EOPS Hearings 9/28/07 AAR - Bonded Warehouses & LEOSA

Wonderful.. so I have still have to go back to Ohio every year to qualify..
Click to expand...

As I maintain a residence in NJ, I go back twice a year to qualify under the NJ Retired Carry Permit regulations which is the same as the mandated NJ AG's requirements. The FI's are state certified which covers me. The town issued a normal ID which states Retired next to the rank. It isn't a big deal as I'm back there enough anyway to visit family. The down side is each qual is $75.00 plus the $50.00 per year for the permit. I'm state certified to do the quals but they have a problem doing my own qualification!!
 
I'll stick my neck out here and say that I oppose any special provisions for retired police. Police are hired to serve the public in a specific capacity, and provisions that make them something other than "ordinary citizens" upon retirement serve to separate them from the rest of the population, and create a privileged class.

If retired police don't have to deal with the same hassles of restricted zones; non-resident licenses; discretionary issue; etc. as the rest of the peons, how can we ever expect them to show any concern for civilian rights? Furthermore, I would rather that the currently serving police have a mindset of "I too will be a civilian like you some day" rather than "I will be immune from laws that apply to you" even after I retire.

And yes, I know that strictly speaking, police are civilians too - but I trust the meaning in this context is clear.

I am sure that the retired police on this forum will have all sorts of reasons why they should have special rights that are not granted to ordinary citizens with spotless records. Sorry, I don't buy that.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
I'll stick my neck out here and say that I oppose any special provisions for retired police. Police are hired to serve the public in a specific capacity, and provisions that make them something other than "ordinary citizens" upon retirement serve to separate them from the rest of the population, and create a privileged class.

If retired police don't have to deal with the same hassles of restricted zones; non-resident licenses; discretionary issue; etc. as the rest of the peons, how can we ever expect them to show any concern for civilian rights? Furthermore, I would rather that the currently serving police have a mindset of "I too will be a civilian like you some day" rather than "I will be immune from laws that apply to you" even after I retire.

And yes, I know that strictly speaking, police are civilians too - but I trust the meaning in this context is clear.

I am sure that the retired police on this forum will have all sorts of reasons why they should have special rights that are not granted to ordinary citizens with spotless records. Sorry, I don't buy that.
Click to expand...


My neck is out there with you, Rob. I agree completely.
 
If retired police don't have to deal with the same hassles of restricted zones; non-resident licenses; discretionary issue; etc. as the rest of the peons, how can we ever expect them to show any concern for civilian rights?
Click to expand...

Get your facts straight before you post. Retired police do have to abide by the same restrictions as civilians, as so out of state LE officers. The ability to take advantage of the LEOSA is not a given. The department's Chief LE Officer must issue the retired ID. We have to jump through more hops than any civilian does for their permit. Do you have to qualify twice a year using only state certified firearm's instructors? And what civilian rights are you speaking of? As a retired LE officer, they have no enforcement powers and as such, they don't infringe on your rights any more than the run of the mill person on the street.

It sounds like you are pissed because they get something you don't. I'm pissed when the guy who works for the car manufacturer gets the special pricing and I don't. I should get the same deal, even though I never worked for that company. Maybe it's just a perk for missing holidays and other family events for thirty years and dealing with all the crap no one else wanted to be bothered.

Maybe because the chance of running into some As*hole that you locked up a half dozen times in the last six months is better than average. How many have you sent to the state prison for a stretch?
 
If H.R. 218 isn't special treatment I don't know what is. [rolleyes]

I spent two years teaching Marines heading in to combat weapons proficiency. I've attended multiple combat courses in both the Marines and Army, yet I'm not a "special LEO" and have to get LTC's from multiple states and pay multiple fees to cover about 60% of the country... [thinking] Seems pretty fair to me.

Maybe it's just a perk for missing holidays and other family events for thirty years and dealing with all the crap no one else wanted to be bothered.
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on this statement. If you think HR 218 isn't special treatment you've spent too much time in the drug evidence room. Can't imagine why COPs get a bad rap for thinking they are so f***ing special.
 
