Federal Concealed Carry Permit

[agentw0]

Say what? How do you figure this? I do not agree with your opinion on this one. I am a cop and I sorta blend in with everyone else, I feel no more a target then anyone else.

I feel as if i do as well, but you could always get someone that you put away or had some bad dealings with that may have a grudge against you.


I know there would be a lot of mixed opinions about LEOSA from Private Citizens, but Personally I support it.

[baker]

I know I'm preaching to the choir but damnit, I think if I'm allowed to own a gun I should be allowed to carry that gun anywhere I want without any "permit" of any sort. I hate the idea of being "permitted" to use the 2A. What I would much rather be is qualified. By passing a test of proficency and knowledge of laws we should be qualified to carry.

ErSwnn, inalienable rights (such as the right to keep and bear arms) operate on the principle that an adult of sound mind needs no other qualifications to exercise said right (and can indeed bear the responsibility of using or misusing that right). The law operates on the assumption that folks are of sound mind unless proven otherwise, thus no testing or training is or should be required.

Is training a good idea? Absolutely. Knowledge and practice is power. Should it be required? Absolutely not.

i think this could be argued till the end of time. obviously training is a great idea. i've stated in another thread that i feel training should be required to own and carry. i will agree that technically your 2a rights does not and should not require training, but with all the new gun owners out there who are carrying that don't know or understand the laws it really couldn't be a bad idea. not to mention that with the current laws it could open up some more possibilities for reciprocity.

[YBNORMAL]

Your correct in what you say...and I agree that under normal circumstances no weapon is dangerous. My concern is the cowboy types or those with short fuses, or those who THINK they know what their doing but don't have a clue. How do we curtail someone who will pull out a gun for a simple argument, thinking they are justified? Now, understand, I agree with you that what you see as the legality of your debate is in fact correct, I'm playing devil's advocate to some extent. Personally I'd like to see armed people display an ability to do so but consititutionally I know it doesn't hold water and accept that fact. It's a shame successive Congresses didn't. It would be nice if people took on the personal responsibility to learn how a weapon is to be used but since that isn't a reality and never will be, how do we deal with those who will be reckless or stupid?

Oh...and no, it would not be wrong to use a car in the way prescribed for saving lives.

bold is me.

in reference to the red:
Let me ask you a question, when your carrying your firearm, have you ever engaged in any kind of disagreement, with anyone, that you have allowed to get heated enough to where the other person (or you) got angry enough to do this?

I'm going to bet that you havent. This is what happens when everyone is armed, or may be armed. I wont quote the cliche, but I'm sure you know what it is.

in black
If everyone had the right to carry, it doesnt mean that everyone would, people that arent comfortable with guns wouldnt, and those that do stupid shit would find out really quick that you dont screw around with firearms, as said by another poster, they would get shot/imprisoned, etc.

[COBMT]

LEOSA is not a federal permit, its an exemption from state prohibitions similar to the exemptions local officers have on-duty under their state law and similar to the exemptions federal officers have on-duty under federal law. It applies, however, on and off-duty and to qualified retired LEOs. There is a seminar which discusses the 12 or so cases that have involved LEOSA since 2004 that is held at the Essex County NJ Police Academy. See www.sheepdogacademy.com

[mjf]

Well, aside from LEOSA, there is a way for congressmen, senators, and other folks to have a "federal carry permit."

The "Special Deputy United States Marshal" deputation is widely used, well, with a limited deputation, to allow special folks to carry firearms.

Senator Orrin Hatch is a SDUSM, for example: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n11407455/

The US attorney's office seems to widely use this as well:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia...3/usa00132.htm

[falcn]

Why hold it agains't LEO's

I did not check back until this morning, sorry i did not reply sooner. I don't hold it against the LEOs themselves. I hold it against the general public and lawmakers considering that LEOs have some magical powers of self control and intelligence that I as a "mere citizen" do not seemingly possess (according to them).

For example, there is no reason I can fathom why a McKeesport PA cop would need more personal protection in say Mississippi than me. Nobody there would know he was a LEO, so his being targeted because of that is a BS argument.

How about the flip side of that...a criminal sees my out of state plates and says "Hey - a guy that can't carry a gun in our state!! He's my target!"

LEOs are PEOPLE just like everyone else. They have the same foibles as the rest of us Schmoes. Just because they have Law Enforcement as a career does give them special needs of additional protection in other states.

[unloved]

I wont quote the cliche, but I'm sure you know what it is.

An armed society is a polite society? I always wonder when I see or hear that if the poster/speaker has read the story the quote is taken from.

Although I agree with the sentiment, I think many people don't know that the fictional society referred to allowed dueling.

[LittleRedToyota]

I know there would be a lot of mixed opinions about LEOSA from Private Citizens, but Personally I support it.

personally, i'm not against LEOSA.

i'm against the need for LEOSA.

i would like to see more police officers more vocally support the right of citizens to carry in all 50 states as well. i would like to see the membership of the FOP demand that the FOP support our rights. i would like to see the FOP and other rank-and-file officers and associations more proactively counter the posititions of the "brass" when they come out in favor of gun control.

that is the one bad aspect of LEOSA. if it did not exist, more police officers would probably feel more motivated to speak out for the rights of everyone to carry everywhere (so they could carry everywhere themselves).

the opinions of police officers do tend to carry more weight with the general public than the opinions of non police officers in this area.

but, i do not want to see LEOSA repealed...i would, however, like to see it made irrelevant.

[Yellowfin]

i would like to see the FOP and other rank-and-file officers and associations more proactively counter the posititions of the "brass" when they come out in favor of gun control.

that is the one bad aspect of LEOSA. if it did not exist, more police officers would probably feel more motivated to speak out for the rights of everyone to carry everywhere (so they could carry everywhere themselves).

Agreed, and what we as gun owners need to do is take a more active role in the process. WE need to take control the process by lobbying city councils to kick out anti gun police chiefs. If your city council won't do so then replace them with someone who will. We have sat by while they do as they do almost entirely without our input. What's the turnout on primaries and city council elections, something like 15-20% at most? We can win that every time if we put some effort into it! There is zero reason we can't get 100-500 people, the usual margin for city council votes, to vote our way when needed. Sometimes it's 50 votes or less--I've heard of it being around 10 more than once.

[King 5.45]

FWIW, I don't think that Powdermill's wife was claiming some sort of "Privileged First-Class Citizen" status when she stated that he had a "federal carry permit." Probably, it was more likely that it was her level of understanding of the provisions of LEOSA as they applied to him and what its practical benefits are.

It is possible for LE to do their job in a conscientious manner without doing a Mexican hat-dance all over our Constitutional assurances, even if there are elements of their community or their specific agency who don't quite share the sentiment that we are a nation of citizens. Every time I see a thread on here that treats that whole community like a tether-ball to be battered about I get a bit queasy.