LEOSA

5

50565

Ive heard there is a LEOSA card you need to apply for in order to take carry in other states? I know the Military is doing this. what about active civ leo? is there any additional steps needed to carry concealed on your creds in other states? or is the creds all you need?
 
Just your ID. If I recall the retired id may require some universal language on it about qualifying.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 
Assuming that the OP is in MA . . . read the MA CMRs on this as MA did somethings with LEOSA that violate the Federal Law (intentionally). I'm not certain but you might need a LE ID that has specific language on it even for active LEOs. I just don't recall and don't have time right now to look it up.
 
Len,

I'm an MSP Certified LEOSA Instructor. I know Active LEO's need credentials only. I'm lost about what CMR's conflicting with LEOSA you mean!?
[thinking]
 
Len,

I'm an MSP Certified LEOSA Instructor. I know Active LEO's need credentials only. I'm lost about what CMR's conflicting with LEOSA you mean!?
[thinking]

Long story that I posted here in 2007 when the hearings were held on the LEOSA and ID CMRs and subsequent heated meeting of GCAB on the subject. One GCAB member was a retired BATFE agent and complained that some of the requirements violated Federal Law, both he and I were ignored by the chairman and the Boston PD Sgt in charge of ballistics (at that time) who were vociferous at minimizing the numbers of LEOs that would be able to be qualified under LEOSA in MA! Here's the thread, but sadly I found it necessary to delete the real meat of it back in 2007.
https://www.northeastshooters.com/v...R-Bonded-Warehouses-amp-LEOSA?highlight=LEOSA

As I stated above, I wasn't sure about the ID credential requirement for MA. I am pretty sure (but not 100%) that it has to have a phone number and perhaps some wording to be LEOSA OK.

Example: One of our Sgts was in the Sandbox when our PD contracted with another PD to supply the newer MA police IDs. When he came back the chief told him "sorry" that was a one-time thing and they typed up (I mean on a IBM Selectric typewriter) a very old ID for him. When I say "old" I mean it, I was issued that same ID back in 1979 by my first chief and re-issued (newer picture and signature) by the chief after him ~1990. Not sure if that ID would fly for LEOSA.
 
When in doubt, turn to the law itself. LEOSA is short and simple.

For active duty officers:

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

(d) The identification required by this subsection is the photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which the individual is employed that identifies the employee as a police officer or law enforcement officer of the agency.



For retired officers:

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof, an individual who is a qualified retired law enforcement officer and who is carrying the identification required by subsection (d) may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

(d) The identification required by this subsection is—
(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer and indicates that the individual has, not less recently than one year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the agency to meet the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training as established by the agency to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
(2)
(A) a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the individual separated from service as a law enforcement officer that identifies the person as having been employed as a police officer or law enforcement officer; and
(B) a certification issued by the State in which the individual resides or by a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State that indicates that the individual has, not less than 1 year before the date the individual is carrying the concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the State or a certified firearms instructor that is qualified to conduct a firearms qualification test for active duty officers within that State to have met—
(I) the active duty standards for qualification in firearms training, as established by the State, to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm; or
(II) if the State has not established such standards, standards set by any law enforcement agency within that State to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.


The SIG Academy conducts free qualification several times a year (you only need to supply the ammo). This obviously only works for retirees living in NH.
 
Thanks Len-2A & KB. LEOSA has several case law standings that have, so far, beaten nearly every state case brought against a LEO. Coast Guard Reserve guy in NJ, Pennsylvania Constable in NYC and half a dozen others. Mass is so adamant in their anti-gun fervor they make clear and conscious choices to ignore Federal Law. Then you have "experts" like Ron Glidden who isn't a lawyer, twisting up the chiefs.
 
Thanks Len-2A & KB. LEOSA has several case law standings that have, so far, beaten nearly every state case brought against a LEO. Coast Guard Reserve guy in NJ, Pennsylvania Constable in NYC and half a dozen others. Mass is so adamant in their anti-gun fervor they make clear and conscious choices to ignore Federal Law. Then you have "experts" like Ron Glidden who isn't a lawyer, twisting up the chiefs.