Then by that statement, why should ex-military get all the special treatment? Do they not get veteran's benefits that the average citizen not get? Guess that makes them special too? Do you want to argue against that?

Seems like too many like to sit home at night when the others are stuck outside dealing with the crap but want nothing better than to nit pick on every little flaw or benefit. Think the job is so great, try to get on a department and get all the "benefits". No one but some here want to think that the LE community thinks they are "special" when in fact we get screwed more than most. How many here can get a DWI and be garenteed the lose of a job. A conviction of an offense, regardless of how minor is cause for forfitting the job. Every pain in the butt has the right to file anonymously a complaint leaving not recourse or defense due to the fact they are unknown. And yet the complaint is filed in your personnel file as if it had legitimacy. I can just go on and on about the benefits involved in the job. But it seems everyone here knows more about the profession than I so why go on.
 
rscalzo said:
Then by that statement, why should ex-military get all the special treatment? Do they not get veteran's benefits that the average citizen not get? Guess that makes them special too? Do you want to argue against that?
Click to expand...

I wasn't the one saying LEO's dont get special treatment when it comes to guns. YOU WERE... [thinking]

I'm not debating other benefits of either job. The discussion is about firearms special treatment.
 
It's a simple point on which we differ: I believe it is appropriate for jobs to have benefits, however, I do not feel that immunity from certain laws the rest of the population must submit to is one benefit that retired police should have. I certainly don't hold it against you or any other LEO for taking advantage of such benefits when they are available.

Economic benefits earned as part of the certain employment arrangement including pensions; the GI bill; access to the VA Rx program; etc. These are economic and employment compensation issues and I'm not going to argue against them any more than I would argue against police pensions. These items are deferred, but earned, compensation for the job.

I believe that all citizens should be equal under the law and subject to the same forcibly applied constraints on their behavior. I do not believe that the enforcers should, upon retirement, be exempt from any laws they spent their career imposing on others.
 
I never said that the LEOSA wasn't a statute that was available to only certain LEO. How much of a benefit it is is debatable. To those who have decided to carry a firearm it seems like a benefit. In reality, few retired LEO chose to even avail themselves of the benefit due to the difficulty in meeting the requirements which are much more difficult to meet than those required of a civilian. I doubt more then ten percent actually bother to even try and meet them. In NJ alone, less than five thousand Retired Permits have been issued. Want to take a guess how many retired are out there that can apply. Ten times that would be on the low side. Of that five thousand, only a fraction bother to keep up the qualifications which make their permit inactive but still on the books as issued.

So in essence, the only ones to date who have opposed the issuance of the LEOSA provisions have been a few here and Sen. Kennedy and his buddies.
 
rscalzo,

I guess Rob was a bit more tactful in how he put it. It is how I feel about it. I apologize for the tone of my posts. However I feel that HR218 is a slap in the face to every "subject" of the good ole USA.
 
The reason everyone comes to the site is to debate their differing opinions. At no time is anyone every allowed to get out of line without sanctions. If everyone here agreed, it wouldn't be any fun.

However, one point to clarify. The LEOSA covers full time sworn as well as retired.

be exempt from any laws they spent their career imposing on others.
Click to expand...
To be perfectly clear, the LE community doesn't impose these laws on anyone. The elected legislators do. If you check further, you will see that most, if not all rank and file police organizations have stated that excessive laws governing firearm's laws for the law abiding citizens are useless. So far to date the only group supporting additional legislation reducing rights and outright bans in other cases is the IACP which ranks right up there with any other political organization out of touch with reality.
 
Last edited:
rscalzo said:
Then by that statement, why should ex-military get all the special treatment? Do they not get veteran's benefits that the average citizen not get? Guess that makes them special too? Do you want to argue against that?
Click to expand...

You're ignoring one very important point... the BOR/2nd amendment
applies to all Americans equally regardless of their service, station in life, job, veterans, police, etc.

What Constitutional grounds exist that would make "veteran's benefits" an extended right that the average citizen can't enjoy also?

