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

I'm not against LEOSA for a few reasons-

-It was sponsored by relatively RKBA friendly police
orgs. (some of which may come to the aid of lawful
gun owners under a similar circumstance, as many of them
probably support "civilians" CCW )

-It pisses off antis- Yes, some antis HATE the fact that
out-of-state LEOs can carry in their state. So F' em. Any
law that pisses off antis is a good thing.

-It helps prove the case/pave the way towards some kind of
national CCW. (One could create a powerful argument that
X number of LEOs carrying everywhere off duty and a lot of
CCW holders carrying in their respective locales has not caused
problems, so it would be harder for them to argue against it. Via
LEOSA the numbers of active/RET LEO get added to the "CCW"
population. )

-It gets more "good guy" guns into places they need
to be. (I won't disagree that it would be even better if
we just had friggan nationwide CCW!)

-I agree that it's gay that, for example, a non-LEO can't jump
through a few of the same flaming hoops to get the same
ability. Problem is, the shit politics would definitely
prevent that. It's very hard for a pol to say they don't
trust a cop; it's very easy for a pol to say they don't
trust the general public, and for that matter (down the line)
that a lot of the f'ing sheep don't even trust each other
enough. This is the crux of the problem...... the political
climate is unfriendly to our cause. If we could just about
entirely marginalize the antis, then passing such a law would be
a lot simpler.


The most IMPORTANT thing to keep in mind- This is a
chicken and egg problem- LEOSA would not need to exist if we, as
a nation, simply decided not to tolerate the abuse that has been
imposed on gun owners- the mere fact that ANY state requires a
"permit" for someone to carry a concealed firearm in some capacity,
is bad out of the gate. That's why we have to deal with
this shit- let's not lose sight of that fact. 95% of the gun laws
out there are, fundamentally, unconstitutional. A lot of people
say "oh, but we need the permits, blah blah blah" but we all know
it's a crock of shit- VT allows CCW by default, and I don't see an excess
of firefights erupting, and numerous other states allow open carry by
default, and it hasn't been a problem in those states, either. It's
simply authoritarian douchebag logic that a "permit" causes some
sort of magical flaming fairy hoop to weed out those who would
abuse their right to carry a firearm.

If we want to change this issue we have to push it from different
directions. I see national CCW reciprocity bills come and go
but typically they are pushed by like one guy in the house and
then they just seem to disappear off the radar- I get the
impression that even the NRA only supports them in a limpwristed
manner..... something in the mix has to change if it's to
be considered a possibility.

-Mike
 
With all honestly... I don't get any perks from my fellow Carpentor... no extra nails... a 2x4...

The hoops the LEO & Re-tired Leo have to jump through are nothing compared to Privite Citizen. I can say this ..because after 154 days the chief finally decided to do his job and sign my renewal for LTC. Yes that is 154 divided by 7 = 22 weeks!!
How long did it take for you to qualify???? The fact that We as LTC carrier don't have the ability to show our knowledge. It is all printed on a piece of paper. And even then.. it don't matter! ( trust me.. I got enough stuff on mine)

The nod and no ticket it happens .I sat with 7 officer over the weekend and the MSP came up. They have been out in force. 3 officer all admitted to being pulled over and guess what...NOT ONE got a ticket.... The big savings here is not the ticket...it's the insurance marks that come about. ( i know you need sooo many to make a difference) It's the point!

(the quote got all screwed up. No credit for the following)

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.[/QUOTE]
 
..and with respect I say.

The vet benefits ....[angry] I believe they deserve them for serving..but we have gone to the other side...
When an vet gets 10 points on a exam for being a vet..FINE! When he gets 10 points then pref. NO that don't work. When a class at the acadamy is ALL vets!??????? Come on! Yes I am Jaded...I got the 97...he got 86.... He got the 10 point ..then the preff. I DID NOT even get a reach around..or a letter!!!!
 
-It helps prove the case/pave the way towards some kind of
national CCW.
Click to expand...

Sort of like how the practice of giving unrestroced NYC carry permits to retired officers in that city has paved the way for licensing of the general public :)
 
[popcorn]

wow... lots of sore spots festering amongst the troops.

Is the LEOSA04 unfair to the non-police, more specifically retired LEO?

To a certain extent, yes. I can carry in any state of the Union. And if I didn't have it, I would be able to carry in the state I live. Is that fair? No, but that's beside the point.

LEOSA04 is a Federal law. It was originally designed to put more trained guns back on the street. Was it successful? Not to the intent it was designed for when states, like this one, go out of their way to ignore the Federal law and conjure up their own versions. MA isn't the only one. Nothing new there.