Glidden is an absolute boob, yet they still listen to him.
 
Mpd61 & GPP, it is much worse than you think. In person ask me about the gory details. I think it was that day when my professional working relationship with Glidden went south! He was very upset with being challenged.
 
Thanks Len-2A & KB. LEOSA has several case law standings that have, so far, beaten nearly every state case brought against a LEO. Coast Guard Reserve guy in NJ, Pennsylvania Constable in NYC and half a dozen others. Mass is so adamant in their anti-gun fervor they make clear and conscious choices to ignore Federal Law. Then you have "experts" like Ron Glidden who isn't a lawyer, twisting up the chiefs.
Maryland is even worse.

When LEOSA passed, the MSP openly stated that they would arrest anyone from my former (federal) agency caught with a handgun.

Oh, and Hawaii actually did so, and the agency (at the local and regional level) promptly threw him under the bus. He was a USAF reservist, and his commander put him on AGR status so he could have a paycheck. Then he went actual active duty, won the criminal case, and never returned to the agency. I wish he had scorched their asses over that. :(
 
Last edited:
The shitty thing about LEOSA is that the places anyone would MOST need or want to use it, it doesn't or barely works. In some of these shitholes you're not going to get treated any different than an unwashed/peon if you get discovered. Years ago a dude at FS who worked with some MSP folks told me they had a trooper that went into NYC and got pulled over for something dumb like a taillight. He thought he would notify them he was carrying under LEOSA. That was a big mistake- they carted him off and detained him for a good chunk of time until someone @ MSP confirmed who he was. Some of these shitholes know they cannot arrest 'foreign" LEOs but that does not stop the harassment from happening. Anyone carrying under LEOSA should not expect any kind of professional courtesy in the anti gun shithole localities, unless there's some kind of established precedent in place.

-Mike
 
Mike,

NYPD brass issued a memo to confiscate and detain any visiting LEO under LEOSA until HQ could verify their status. I read that memo when it was issued, too bad I didn't keep a copy. It was posted in a LE forum that I was on (don't recall where). That was back in 2004, unsure their policy today but NYC is an ugly place to be! I have a friend on NYPD and he's counting off the months until he can retire and then he's moving out of NY completely. He's a good guy, Son of high school classmates and I've known him since he was ~3 years old.
 
Last edited:
In my experience, the LEOSA struggles are pretty much over. There were a lot of rank and file guys in the beginning that didn't understand it.

Now if you have creds, nobody does more than make a call if there is any doubt about the creds being real.
 
In my experience, the LEOSA struggles are pretty much over. There were a lot of rank and file guys in the beginning that didn't understand it.

Now if you have creds, nobody does more than make a call if there is any doubt about the creds being real.

People say this but I think it's a bunch of crap. I just think the incident rate is lower because the guys carrying under LEOSA have figured out the negative repercussions of openly disclosing carry in an unfriendly location. After a few of these incidents made the news, and the modality of those incidents became known, the number of incidents went down... probably because people are keeping their ****ing mouth shut whenever possible now, NOT because the shit PDs in the garbage states are being "nicer".

-Mike
 
Mike,

NYPD brass issued a memo to confiscate and detain any visiting LEO under LEOSA until HQ could verify their status. I read that memo when it was issued, too bad I didn't keep a copy. It was posted in a LE forum that I was on (don't recall where). That was back in 2004, unsure their policy today but NYC is an ugly place to be! I have a friend on NYPD and he's counting off the months until he can retire and then he's moving out of NY completely. He's a good guy, Son of high school classmates that I've known since he was ~3 years old.

This doesn't surprise me, wouldn't surprise me if it was still in effect, either. Rumor has it the transit authority cops have a pole up their ass, too.

-Mike
 
18 USC 926B - for current Qualified LEOs
18 USC 926C - for retired Qualified LEOs

Federal law > all else.

