LEOSA ACT

[Tyke8319]

A "LEOSA Card" provides no powers of arrest. It only recognizes that the bearer already possesses statutory powers of arrest, or military powers of apprehension (the "Powers of Apprehension" provision was added in 2013 to cover military law enforcement officers).

Military law enforcement officers are kinda unique. Only Coast Guard members possess "statutory powers of arrest." The DoD services do not have "statutory powers of arrest" but do assign their LEO's the power of "apprehension" (it's largely a semantic difference). Military Special Agents of the CID units do not have statutory powers of arrest, but are authorized by Title 28 of the CFR to serve search warrants upon civilian targets.

The purchase of an off-roster handgun is governed by Penal Code section 32000. It enumerates the categories of folks who are able to make such a purchase. There is no provision for a person to be eligible based only on the possession of a LEOSA ID card.

PC 32000(b)(4) does permit the off-roster sale to sworn members of the "military or naval forces." We've discussed this in other threads, the key point being that all military members take an oath upon enlistment or commissioning and could therefore claim to be "sworn." But the context of the statute, and the DOJ interpretation, is that it only applies to members who have sworn to an LEO oath (primarily section 1811 covered CID special agents).

Very interesting stuff...

[Librarian]

The LEOSA sticky in the LEO forum has a lot more info.

[NoName408]

There are two different kinds of LEOSAs. One being retired, and one being an active LEO for their respective Branch. Department of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard.
LEOSA 926B: Active LEOs (On the right Under TYPE will say Active)
LEOSA 926C: Retired LEOs (On the right under TYPE will say Retired)

Anyone that has a an Active LEOSA (926B) are sworn LEOs for the 5 Departments of the DOD.

[Quiet]

There are two different kinds of LEOSAs. One being retired, and one being an active LEO for their respective Branch. Department of the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard.
LEOSA 926B: Active LEOs (On the right Under TYPE will say Active)
LEOSA 926C: Retired LEOs (On the right under TYPE will say Retired)

Anyone that has a an Active LEOSA (926B) are sworn LEOs for the 5 Departments of the DOD.

Regardless of the type of person qualified under the LEOSA, being qualified under LEOSA does not necessarily make that person exempt from the requirements of CA unsafe handgun laws.

Similar, but different qualifications are required to be exempt from CA unsafe handgun laws.

Which means a person who qualifies under the LEOSA to carry a concealed handgun, may not be qualified as an exempt person that can legally obtain off-Roster handguns from a CA FFL dealer.
^Which is the issue that the OP has encountered.

This also means that LEOSA credentials are useless when trying to legally acquire an off-Roster handgun from a CA FFL dealer.

The transferee must provide the required credentials/documentation to prove they are an exempt person.
^LEOSA creds do not meet this requirement.

[smallito12]

Hey guys, I'm new so I wanted to chime in since I am a LEOSA card holder. You are correct in stating that LEOSA in and of itself does not authorize the purchase of off-roster weapons in California. This would also be the case for those who carry under retired LEOSA creds.

That being said, if a member is carrying and an active duty military LEO, they would meet the requirements to purchase off-roster in California since they are sworn Department of Defense LEO's. The State AG's own website lists both Federal Law Enforcement Agencies (DOD) and Military as exemptions to the roster policy. Those personnel are also authorized to purchase large capacity magazines. I have done both of these myself from FFL's with no issues.

The only thing I have not been able to get around has been the 10 day waiting period. I have not been able to draw a line connecting military law enforcement to the "Peace Officer" provision for that to be waived.

These have just been my experiences. Your results may vary.

[smallito12]

A "LEOSA Card" provides no powers of arrest. It only recognizes that the bearer already possesses statutory powers of arrest, or military powers of apprehension (the "Powers of Apprehension" provision was added in 2013 to cover military law enforcement officers).

Military law enforcement officers are kinda unique. Only Coast Guard members possess "statutory powers of arrest." The DoD services do not have "statutory powers of arrest" but do assign their LEO's the power of "apprehension" (it's largely a semantic difference). Military Special Agents of the CID units do not have statutory powers of arrest, but are authorized by Title 28 of the CFR to serve search warrants upon civilian targets.

The purchase of an off-roster handgun is governed by Penal Code section 32000. It enumerates the categories of folks who are able to make such a purchase. There is no provision for a person to be eligible based only on the possession of a LEOSA ID card.

PC 32000(b)(4) does permit the off-roster sale to sworn members of the "military or naval forces." We've discussed this in other threads, the key point being that all military members take an oath upon enlistment or commissioning and could therefore claim to be "sworn." But the context of the statute, and the DOJ interpretation, is that it only applies to members who have sworn to an LEO oath (primarily section 1811 covered CID special agents).

