PA finally getting act together for retired LEOs to conceal carry under LEOSA

[RoyJackson]

I haven't read this entire thread, so I may be repeating others' comments...

That said, I am totally against the LEOSA law. These folks are retired, hence have no more law enforcement powers then any other private citizen. They are entitled to no more rights or privileges then any other citizen. And, most certain, they have no more qualifications with firearms then any private citizen.

[son of the revolution]

And, most certain, they have no more qualifications with firearms then any private citizen.

Thats just not true, LEOSA requires annual re qualifying with the carry weapon. Lots of Carry License holders in many States arent even required to show they know which end is the dangerous one , let alone shoot a qual course every year. But I do agree LEOSA is ripe for a fall on 14th Ammendment Grounds.

[Steve in PA]

There you go, you don't have to follow permit holder laws, aside from ones relating to carrying on government property or laws specifically crafted to prohibit carry on private property (no guns signs).

Laws, such as Ohio's no firearms in bars law, can be safely ignored.

As was the case in South Dakota.

[cigarmanpa]

i've made quite a few enemies in my 27 years on the planet, I need special treatment too

[mjf]

Thats just not true, LEOSA requires annual re qualifying with the carry weapon. Lots of Carry License holders in many States arent even required to show they know which end is the dangerous one , let alone shoot a qual course every year. But I do agree LEOSA is ripe for a fall on 14th Ammendment Grounds.

Wrong, for the purposes of this act, active "qualified law enforcement officers" are to "`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;"

That said, the standards may, require a biannual qualification, a yearly qualification, every two years, or no standard may exist. Retired police officers must re-qualify every year.

[son of the revolution]

Wrong, for the purposes of this act, active "qualified law enforcement officers" are to "`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;"

That said, the standards may, require a biannual qualification, a yearly qualification, every two years, or no standard may exist. Retired police officers must re-qualify every year.

Thanks for making the point that I wasnt in fact WRONG. If you go back and read Roy Jackson's post that I quoted , he specifically stated that the LEO's were retired and not any more qualified that a civilian. I came back with that wasnt true because, as you agreed , retiree's had to requal, so were am I wrong ?

[mjf]

Thanks for making the point that I wasnt in fact WRONG. If you go back and read Roy Jackson's post that I quoted , he specifically stated that the LEO's were retired and not any more qualified that a civilian. I came back with that wasnt true because, as you agreed , retiree's had to requal, so were am I wrong ?

Sorry, I didn't read your post through the scope of the previous post--in that case, you're not wrong at all. I just try to aim for accuracy of information, that's all.

[son of the revolution]

Sorry, I didn't read your post through the scope of the previous post--in that case, you're not wrong at all. I just try to aim for accuracy of information, that's all.

No problem , I just try to aim for people fully reading all the relevant posts before they comment