in the Penal Code that allows you to acquire large-capacity magazines after retirement. There's conflicting information as to LEOSA. There's an Illinois state case (not binding in California) that suggests you could acquire a large-capacity magazine out of state and import it (using LEOSA to exempt the state law), but there is also guidance from the USDOJ that states that action falls outside of LEOSA. There's nothing in LEOSA that would allow a vendor to lawfully sell you a large-capacity magazine in California. Best advise is stock up before you retire, or leave the state.

There is also a California Attorney General's Opinion that provides you are required to surrender any "Assault Weapon" that you acquired using an agency letter. That opinion does not apply to assault weapons that are lawfully registered to you as a private citizen.

[cacop]

There is also a California Attorney General's Opinion that provides you are required to surrender any "Assault Weapon" that you acquired using an agency letter. That opinion does not apply to assault weapons that are lawfully registered to you as a private citizen.

Part of the problem with that opinion is that they are registered to you even with letterhead. The letter just lets you register after the ban.

It reminds me of when bullet button ARs started hitting the streets. DOJ did not want to specifically state their opinion.

In this case they don't want to answer questions about turning them into OLLs or compensation for turning them in.

I just want to know why the SD sheriff or chief (cant remember which it was) asked that question. Did he want to take retired officers ARs? If he did has he since the opinion? Has he been sued for reimbursement? Has he paid for them?

[1CavScout]

^^^ Yes he want to take your personally owned AR's after retirement. Guys I have talked to that are in this situation seem to be leaning towards surrendering the stripped lower if push comes to shove on the issue.

[RickD427]

Part of the problem with that opinion is that they are registered to you even with letterhead. The letter just lets you register after the ban.

It reminds me of when bullet button ARs started hitting the streets. DOJ did not want to specifically state their opinion.

In this case they don't want to answer questions about turning them into OLLs or compensation for turning them in.

I just want to know why the SD sheriff or chief (cant remember which it was) asked that question. Did he want to take retired officers ARs? If he did has he since the opinion? Has he been sued for reimbursement? Has he paid for them?

Cacop,

You're right about the registration point, but that was they way the AG Opinion was written.

IMHO, the AG Opinion was very horribly written. It concluded that officers must surrender their Registered Assault Weapons upon retirement or separation if they were acquired using an agency letter. The opinion did not state what law would be violated if an officer failed to do so.

The situation may be ripe for a Fifth Amendment "Takings" claim, but as far as I know, none has been made yet.

[CaptMike]

I need to move out of the state when I retire

[rodnak]

I retired June 1 this year. Picked up a Springfield XDS just prior to leaving. Very glad that I had. My partner waited a bit too long. Called me after we retired asking how I liked it and that he may want to get one. Had to tell him, "Sorry buddy, you can't."

The same advise that you've told all the younger coppers that told you they were getting married. "Buy your toys now!"

Great luck in retirement. I can tell you it's everything people say, and more!

Remember your goal is to collect retirement for at least as long as you were on the Force!

[ap3572001]

I retired June 1 this year. Picked up a Springfield XDS just prior to leaving. Very glad that I had. My partner waited a bit too long. Called me after we retired asking how I liked it and that he may want to get one. Had to tell him, "Sorry buddy, you can't."

The same advise that you've told all the younger coppers that told you they were getting married. "Buy your toys now!"

Great luck in retirement. I can tell you it's everything people say, and more!

Remember your goal is to collect retirement for at least as long as you were on the Force!

I agree

[x-007]

Here's a bit of humor....just before retiring, my wife and I would get $3,000 to $4,000 back in tax refunds every year. During the last year that I worked, I didn't buy any new guns or ammo. When we had our taxes done for the first year of my retirement, our auditor told us that we would only be getting back about $1,400. That puzzled my wife, and on the way out of the building, she asked me why our refund was going to be so low. "I didn't buy any new guns, ammo or other job-related items during the last year that I worked.", I explained. She paused for a brief few moments, then said, "Well, you ought to buy MORE guns!".

I guess that she didn't know that all job-related items are tax deductible. She thought that, even though I was retired, I could STILL deduct guns and ammo....but I told her that was not allowed.

Buy 'em while you can benefit from your active duty status, since ALL guns and ammo are JOB-RELATED!

Thinking back on those days before I retired, my wife "sort of" complained every time I bought a new gun or a bulk amount of ammo. Well, I always told her that those things were "INVESTMENTS", and that I "needed" them!
Little did I know back then that they actually WERE good investments!

(By the way, we're still happily married after 43 years, and my wife no longer even "sort of" complains if I buy a new addition! Just can't deduct them!)

[jgstorm]

Here's a bit of humor....just before retiring, my wife and I would get $3,000 to $4,000 back in tax refunds every year. During the last year that I worked, I didn't buy any new guns or ammo. When we had our taxes done for the first year of my retirement, our auditor told us that we would only be getting back about $1,400. That puzzled my wife, and on the way out of the building, she asked me why our refund was going to be so low. "I didn't buy any new guns, ammo or other job-related items during the last year that I worked.", I explained. She paused for a brief few moments, then said, "Well, you ought to buy MORE guns!".

I guess that she didn't know that all job-related items are tax deductible. She thought that, even though I was retired, I could STILL deduct guns and ammo....but I told her that was not allowed.

Buy 'em while you can benefit from your active duty status, since ALL guns and ammo are JOB-RELATED!

Thinking back on those days before I retired, my wife "sort of" complained every time I bought a new gun or a bulk amount of ammo. Well, I always told her that those things were "INVESTMENTS", and that I "needed" them!
Little did I know back then that they actually WERE good investments!

(By the way, we're still happily married after 43 years, and my wife no longer even "sort of" complains if I buy a new addition! Just can't deduct them!)

Good for you! Thats a great story and thanks for sharing it.

[Caddis]

As Rickd427 posted, "As previous posters have stated, you're able to retain magazines that you lawfully acquired during your service. There's no provision in the Penal Code that allows you to acquire large-capacity magazines after retirement."

However, magazines do not have "manufactured dates" on them so the burden of proof is upon the state to prove they were purchased or acquired before the ban. I've arrested many of crooks with guns but could never get the 10+ mag penalty because I couldn't prove when they were acquired.

Not advocating violating any laws but I do violate the vehicle code off duty occasionally and probably some other minor offenses such as throwing my dead batteries and florescent bulbs in the regular garbage.

Bottom line is there is the "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law!!"

Please spare me the "Holier than Thou" comments.