Seems like too many like to sit home at night when the others are stuck outside dealing with the crap but want nothing better than to nit pick on every little flaw or benefit. Think the job is so great, try to get on a department and get all the "benefits". No one but some here want to think that the LE community thinks they are "special" when in fact we get screwed more than most. How many here can get a DWI and be garenteed the lose of a job.
Click to expand...
How many here can be pulled over for an obvious DUI and not even be charged/arrested and the encounter treated as if it never happened? How about a moving violation being waved off or parking ticket never being issued? Does the average person enjoy that "benefit"?

A conviction of an offense, regardless of how minor is cause for forfitting the job.
Click to expand...

But... does it actually happen? (that is unless for personal reasons, management is just waiting for the person involved to f***-up so they can be fired).

Every pain in the butt has the right to file anonymously a complaint leaving not recourse or defense due to the fact they are unknown. And yet the complaint is filed in your personnel file as if it had legitimacy.
Click to expand...

And? I'm willing to bet that there isn't a single cop out there that has never had a complaint filed against them by some person with an ax to grind or is just unhappy with the way they were treated. So what! It's an acknowledged part of the job that a**h***s are going to complain no matter what. People complain about piddling shit in the private sector also. However, the exception is all it takes is even one accusation to get that person fired.

Honestly... how much creditability is given by the brass with regard to anonymous complaints? They probably laugh at them like you.I or anyone else would.
 
Based on what you said, I would not have had to arrest one of my patrol officers for a DV. Guess he got let go. Not to mention other who when through the system due to incidents involving family/girlfriends. But guess what. The average citizen gets to go about their business if involved in a DV. We get suspended without a trial and don't work until it's adjudicated which may be months or longer. What a benefit. Get convicted of anything involving DV and you're gone, no appeal.

But... does it actually happen? (that is unless for personal reasons, management is just waiting for the person involved to f***-up so they can be fired).
Click to expand...

That isn't management's prerogative. It is NJ State law enacted several years back. Better yet, the DV laws are applied retroactively to LE in the state when applied to DV with no statute of limitations. Another benefit.

We always get let go if stopped for DWI. That's why two of my people were fired after being convicted of DWI. Both should have lost their job and due to the arresting officers doing their job saved me and my town a lot of grief.

Honestly... how much creditability is given by the brass with regard to anonymous complaints? They probably laugh at them like you.I or anyone else would.
Click to expand...

Normal people would think so. And yet they cannot be disregarded and must, by the AG rulings, entered into your personnel file for LIFE. Not as dismissed but unsubstantiated. By the AG's guidelines, that means there was not enough to prove the charge, but it could not be disproved. They aren't laughed off as I was stuck handled some of them.

I guess everyone EVERY stopped for a moving violation was issued a summons. Guess we won't hear one story about how they were stopped, issued a warning and sent one their way. Short memories if I can't get at least one to step up.

Parking tickets??? Now you're reaching. I've bypassed parking violations...Maybe I should have issued the one for two feet into the yellow zone. Then someone could bitch about how we had nothing better to do or a donut joke.Probably the only one hundred percent issuance on parking was for Handicap. No one was bypassed if not entitled to that space. Which way do you want it. total enforcement or discretion? I guess it depends on which end you're on. I NEVER hear complaints about how someone gets stopped for doing only fifteen miles over the speed limit. And yet now I hear how some are let go......

I guess I could come up with some stats to justify why no one outside of the police profession should even be allowed a firearm. In thirty years I can not cite ONE instance where a legally owned firearm stopped a crime in my town. I can cite one mistaken shooting and death by a homeowner who killed their niece living in the house because of a failure to determine their intended target. A father how told his daughter's boyfriend who he did not like to wait at the front door while he went to the back of the house to get a shotgun where he then proceeded to shot him, killing him instantly. The killing of a girl's brother by her boyfriend because they disliked each other. Three murder-suicides and several suicides.

Yet I still, obviously back firearm's ownership. I realize these are tragic yet isolated incidents. Yet, unlike you, I don't see them as representative as the ENTIRE firearm owning population.

Stereotypes and unfounded opinions based on misconceptions and hearsay are dangerous. Now if you take this to imply that mistakes are never made in LE, don't I've seen them and I've found LE is their own worst critic. We have to sit and take the heat and have the entire profession judged by the screwup, intentional or not of a few. Kind of like firearm's ownership.

