High cap scenario.

Doctordrew

Doctordrew

Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
325
Likes
19
Location
Woburn
Feedback: 6 / 0 / 0
what are your oppinions.

I am getting a letter for High Cap mags (aux officer), I know that I can carry them "on duty", and I know that Im entitled to own them so I can legally carry them when/where ever, but I won't have a "police ID" to prove it if EVER asked by another "real LEO" while im "off duty"....
should I keep a copy of the letter I get folded up in my wallet for proof?
or should I get some 10 rnd for off duty? is it worth the "risk".


any oppinions on this before I order my mags?
 
I haven't ever paid any attention to this issue, but a quick look at the law and it looks to me that Ch 140 Sec 131M would imply you can only use them while on duty: "possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement."
 
FWIW, the proper term is "large capacity magazines". Unless you live in very hostile territory, you should be able to obtain an unrestricted Class A LTC, especially if you can show your auxiliary police creds when you turn in you LTC application.
 
they are post ban large capacity. If I could get pre ban, then I would be fine, but I am getting post ban "leo" mags (new)

maybe I will order 3 "leo" mags and 3 10rnd....until I can find some pre ban.
 
Last edited:
cricco said:
H.R 218 should cover you.
Click to expand...

HR 218 only covers concealed carry. It allows LEOs and retired LEOs to carry in any state regardless of the state's concealed carry laws. It does not, however, say anywhere that you can possess restricted weapons or magazines. So if Doctordrew already has an LTC-A, I don't think HR 218 would really effect him at all while in MA.
 
jdubois said:
HR 218 only covers concealed carry. It allows LEOs and retired LEOs to carry in any state regardless of the state's concealed carry laws. It does not, however, say anywhere that you can possess restricted weapons or magazines. So if Doctordrew already has an LTC-A, I don't think HR 218 would really effect him at all while in MA.
Click to expand...

Not to mention, that HR218 has a bunch of standards that have to be met... and if he is a LEO that doesn't meet those standards, then he would not qualify as being a LEO as far as HR218 is concerned anyways. (Not that it is
relevant in this case, but it bears mentioning. ) There are numerous landmines embedded in HR218 that make
it so that not all badge carriers qualify under that section of law.

-Mike
 
Doctordrew said:
what are your oppinions.

I am getting a letter for High Cap mags (aux officer), I know that I can carry them "on duty", and I know that Im entitled to own them so I can legally carry them when/where ever, but I won't have a "police ID" to prove it if EVER asked by another "real LEO" while im "off duty"....
should I keep a copy of the letter I get folded up in my wallet for proof?
or should I get some 10 rnd for off duty? is it worth the "risk".


any oppinions on this before I order my mags?
Click to expand...

You may carry under your badge. The courts have ruled that a Police Officer, when off duty, is still a Police Officer. It does not matter if your on duty or not. You may want to ask your chief what your department policy is regarding off duty carry. If you qualify with that weapon, and you have powers of arrest, you may carry it.
 
jdubois said:
HR 218 only covers concealed carry. It allows LEOs and retired LEOs to carry in any state regardless of the state's concealed carry laws. It does not, however, say anywhere that you can possess restricted weapons or magazines. So if Doctordrew already has an LTC-A, I don't think HR 218 would really effect him at all while in MA.
Click to expand...



This law applies to persons who meet the definition listed below of a "Qualified Law Enforcement Officer."

qualified law enforcement officer means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;

`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
 
cricco said:
This law applies to persons who meet the definition listed below of a "Qualified Law Enforcement Officer."
Click to expand...

I fully understand who the law covers. The question is what does the law cover. It covers concealed carry. It does NOT cover concealed carry of firearms prohibited under state law.

circco said:
The courts have ruled that a Police Officer, when off duty, is still a Police Officer.
Click to expand...

That's nice. But has a Massachusetts court ruled that Police Officers carrying off duty are doing so "for the purposes of law enforcement"?
 
jdubois said:
I fully understand who the law covers. The question is what does the law cover. It covers concealed carry. It does NOT cover concealed carry of firearms prohibited under state law.



That's nice. But has a Massachusetts court ruled that Police Officers carrying off duty are doing so "for the purposes of law enforcement"?
Click to expand...

jdubois. I have no desire to hold a pissing contest with you. However, a Police Officer may carry whatever he carries on duty. I don't know of many LEO's who carry non high cap weapons....period. It does not matter if he is carrying "for the purposes of law enforcement". If a cop is vacationing in Las Vegas with is wife, he is obviously not performing as a Police Officer....however, he may still carry under H.R 218. If you have doubts, then show me an instance of a Police Officer being charged with carrying a high cap mag without authority.
 
cricco said:
This law applies to persons who meet the definition listed below of a "Qualified Law Enforcement Officer."

qualified law enforcement officer means an employee of a governmental agency who--

`(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has statutory powers of arrest;

`(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;

`(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency;

`(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;

`(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
Click to expand...

