The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 delineated the national off-duty concealed firearms carry rights and requirements for active sworn, and retired, law enforcement officers. Senate S.1132 and House H.R. 3752 were bills introduced in 2009 to amend the original LEOSA and make needed improvements.
Becoming Public Law No. 111-272 on 10/12/2010, the following changes to LEOSA went into effect:
- More clearly defines disciplinary action in LEOSA’s language to be discipline “which could result in the loss of police powers.”
- Retired officers are now referred to as “separated from service in good standing.” It lowers their required years of service to 10 years, eliminates the “nonforfeitable” pension or benefit requirement, and eases firearms qualifications to those standard by agency, state, or state certified instructor of LEO’s.
- Includes the carry of ammunition “not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act.” Federally legal ammunition, such as hollow-point bullets, can be carried where state law would normally prohibit it (i.e. New Jersey).
- Amtrak, Federal Reserve, and Federal executive branch law enforcement officers are now included in the “qualified” LEO definition.
Here at Bluesheepdog.com, we vehemently advocate LEO’s availing themselves of their responsibility to carry firearms, and the necessary gear, to respond to life-threatening encounters each and every day.
The federal government believes that trained law enforcement officers enhance the safety of all citizens. LEOSA recognizes that police officers do not go off duty at the end of a watch.
Following state and federal laws, and my agency’s SOP, I have carried a concealed firearm in travels from New York to California. In a future article, I will discuss airline travel with a firearm in checked luggage. Also, make sure you understand that LEOSA does not exempt officers from the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act.
Please stay vigilant and prepared.
Randy is a twenty-three year veteran officer of a mid-size Florida police department. He served as a SWAT team officer for 21 years, to include 12 years as a team leader. His other duties included police K9 handler, FTO, and detective. Currently serving as a midnight shift sergeant, he is also his department’s SWAT Coordinator.
Natheniale Bilaal says
Thank U for the updates on LEOSA. I am retired from a NJ dept. NJ is STILL telling retired officers that they HAVE TO HAVE a NJ issued CARRY PERMIT @ $50.00 a yr.,qualify TWICE a yr and CANNOT carry hollow point rounds. To my understanding STATES only have the legal right to regulate the magazine capacity. everything else is under federal authorization. Please clear this up, because a lot of retirees I know are being ripping off @ $50. a head and are telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about
Matt says
I have read differing articles as to weather or not LEOSA allows an off duty officer to carry standard capacity magazines in states that restrict magazine capacity to 10 or 7 (New York) rounds of ammunition. In reading the text of LEOSA I see an exemption for hollow point ammunition but not magazines. I do not see an exemption in the text of New York state law. Is there a reliable legal opinion that you know of?
Richard says
Hi Matt,
I spoke with an NRA attorney in April. It was his opinion that there are no exemptions under LEOSA regarding magazine capacity limits/bans. He was also unaware of any test cases on this point.
-Richard
Matt says
Thanks Richard. I read an article by Massad Ayoob a while ago that indicated that there was no exemption in LEOSA so I inquired with the legal advisor with my agency and she thought there was. I would hate for an officer to be involved in a shooting out of state and find out the hard way. I travel to New York to visit family and since I read the article I picked up a couple XDS’s with 7 round mags so I am sure I am in compliance. By the way, Mas recomended your site to me to inquire and I will pass the sight on to my guys.
Richard says
The XDS is a good pistol. I had a chance to review one last year, and I really like it a lot.
Mas is a good man. I’ve had the chance to meet him on a few occasions and he has always been kind and generous with his time.
If you ever get a chance to take on of his classes, jump on it. I don’t know what area of the world you are in, but a good friend of mine, Paul Carlson, is hosting Mas for a 40 hour course in Ohio. Paul is a great host and the range they will be shooting on is absolutely wonderful. http://www.safetysolutionsacademy.com/safety-solutions-academy-training-calendar/special-guest-instructor-training-calendar/
Stay safe!