Basically all you are wishing for is even less private ability to carry a firearm concealed outside the profession of LE. We can keep this up to the point when no one will have the right. Keep relying on the 2nd. Amendment and you will get burnt. Remember the 21st. Amendment. Nothing is carved in stone that politicians can't repeal. It wouldn't be the first time.
 
Last edited:
rscalzo said:
Retired police do have to abide by the same restrictions as civilians, as so out of state LE officers.
Click to expand...
Really? If you can get a permit that allows you to carry in New York state, and one to carry in New Jersey, then you, my friend, have a special privilege. New York doesn't even HAVE a provision for a non-resident carry permit, and as for NJ... you either have to be LE, or a security guard (and you can only carry while you're working). So don't tell me that you don't get a special privilege that I can't get; I don't believe it.
rscalzo said:
How many here can get a DWI and be garenteed the lose of a job. A conviction of an offense, regardless of how minor is cause for forfitting the job.
Click to expand...
Probably everyone here with a security clearance would be sweating bullets for something like that... and THEY don't have the nifty little "thin blue line" sticker on their cars to let the other cops know that they're one and to treat them nice. How many times have we read about some cop leaving their gun somewhere and getting a slap on the wrist for it? A civilian in MA would certainly have his permit pulled - and probably prosecuted for something or other as well.

I'd be a lot more sympathetic to your comments if I couldn't dredge up far too many cases where the cops already get special privileges from their buddies in blue.

You may be squeaky clean and treat every cop you ever pulled over like any other person, but there are way too many who do not act that way.
 
Really? If you can get a permit that allows you to carry in New York state, and one to carry in New Jersey, then you, my friend, have a special privilege. New York doesn't even HAVE a provision for a non-resident carry permit, and as for NJ... you either have to be LE, or a security guard (and you can only carry while you're working). So don't tell me that you don't get a special privilege that I can't get; I don't believe it.
Click to expand...

You lost me somewhat with the NJ/NY reference but if you read the text of the LEOSA, you would have no greater rights as any civilian as that's all you are under the regulations. By the way, NY does have Non-resident permits. They are restricted to those who live out of state but have businesses in the state. No idea how easy they are to get as I never dealt with their laws. As far as NJ is concerned, retired or not under the bill is not exempt from the hi-cap regulations and cannot carry hp ammo. You are not entitled to enter, as any civilian, into any area that bans the carrying of firearms. While carry permits in NJ are tough to get, they are given out, rarely. To be honest, no one is making much of a fuss about it. The NJ Firearm's Association is vocal but in that state they are not taken seriously. Can't expect anything difference when the state put Lautenburg in a position he wasn't legally entitled in which to run.

Those blue line stickers can be bought on line or at the police shop in Amesbury by anyone walking through the door. Like the PBA cards and FOP stickers that were one almost every car traveling down the road they have VERY little effect on the outcome of a stop. Some as*hole puts a decal on his car and think he has cart blanc is in for a rude awakening. Cops getting a brake. Yeah it happens. Like in any profession, those in it get brakes. Think lawyers, doctors, the travel industry, etc. take care of their own...yep. To a point. I'm not losing my job for someone who thinks they can do whatever they want. As I said, that's the perception the general public has and I'm not going to change it. To be truthful, I never cared. People still think we never paid for dinner and get free coffee and donuts everywhere we go. People has most of their perceptions on owners of firearms based on a few who have abused the right or outright screwed up. Should we assume that those perceptions are valid?

In fact I really think a huge outcry to strip the rights of those private citizens who carry under that legislation. Let's all get on board to remove all those handguns legally carried and give Handgun Control and those other groups a headstart in the total ban. Year back everyone got on board to try and destroy one of the biggest handgun company in the world for their agreement with a past group of politician's firearms regulations. That also made sense. Remove the companies whose products you fight to possess. A few of those victories and you don't have firearm's industry at all. Just like the efforts to remove them through baseless lawsuits, we can put them out of business ourselves. Sometimes I think we are our own worst enemies.