The way it was explained to me by an active LEO, DoctorDrew would not qualify under HR-218, The highlighted reason is why. Auxiliary is not considered an employee and HR-218 only covers active or retired (before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more) Employees.
If my info is wrong, I would like to know
 
cricco said:
jdubois. I have no desire to hold a pissing contest with you.
Click to expand...

No need to get cranky. I'm not trying to have a pissing contest, I'm just trying to make absolutely sure that what Doctordrew wants to do is legal. Could well be, but I'm not yet convinced that HR 218 is the answer.

cricco said:
It does not matter if he is carrying "for the purposes of law enforcement".
Click to expand...

Apparently it does to Massachusetts. Otherwise they wouldn't have put that phrase in the text of the law.

circco said:
If a cop is vacationing in Las Vegas with is wife, he is obviously not performing as a Police Officer....however, he may still carry under H.R 218.
Click to expand...

We're not talking about Nevada. We're talking about Massachusetts.

circco said:
show me an instance of a Police Officer being charged with carrying a high cap mag without authority.
Click to expand...

I can't show you that. I'm not a lawyer. I don't know of any precedent either way. All I can do is read the text of both HR 218 and S131M. If you know of precedent showing HR 218 overruling S131M, or even HR 218 overruling ANY state prohibited weapons law, I'd love to know about it. That would strongly make your case.

However, the text in HR 218: "may carry a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce" makes me wonder if the law even applies to a Police Officer in their own state of residence. I can't quite understand what the point of the "interstate or foreign commerce" wording is, except as a wordy way of saying, "brought with them from another state".
 
[DOCID: f:publ277.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 865]]

Public Law 108-277
108th Congress

An Act



To amend title 18, United States Code, to exempt qualified current and
former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying
of concealed handguns. <<NOTE: July 22, 2004 - [H.R. 218]>>

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Law Enforcement
Officers Safety Act of 2004. 18 USC 921 note.>>

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act
of 2004''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS
PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 926A the following:

``Sec. 926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
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).
``(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the
laws of any State that--
``(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property;
or
``(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any
State or local government property, installation, building,
base, or park.

``(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified law enforcement
officer' means an employee of a governmental agency who--
``(1) is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the
prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the
incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and has
statutory powers of arrest;
``(2) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
``(3) is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the
agency;
``(4) meets standards, if any, established by the agency
which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a
firearm;

[[Page 118 STAT. 866]]

``(5) is not under the influence of alcohol or another
intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
``(6) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.

``(d) The identification required by this subsection is the
photographic identification issued by the governmental agency for which
the individual is employed as a law enforcement officer.
``(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--
``(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the
National Firearms Act);
``(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of
this title); and
``(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of
this title).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such chapter is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926A the
following:

``926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement
officers.''.

SEC. 3. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM
STATE LAWS PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is
further amended by inserting after section 926B the following:

``Sec. 926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement 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).
``(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or limit the
laws of any State that--
``(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property;
or
``(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any
State or local government property, installation, building,
base, or park.

``(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified retired law
enforcement officer' means an individual who--
``(1) retired in good standing from service with a public
agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of
mental instability;
``(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to
engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation,
or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any
violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;
``(3)(A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a
law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or
``(B) retired from service with such agency, after
completing any applicable probationary period of such service,
due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such
agency;
``(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the
retirement plan of the agency;

[[Page 118 STAT. 867]]

``(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at
the expense of the individual, the State's standards for
training and qualification for active law enforcement officers
to carry firearms;
``(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another
intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
``(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a
firearm.

``(d) The identification required by this subsection is--
``(1) a photographic identification issued by the agency
from which the individual retired from service as a law
enforcement officer that 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 standards established by the agency
for training and qualification for active law enforcement
officers 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 retired from service as a law
enforcement officer; and
``(B) a certification issued by the State in which the
individual resides that 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 State to meet the standards established by the State for
training and qualification for active law enforcement officers
to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.

``(e) As used in this section, the term `firearm' does not include--
``(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the
National Firearms Act);
``(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of
this title); and
``(3) a destructive device (as defined in section 921 of
this title).''.

(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such chapter is
further amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926B the
following:

``926C. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law
enforcement officers.''.

Approved July 22, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 218 (S. 253):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108-560 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 108-29 accompanying S. 253 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
June 23, considered and passed House.
July 7, considered and passed Senate.

<all>


The law is quite clear, as are the exemptions. HR 218 does not mention high cap mags. It DOES mention machine guns. As far as whether or not he is an employee, if he is an auxillary Officer, with powers of arrest, he is covered. The key here is "powers of arrest". I believe the intent of the law was to prevent people such as constables, dog officers, firemen, etc, from claiming HR 218 status.
 
EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS
PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Exemption from state laws about CONCEALED CARRY, not about PROHIBITED WEAPONS.