DC says
This case has been around since 2008, holding that the possesion of a pistol and “hi-cap” mags in violation of NYS law, were both exempt by LEOSA. Yet, the uninformed keep repeating that LEOSA does not exempt magazine restrictions. The magazine is part of the firearm.
https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2008/2008-28206.html
Aaron says
DC, thank you very much for sharing this case with us and our readers. This case is very important to the overall understanding of how LEOSA applies in the State of New York.
However, in reading the decision by the court it appears they only addressed the possession of a firearm without a license, which the court correctly said was exempted by LEOSA. I read no indication the magazine capacity was considered by the court, most likely due to that charge not being a part of the charging.
This is the best information I can find from the NY State Police on its “Guide to the New York SAFE Act.”
EFFECT ON POLICE (Magazine Laws) A. Police exemptions
Police officers remain exempt from the provisions of 265.02 and may continue to possess large capacity ammunition feeding devices for as long as they are serving police officers. In addition, a new exemption has been created to exempt police officers from the provisions of PL 265.36 (unlawful possession of a pre-94 magazine).
B. Visiting police officers from other states
Police officers from other states who are conducting business within New York have
been exempt from the laws relating to the possession of firearms and magazines under PL
265.20 (11). This exemption also covers the new crimes and offenses created by the Safe
Act.
C. Retired police exemption
There are (2) areas of concern from this “Guide.” Much of what is written involves “New York” officers – serving and retired. It does not specifically talk about “retired” officers from out of state. The SAFE Act says visiting law enforcement officers are only exempt from SAFE Act (in accordance with LEOSA), when they travel in or through New York “conducting business.” How “conducting business” is interpreted could present legal troubles for out-of-state officers simply on vacation, or traveling through the state.
We strongly oppose laws like the SAFE Act for the very reasons about by these confusing exemptions and definition questions.
Chris says
I am retired after 12 years with my agency. In Michigan mcoles is the administrator for leosa certification. I submitted all required documentation. Mcoles is refusing to issue my permit because my agency does not put the specific words IN GOOD STANDING. in ANY of their correspondence. What is my recourse.
Sean Calhoun says
We need to get the magazine issue officially addressed by amendment to the law. I shouldn’t have to buy a special 7-round magazine just to travel to New York! If you look at the intent of the law, I should be able to carry the same gun/mag/ammo combination that I carry at home wherever I go.
Richard says
I agree – New York’s draconian gun laws should be repealed. No citizen should be disbarred from the ownership and carrying of firearms for self defense, retired police officers included. The notion that gun control in any way equates to crime control has been proven time and time again to be false.
-Richard
Dlhvac says
My wife just had an incident with an off duty sheriffs officer beating his kid on school grounds and she saw his pistol on his hip and was afraid he was enraged and she was afraid I told her to call the police she didn’t want to he violated two Florida concealed carry laws he let his concealed weapon be seen and did it so she would back off and he was off duty on school grounds
Aaron says
In reply to Dlhvac,
Your post definitely sounds like a disturbing circumstance, but I would need more information before fully responding. Florida Statute 790.052 allows off-duty law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms. Florida Statute 790.10 requires a firearm to be “exhibited” in an angry manner for a violation to occur. A firearm in a holster on the hip of someone who may be angry does not violate the Statute. Florida Statute 790.115 expressly exempts law enforcement from the provisions of carrying a concealed firearm on school grounds. Finally, what do you and your wife define as “beating his kid?” Florida law, like many States, allows corporal punishment. Was this a spanking, or even a slap? My definition of “beating” is much more serious than that – fists blows, kicking, multiple strikes, etc., and I believe Florida law would support that higher definition. The actions of the off-duty deputy may not have been wise, and likely appeared very disturbing. However, the deputy may have been well within his/her legal rights, and the “punishment” may have been more than warranted based upon his child’s behavior. You state the deputy violated 2 Florida concealed carry laws. Can you please provide the Statute numbers?