On a different note, my fingers are starting to hurt..........
10dtcv4.jpg
 
Last edited:
rscalzo said:
Based on what you said, I would not have had to arrest one of my patrol officers for a DV. Guess he got let go. Not to mention other who when through the system due to incidents involving family/girlfriends. But guess what. The average citizen gets to go about their business if involved in a DV. We get suspended without a trial and don't work until it's adjudicated which may be months or longer. What a benefit. Get convicted of anything involving DV and you're gone, no appeal.



That isn't management's prerogative. It is NJ State law enacted several years back. Better yet, the DV laws are applied retroactively to LE in the state when applied to DV with no statute of limitations. Another benefit.

We always get let go if stopped for DWI. That's why two of my people were fired after being convicted of DWI. Both should have lost their job and due to the arresting officers doing their job saved me and my town a lot of grief.



Normal people would think so. And yet they cannot be disregarded and must, by the AG rulings, entered into your personnel file for LIFE. Not as dismissed but unsubstantiated. By the AG's guidelines, that means there was not enough to prove the charge, but it could not be disproved. They aren't laughed off as I was stuck handled some of them.

I guess everyone EVERY stopped for a moving violation was issued a summons. Guess we won't hear one story about how they were stopped, issued a warning and sent one their way. Short memories if I can't get at least one to step up.

Parking tickets??? Now you're reaching. I've bypassed parking violations...Maybe I should have issued the one for two feet into the yellow zone. Then someone could bitch about how we had nothing better to do or a donut joke.Probably the only one hundred percent issuance on parking was for Handicap. No one was bypassed if not entitled to that space. Which way do you want it. total enforcement or discretion? I guess it depends on which end you're on. I NEVER hear complaints about how someone gets stopped for doing only fifteen miles over the speed limit. And yet now I hear how some are let go......

I guess I could come up with some stats to justify why no one outside of the police profession should even be allowed a firearm. In thirty years I can not cite ONE instance where a legally owned firearm stopped a crime in my town. I can cite one mistaken shooting and death by a homeowner who killed their niece living in the house because of a failure to determine their intended target. A father how told his daughter's boyfriend who he did not like to wait at the front door while he went to the back of the house to get a shotgun where he then proceeded to shot him, killing him instantly. The killing of a girl's brother by her boyfriend because they disliked each other. Three murder-suicides and several suicides.

Yet I still, obviously back firearm's ownership. I realize these are tragic yet isolated incidents. Yet, unlike you, I don't see them as representative as the ENTIRE firearm owning population.

Stereotypes and unfounded opinions based on misconceptions and hearsay are dangerous. Now if you take this to imply that mistakes are never made in LE, don't I've seen them and I've found LE is their own worst critic. We have to sit and take the heat and have the entire profession judged by the screwup, intentional or not of a few. Kind of like firearm's ownership.

Basically all you are wishing for is even less private ability to carry a firearm concealed outside the profession of LE. We can keep this up to the point when no one will have the right. Keep relying on the 2nd. Amendment and you will get burnt. Remember the 21st. Amendment. Nothing is carved in stone that politicians can't repeal. It wouldn't be the first time.
Click to expand...


Look... to be honest with you I really don't care if police officers will give another cop a free ride because their "brothers". I think it's wrong, but I accept that it's a reality and it's not going to go away (and be honest here... it does happen).

I also accept that in certain circumstances that cops might get screwed over when average citizens might get less scrutiny or less punishment. However, I think the inverse is even more true in that on average, cops will get even more of a wink and a nod than the average citizen would under similar circumstances.

But hey... it's all part of the jobs we choose and we (should), accept it and any consequences (good or bad). There are things we may or may not like about our chosen professions or the people we work for, but it happens in every job.

Anyhow... this debate has taken a wrong turn/gone off-course.

Whatever work related complaints you might have has nothing to do with the issue at hand. There is no justification to grant extended Constitutional rights to another class that other citizens can't exercise as well.
 
I did NOT post this thread to create a shit-storm, and we don't allow Cop-bashing on NES.
Click to expand...

Len, as one of the majority posters on this thread, at no time did I take offense of see it as cop bashing. Everyone has the right to their views. I may not agree and I will try to give what I feel is a valid explanation of those views.