The real success of LEOSA04 was the ability for active police to carry in all the states. Something that didn't exist before.

Is that a benefit to them, or the general public? I suppose we'll see eventually.

The real problem, as already mentioned here, is that we shouldn't have go jump through any of these hoops. But we do, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

So, instead of complaining that you can't carry in any state, backed by a Federal law, maybe feel a little glad that a step was taken in the right direction that maybe someday we all can.
 
With all honestly... I don't get any perks from my fellow Carpenter... no extra nails... a 2x4...
Click to expand...


Not true. I saw the Trades Only area in Home Depot.....and come on, they throw in a few extra nails...and you guys always get the truly straight 2x4's.

On a more serious note,

Sort of like how the practice of giving unrestroced NYC carry permits to retired officers in that city has paved the way for licensing of the general public :)
Click to expand...

is not a given. The retirees must report to Rodman Point for the qualifications and firearm's inspection. Then the process starts. Upon retirement, the y are not allowed to retain any of their duty/off duty firearms until a Premise Permit at the very least is issued. 1PP makes them sweat bullets to get it. When issued, they are allowed to release their firearm's to them.

But let's be realistic. Bloomburg will NEVER make it easier in NYC to obtain any permits. I'm actually surprised he hasn't gone after Jovinos as the last remaining gun shop in the city.
 
Last edited:
1PP makes them sweat bullets to get it.
Click to expand...

Do they have to prove "need" beyond "retired cop"?

But let's be realistic. Bloomburg will NEVER make it easier in NYC to obtain any permits. I'm actually surprised he hasn't gone after Jovinos as the last remaining gun shop in the city.
Click to expand...

My point exactly - taking care of retired police is not a "first step" towards taking care of the members of the general public.
 
It (regrettably) should put to rest some of the feelings of "preferential treatment for LEOs" that some perceive. Read it with an open eye for the attitudes behind it . . . that even many LEOs aren't "good enough" in some eyes to be granted the privilege of LEOSA.

It will give you insight into why we (common citizens) are treated so poorly.
Click to expand...

From what the outsider has been able to observe, some LEOs don't consider persons with part time status; special officer status; private sector employees with sworn law officer status or self-employed constables to be in the same category as full time governmentally employed law enforcement when it comes to handing out special treatment. Nothing I saw in the draft implied that those in charge of determining who gets special treatment would draw the circle with themselves standing on the outside.
 
Last edited:
My point exactly - taking care of retired police is not a "first step" towards taking care of the members of the general public.
Click to expand...

It took almost twenty years to get HR218 pasted and now you want benefits in amatter on a year or two. Maybe you should have voiced your opposition during those many years the bill was up for passage. Ted Kennedy might have given you the floor to voice your opposition to allow citizens to carry a handgun. He will take victory whenever he can get it.

By the way, who is pushing for these rights you wish for??? Where is the national organization watching out for these rights? The NRA?? Doubt it. Beyond press releases, I haven't seen them do much of anything. The various fragmented state organizations? Not a very powerful voice. The only reason that HR218 passed was that the national organization pushing it decided to work together. The FOP and NAPO representing almost every state pushed it through. The days of those up for election fearing the wrath of the NRA are over. They may give them lip service but beyond that they aren't worried about them.
 
It took almost twenty years to get HR218 pasted and now you want benefits in amatter on a year or two.
Click to expand...
I am using history as a model. NYC has provided carry privs to retired offircers for decades without any positive influence on civilian carry. So, I am basing my conclsion on decades of history, not events of the past two years.

The NRA is a mixed bag - the Republicans walk the line of trying to be just enough better than the Democrats to get the NRA votes, without being so much better that the NRA endorsement of Republican candidates becomes a benefit for the Democrats. I don't know about NJ, but politicians in MA who have stated "I consider opposition by the NRA a badge of honor and do not seek votes from their members" traditionally win in a landslide.
 
C 140 S 129D.

VTpro said:
Whats the fee for bonded warehouse ?
Is there laws regulating fees ?
or the WH charges as they please ?
Click to expand...

"The owner shall be liable to such dealer for reasonable storage charges" (a.k.a. they can charge what they please)

VTpro said:
How long can they hold your weapon before they have a right to dispose/sell/trade them ?
Click to expand...

"Such person, or his legal representative, shall have the right, at any time up to one year after said delivery or surrender, to transfer such firearms, rifles, shotguns and machine guns and ammunition"
 

Similar threads

"...possess prior to 9/13/14" Line in the Law
Replies
1
Views
140
Marty McFly
Marty McFly
Ptr 9r evil features
Replies
4
Views
514
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