Wonder what happens when a LEOSA qualified LEO is arrested? See State o CA Vs. Jose Diaz (case number 7G00494, Cal Sup Ct. 2007). Diaz was found not guilty, receives $43,000 in a civil settlement against the arresting agency.

Currently, additional amendments to LEOSA are being worked on, to include magazine capacity.
 
I know numerous LEO who have gone to NYC, carrying, and were treated like gold. Above and beyond anything you'd see here. I've personally been there twice with my family, carrying, and was treated like royalty by NYPD and US Park Police. Maybe I just ran into the right guys. I guess I'm lucky.
 
Careful in NJ they are still asshats about LEOSA. I find NYPD to be fairly decent but not 100%. I've carried all over South FL, and even had guys in Miami ask if I'm carrying a spare mag.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
I let my LEOSA quals lapse because, I do not trust the cops in the other states, so no sense going through the effort and expense. I mostly restrict my travels when possible to Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine.

That's pretty much my working theory too. I hate even going south of the notches.
 
So I was in NYC this week. Had two NYPD detectives at our office doing active shooter training for employees. I asked one of them about LEOSA support in the city and he looked at me like I had two heads. His interpretation was that it's only for off duty, not retired or separated. I go there frequently and don't carry because of this ignorance and sometimes willfull misinterpretation. Glad to hear there have been some good experiences.
 
Do you post contact info? I'm retired LEO and wish to be LEOSA complainant.
Len,

I'm an MSP Certified LEOSA Instructor. I know Active LEO's need credentials only. I'm lost about what CMR's conflicting with LEOSA you mean!?
[thinking]
Do
 
Example: One of our Sgts was in the Sandbox when our PD contracted with another PD to supply the newer MA police IDs.
As to old ID's - a friend still carries his ID from his police days from another state - it is titled "License to act as a police officer" and is dated 1969 (with no expiration date).
 
Active LEO your fine seeing you requal each year. Retired you have to find a trainer that will run you throw qual then give you a LEOSA card showing you shot and keep it with your ID.
 
My dept quals its retirees annually and gives LEOSA card but AFAIK, they don't do retirees from any other agency.

Hey what's up Bob. You didn't happen to see my uncle up in the guard tower lately have you? [wink][cheers]
 
Never an issue carrying under LEOSA in any of the following states for me: Hawaii, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, SC, NC, Virginia, Washington DC, Maryland or West by God Virginia. I will see how it goes. Thankfully under Federal agency I can carry the duty weapon if I choose everywhere I can with a personal weapon under LEOSA. Which brings up another point... How do they know what you are carrying is your duty weapon or personal one if they are the same make and model? lol.
 
Under LEOSA they shouldn't care. As of now, the gun and ammo are no longer an issue but mag restrictions are not addressed by LEOSA's latest iteration of the law and desperately needs to be addressed.

Active Fed credentials trump it all . . . but retirees are left hanging on the mag issue in several states.
 
Under LEOSA they shouldn't care. As of now, the gun and ammo are no longer an issue but mag restrictions are not addressed by LEOSA's latest iteration of the law and desperately needs to be addressed.

Active Fed credentials trump it all . . . but retirees are left hanging on the mag issue in several states.

Agreed they need to address retirees for certain. So far I have not run into any issues with mag capacity, as most states exempt LE from that portion of the law. We have 10 rd pistol mag limit here in HI, but LE exempt. California is the same. Does Mass actually not exempt active LE?
 
Agreed they need to address retirees for certain. So far I have not run into any issues with mag capacity, as most states exempt LE from that portion of the law. We have 10 rd pistol mag limit here in HI, but LE exempt. California is the same. Does Mass actually not exempt active LE?

Mass has exempted active LEOs for >20 years. In fact it was Mas Ayoob (ret'd Capt. Grantham NH PD) who told me about this exemption back in the early 1980s. He was speaking to a start-up women's group (AWARE) that was started by a rape victim who I happened to work with at DEC . . . Mas was openly carrying with a badge on his belt and the speech was given in MA. I was an active police officer at the time, so we had an off-line casual conversation about this after his speech.
 
Back
Top Bottom