I am an AD Security Forces member and can say that, at least in the Air Force, we are sworn at the completion of our training. This was done as the Air Force actually changed their training to meet FLETC requirements so additional training would not be needed if service members ETS'd and moved into other Federal Law Enforcement agencies. So, at least in the Air Force, we should meet this provision.

[smallito12]

A little off the subject...
Apparently, not all "agencies" within CA issue LEOSA ID Card or LEOSA Qualification Cards. At least one I know of only requires annual departmental qualification.

California would never issue a LEOSA. They are issued by the Federal Agency or military branch that you work for.

[NoName408]

I have had no issues getting off- roster handguns in California. California law clearly states that sworn members of the military are exempt.

[RickD427]

Hey guys, I'm new so I wanted to chime in since I am a LEOSA card holder. You are correct in stating that LEOSA in and of itself does not authorize the purchase of off-roster weapons in California. This would also be the case for those who carry under retired LEOSA creds.

That being said, if a member is carrying and an active duty military LEO, they would meet the requirements to purchase off-roster in California since they are sworn Department of Defense LEO's. The State AG's own website lists both Federal Law Enforcement Agencies (DOD) and Military as exemptions to the roster policy. Those personnel are also authorized to purchase large capacity magazines. I have done both of these myself from FFL's with no issues.

The only thing I have not been able to get around has been the 10 day waiting period. I have not been able to draw a line connecting military law enforcement to the "Peace Officer" provision for that to be waived.

These have just been my experiences. Your results may vary.

I am an AD Security Forces member and can say that, at least in the Air Force, we are sworn at the completion of our training. This was done as the Air Force actually changed their training to meet FLETC requirements so additional training would not be needed if service members ETS'd and moved into other Federal Law Enforcement agencies. So, at least in the Air Force, we should meet this provision.

First off, thanks for your service, even if its in the Air Force (that's just my 24 years in the CG talking).

Can you please provide a link to the CA DOJ web page that you're referring to. I try to stay current with DOJ guidance and I haven't seen anything from them that clearly states military members are roster exempt. There's been a lot of forum debate over whether PC 32000(b)(4) provides such an exemption, but the guidance given to FFLs from their DOJ reps has been that they are not.

[NoName408]

I believe this is the one.

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/exemptpo

[iBkickinit]

Sworn members of armed forces who are militARy police or ncis or cid .

[smallito12]

I believe this is the one.

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/exemptpo

Beat me to it...Thanks!

[Johnson618]

It seems like there have been enough answers to get the idea of what the LEOSA is. I will give my quick run down of what I was told and what I know from previously having the credentials. I worked in Ca for a county that has separate correctional deputies for the jail and not sworn peace officers. My dept ID had LEOSA act on the back and I was told that allowed me ccw rights in all state while carrying the card but I had to adhere to Ca laws and only carry 10 rnd mags. Not the standard mags of 17-19. The LEOSA part had nothing to do with gun purchases, that was based on my dept id. I could buy off roster guns and standard capacity mags. I still had to wait 10 days unless I got a letter from the Sheriff allowing to take at purchase time. Hope this helps some.

[RickD427]

I believe this is the one.

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/exemptpo

Sworn members of armed forces who are militARy police or ncis or cid .

Beat me to it...Thanks!

Thanks guys, but that one just re-states the provisions of Penal Code section 32000(b)(4). There's nothing new in there, and it doesn't make clear that it establishes eligibility for military LEOs.

We're back to the same old debate, there's certainly an argument to be made that it does cover them since military LEO's do swear an oath, but that argument is countered by the California context usage of "Sworn" to indicate folks having peace officer powers.

To further the debate:

1) Who has received any guidance from their DOJ reps on the question?

2) Can anyone cite any authority defining military LEOs as "peace officers" or of having powers of arrest (as opposed to "apprehension")?

[SB1942]

2) Can anyone cite any authority defining military LEOs as "peace officers" or of having powers of arrest (as opposed to "apprehension")?

They fall under the term "qualified law enforcement officer."

From 18 USC 926B:

(c)As used in this section, the term “qualified law enforcement officer” means an employee of a governmental agency who—

(1)is 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 has 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);

From CA 32000(b)(4) PC:

(4) The sale or purchase of a handgun, if the handgun is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, a police department, a sheriff's official, a marshal's office, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Department of the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney's office, any federal law enforcement agency, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties.  This section does not prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of a handgun.