But throughout this rather active discussion, everyone acted in a very responsible and adult manner, unlike many other forums. That says a lot about those not only running and moderating but also about those here as members. Sometimes the discussion is humorous, sometimes more on a serious note. In the end, everyone speaks their mind without going over the line. Truth be told, I'd rather have the discussion face to face over a beer but that isn't always possible. So here we are.........
 
LenS said:
The Cop-haters will be happy to know that retired LEOs in MA will be getting shafted in the MA implementation of LEOSA and treated not much better than "almost everyone else".
Click to expand...

Umm we are not Cop-Haters. Because we don't agree with an unfair 2nd Amendment law that gives Cops more rights than us peons doesn't mean we hate cops. The law is stupid...
 
LenS said:
I did NOT post this thread to create a shit-storm, and we don't allow Cop-bashing on NES.
Click to expand...
Len, I apologize if I came across as "cop-bashing"; I was trying to make the point that the law, as written, whether neutered in MA or not (and it certainly sounds like the cops living in MA ARE getting the fuzzy side of the lollipop!), it is a special privilege that civilians do not have.

If a national CCW bill that covers ALL citizens is ever passed, I'll happily shut up about LEOSA.
 
What Constitutional grounds exist that would make "veteran's benefits" an extended right that the average citizen can't enjoy also?
Click to expand...

The same constitutional grounds that allow my town to give teachers a regular paycheck and not give me one.

How many here can be pulled over for an obvious DUI and not even be charged/arrested and the encounter treated as if it never happened? How about a moving violation being waved off or parking ticket never being issued? Does the average person enjoy that "benefit"?
Click to expand...

The days of off duty LEO getting a pass on DUI seem to be history. Any officer caught giving a drunk LEO a ride home instead of to the police station for booking is putting his career in serious jeopardy.

Some as*hole puts a decal on his car and think he has cart blanc is in for a rude awakening.
Click to expand...
Unless it's a MPA sticker (in Massachusetts) - Serial numbered, issued only to police, and subject to confiscation if found on a civilian vehicle.

---------------------

As to how easy it is for a cop to lose his job. This is true - very much like airline pilots - one mistake and the career is history. But, let's look at some of the the job protections those of us in private sector civilian employment enjoy (and I work for a great company) -

1. My boss is free to include me on a layoff list regardless of seniority, and not invite me back when the company eventually resumes hiring. Could a police commanding officer tell one of his men "Your service has been great, your 10 years of service very much appreciated, but we cannot afford as many officers. Yes, I know some recruits with 2 years on the force are being kept, but you have been selected. The department HR rep is here to describe the separation process and your COBRA benefits."

2. If I'm arrested for a violent felony that would make the company feel uncomfortable having me on the premises, I can be fired. Not "suspended", "fired". No pay, not right to an appear before an appeal board, no right to the job back if found innocent or the charges dropped.

I'm not implying that the police shouldn't get the benefits of seniority and due process; just pointing out that there are positives and negatives to each sector of the employment marketplace.


---------------------

There are two points with which I agree:

1. All citizens should be treated equally

2. Retired police should be able to carry

The problem is that #1 and #2 are in direct conflict under LEOSA. I value #1 more highly that I value #2. Others may disagree.
 
Last edited:
I think retired LEOs should be allowed to carry. I also think everyone else who is not federally prohibited should as well.
 
I think retired LEOs should be allowed to carry. I also think everyone else who is not federally prohibited should as well.
Click to expand...
I expect everyone on this list is in agreement. Assuming the only two choices are "everyone is treated the same", or "retired LEOs get treated differently than ordinary people", which would you choose? That is the essence of the issue under discussion.
 

Similar threads

"...possess prior to 9/13/14" Line in the Law
Replies
1
Views
141
Marty McFly
Marty McFly
Ptr 9r evil features
Replies
4
Views
515
MAJoe
M
94 OUI conviction fixed
Replies
10
Views
685
SgtHal75
SgtHal75
9mm Draco legality...
Replies
1
Views
580
Joeldiaz
J
Pre 94 Bushmaster
Replies
6
Views
552
wmass
wmass
Back
Top Bottom