PDA

View Full Version : Petition: Let federal LEOs keep their weapons upon retirement



HCM
03-13-2016, 12:58 AM
Many state and local law enforcement agencies allow for their officers to receive or purchase their service weapons upon retirement or separation in good standing. However, this is no longer the case for federal law enforcement due to a Clinton era executive order which was later codified CFR Title 41 §101-42.1102-10(5) (c). Unlike the U.S. Military, which can sell civilian legal firearms to the general public by donating them to the CMP, federal law enforcement agencies can only dispose of firearms by destroying them or giving them to another government agency.

This petition seeks to:

1) Give federal agents/officers the option to retain or purchase their service weapon upon retirement or under certain other limited circumstances and;

2) Amend the LEOSA Improvements Act to allow all retired or honorably separated LEOs the ability to carry the higher capacity magazines and other accessories (used while on active status) after they have retired or separated.



http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/let-federal-leos-keep-their-weapons

PETITION TO ALLOW FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS/OFFICERS THE OPTION TO RETAIN OR BUY THEIR SERVICE WEAPON UPON RETIREMENT OR SEPARATION

PURPOSE OF PETITION:

To change the current law to allow federal law enforcement agents/officers the option to receive or purchase their service weapon upon retirement or separation in good standing after 10 years of service or when that agency switches from one weapon system to another and carry concealed that weapon and all of the accessories. This will allow these professionals to continue to utilize their most familiar tool along with the skills that they have acquired over the length of their career.

SITUATION:

When a federal agent/officer retires, the agency retains possession of that law enforcement officer’s (LEO) service weapon. That LEO is given retirement credentials and allowed to retain their badge, but not their pistol. The dangers inherent to police work do not stop when the LEO goes off shift or retires. Retired federal agents/officers are entrusted by Congress through the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) and LEOSA Improvements Act to carry concealed throughout the US, but are not provided an option to do so. Throughout the duration of their careers, federal agents/officers have received the necessary training and experience to bring most emergent situations to a logical law enforcement resolve. Currently, retired agents/officers have amassed years of applied training and experience, but are stripped of the tools of their trade upon retirement.

Current Status:

Many state and local law enforcement agencies allow for their officers/agents to receive or purchase their service weapons upon retirement or separation in good standing. This is not allowed in federal law enforcement due to CFR Title 41 §101-42.1102-10(5) (c). According to this law, federal agencies must destroy those weapons. The same thing happens when a federal law enforcement agency re-evaluates and changes from their current weapons systems to another. These weapons are being destroyed instead of being put in the capable and trained hands of the agents/officers that originally utilized those weapons on duty. All law enforcement agents/officers are targets of criminals and terrorists whether in uniform or not, on duty or off, active or retired. Federal agents who retire are given a badge and credentials to identify who they are, but are left weaponless to defend themselves if confronted.

BACKGROUND:

CFR Title 41 §101-42.1102-10(5)(c) states that, “Surplus firearms may be sold only for scrap after total destruction by crushing, cutting, breaking, or deforming to be performed in a manner to ensure that the firearms are rendered completely inoperative and to preclude their being made operative. Such sale shall be conducted under subpart 101-45.3.”

RECOMMENDATION:

An ideal solution for this problem would be to change CFR Title 41 §101-42.1102-10(5) (c) and amend it so that federal agents/officers are given the option to retain their service weapon upon retirement or certain other limited circumstances and amend the LEOSA Improvements Act to allow retired or separated agents/officers the ability to carry the higher capacity magazines and other accessories (used while on active status) after they have retired or separated.

KeeFus
03-13-2016, 06:15 AM
That sucks. When one of our guys retire the City lets the officer keep their weapon for a dollar ($1.00). They also provide a handgun safe.

Signed.

Mike C
03-13-2016, 07:28 AM
Signed.

Thanks to all LEO's: Federal, State, County, or Municipal. My family and I really appreciate everything you all do, and continue to do despite all the maltreatment from the idiots, politicians, and special victim's class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ntexwheels
03-13-2016, 08:16 AM
Signed!

JV_
03-13-2016, 09:42 AM
They also provide a handgun safe.
If they're going to provide a safe, why not get it when they're issued a gun, rather than at retirement?

LSP552
03-13-2016, 10:15 AM
Done. Hopefully that will help lead to some positive legislative change.

ffhounddog
03-13-2016, 10:16 AM
If they're going to provide a safe, why not get it when they're issued a gun, rather than at retirement?

I know my wife was issued a safe with Her Glock 22.

I was given a safety brief.

SeriousStudent
03-13-2016, 10:27 AM
I think this is an excellent idea. Let them purchase their duty sidearm(s) for a dollar. Then it is clearly a sale, and makes it more difficult to take the firearms back from the retiree.

Sadly, all those destroyed CS-1's come to mind.

KeeFus
03-13-2016, 10:42 AM
If they're going to provide a safe, why not get it when they're issued a gun, rather than at retirement?