From http://njlawman.com/Feature Pieces/HR 218.htm:

"HR 218 will not be a defense to possessing hollow point bullets, carrying a weapon on a school campus, carrying prohibited weapons, carrying a weapon in a casino, etc. Some of these scenarios are illegal in certain states. Know HR 218, but also know the laws of that state in which you intend to carry!"
 
Is this what you are looking for jdubois?
[MGL] Chapter 140: Section 131M.
No person shall sell, offer for sale, transfer or possess an assault weapon or a large capacity feeding device that was not otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 ...

The provisions of this section shall not apply to: (i) the possession by a law enforcement officer for purposes of law enforcement; or (ii) the possession by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving such a weapon or feeding device from such agency upon retirement.
Click to expand...
This is the section of the law that makes post ban hi-caps prohibited for peons and not for LEOs.
 
cricco said:
[DOCID: f:publ277.108]
The law is quite clear, as are the exemptions. HR 218 does not mention high cap mags. It DOES mention machine guns. As far as whether or not he is an employee, if he is an auxillary Officer, with powers of arrest, he is covered. The key here is "powers of arrest". I believe the intent of the law was to prevent people such as constables, dog officers, firemen, etc, from claiming HR 218 status.
Click to expand...
I believe the intent of the law was to prevent people such as Specials, deputy sheriffs (as in MA), Reserve and every other Auxiliary from getting (or buying) a badge and claiming HR 218 status.
Lets look at How the Law Defines "Qualified Retired LEO?"


(c) As used in this section, the term `qualified retired law enforcement officer' means an individual who--

`(1) retired in good standing from service with a public agency as a law enforcement officer, other than for reasons of mental instability;

`(2) before such retirement, was authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and had statutory powers of arrest;

`(3) (A) before such retirement, was regularly employed as a law enforcement officer for an aggregate of 15 years or more; or

`(B) retired from service with such agency, after completing any applicable probationary period of such service, due to a service-connected disability, as determined by such agency;

`(4) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the retirement plan of the agency;

`(5) during the most recent 12-month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the State's standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms;

`(6) is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and

`(7) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.

Auxiliary, reserve or specials do not receive benefits under the retirement plan of the agency.
So, sorry but I still think you are wrong. What you state seems to be your opinion. You have not proved the employee detail.

I think this whole HR218 thing is just a bag of SH*T anyways, lets face it, an LEO from MA in Texas has no more powers of arrest than does a civilian from MA. So why is the LEO's life more important?
Does he/she have more of a right to self defense than any other law abiding citizen?
I THINK NOT! [angry]
 
The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act. (the correct term. HR218 is not the correct designation of the legislation any longer HR218 - Health Care Tax Deduction Act of 2005') does not come into play in this case as it in no way covers any part time or auxiliary law enforcement personnel.

As correctly pointed out earlier, it is no way affects the ability to legally possession hi-cap magazines, hp ammo or other prohibited items. It only deals with the concealed carry laws of the states.
 
Last edited:
okay, i think im going to get some 10-rnd for CCW, it only takes 13 large capacity anyways, ill just switch the ammo over and let the high cap mag springs rest while i use the 10 rnders. no biggie, not worth the aggrivation if ever asked, to defend myself for 3 rounds... maybe ill buy some pre ban if i can find them.

thanks guys for the responses.
 
kevin9 said:
Is this what you are looking for jdubois?

This is the section of the law that makes post ban hi-caps prohibited for peons and not for LEOs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Kevin, that's exactly the bit that is the crux of the matter, all this HR218 (I mean LEOSA, thanks for the correction rscalzo) stuff is a red herring. The text you quoted obviously allows LEOs to carry hi-caps. My only question is why do they have the "for purposes of law enforcement" wording in there? Is that intended to mean they can't carry them off duty? I'm not sure, but it's obviously in there for some reason, right?
 
The text you quoted obviously allows LEOs to carry hi-caps
Click to expand...

The LEOSA doesn't allow the carrying of anything that the state restricts unless it is duty related. Retired and off-duty do not get a bye on any firearm's related legislation outside of the need to acquire a Concealed Carry Permit.

NJ as an example specifically restricts hi-cap (over 15 rounds and hp ammo) even when doing so under the guidelines of the act for out of state individuals. As far as current sworn FT under the act is is somewhat of a gray area.
 

Similar threads

Post-ban High Capacity Magazines
Replies
6
Views
425
CrackPot
CrackPot
Fa-10 Large Capcity
Replies
3
Views
172
milktree
milktree
Does a Dirt Road Count as a "hard surfaced highway"?
Replies
17
Views
1K
DJBrad
DJBrad
Lever action rifles…capacity question
Replies
11
Views
634
Palladin
Palladin
Non-Resident LTC and high cap mags?
Replies
6
Views
428
daekken
daekken
Back
Top Bottom