If you can figure out PD admins please let me know. Ive been doing this shit for over 20 years and I've yet to do it...im just a road guy that punches tickets all day and answers calls. Thats far removed from admin...

That said, it all comes down to money...and if they'd ever get the safe back should someone leave before retirement. For example, we are probably getting G-17's this budget year, which means we have to trade our M&Ps. You want to place a wager on how many blue S&W boxes (which were also given to the officers when they were new) we will get back? Better yet, all the back straps? Some officers that have left over the past 5 years haven't returned these items...so Im betting we will be lucky if we get 2/3 of them.

Glenn E. Meyer
03-13-2016, 10:54 AM
Done. Is this posted on other forums?

psalms144.1
03-13-2016, 11:08 AM
signed

Beat Trash
03-13-2016, 11:08 AM
Signed. Our Contract allows for the retired officer to purchase their duty weapon for the price of $1.00. Our FOP pays the $1.00.

I see no reason for a Federal LEO to not be afford the same option.

I would also like to see LEOSA amended to cover standard capacity magazines for handguns for off-duty and retired LEO's who happen to find themselves in states with magazine capacity limitations.

Dave J
03-13-2016, 11:12 AM
Signed. Finally, a "common sense gun law" I can support. :)

11B10
03-13-2016, 11:47 AM
Signed with eternal gratitude for all the sacrifices made - and risks taken. Please try to stay safe.

JV_
03-13-2016, 12:21 PM
..and if they'd ever get the safe back should someone leave before retirement.At previous job, we didn't get our last paycheck if we didn't return all of the company property.

KeeFus
03-13-2016, 12:36 PM
At previous job, we didn't get our last paycheck if we didn't return all of the company property.

I agree...

HopetonBrown
03-13-2016, 12:47 PM
Wasn't this law enacted partially because some department was selling Kimbers for a $1?

HCM
03-13-2016, 01:20 PM
Done. Is this posted on other forums?

I have not posted it on any other gun forums yet. Feel free to share it elsewhere.

HCM
03-13-2016, 01:26 PM
I think this is an excellent idea. Let them purchase their duty sidearm(s) for a dollar. Then it is clearly a sale, and makes it more difficult to take the firearms back from the retiree.

Sadly, all those destroyed CS-1's come to mind.

Not all the CS-1s were destroyed. At least some of them were given to FLETC. A batch of the 3 inch version were converted to non firing "red handle" guns and another batch were converted for blanks as training guns. There are also still some 4" CS-1's used for live fire. Our trainees get a revolver familiarization class which includes 50 rounds of live fire with the CS-1's.

All we would need to do is sign a form authorizing payroll deduction for the $1.

HCM
03-13-2016, 01:32 PM
If they're going to provide a safe, why not get it when they're issued a gun, rather than at retirement?

Good question. When I started in the mid 1990's we were issued a long shank padlock to put through the magwell and open ejection port. Pretty much useless. About 10 years ago we started issuing everyone Armaloc II lock boxes. Not quick access but they're sturdy and reliable. More importantly, they allow you to leave the gun loaded and lock it up "as-is".

TGS
03-13-2016, 01:38 PM
Not all the CS-1s were destroyed. At least some of them were given to FLETC. A batch of the 3 inch version were converted to non firing "red handle" guns and another batch were converted for blanks as training guns. There are also still some 4" CS-1's used for live fire. Our trainees get a revolver familiarization class which includes 50 rounds of live fire with the CS-1's.

In my FLETC class, they were used to teach students how to decock and unload revolvers. Apparently they used to do a fam-fire with the basic programs, but stopped that sometime before I got there.

They were also used as props for the crime scene and search warrant training.

Kind of broke my heart.


Wasn't this law enacted partially because some department was selling Kimbers for a $1?

If I'm thinking of the same instance, that was a state LE agency, not a federal one.

Seperate issue, basically.

SLG
03-13-2016, 01:40 PM
I shared this with some guys, and my wife put it on her social media stuff. Some idiot posted on her feed saying that he would support this when it was for civilians also. Aside from the fact that LEO's are civilians, I'm not sure anyone dumber than that guy exists. Not only does it not cost taxpayers a dime, the public gets to benefit from career expenses involved in guns/ammo/training and make the public a tiny bit safer for free. No agency I have worked for puts retired guns back into service, so no extra expense at all.

When non leo's spend 20-30 years with taxpayer funded weapons/ammo/training and a career arresting bad guys, then I'm all for them getting to keep those guns. I know no one here disagrees, so I'm not attacking anyone, just venting.

HCM
03-13-2016, 01:59 PM
Wasn't this law enacted partially because some department was selling Kimbers for a $1?

This only applies to federal LE agencies. Basically, the transitions from revolvers to 9mm autos and subsequent traditions to 40 autos in the 1990's placed large numbers of surplus police firearms on the market in the 1990's. Because they were being sold cheap, some of these surplus PD guns started showing at crime scenes and became a target of anti gunners. It became "a thing" and someone had to "do something".

President Clinton (Bubba) issued an executive order in 1996 barring Federal LE agencies from selling guns to anyone, including retired officers/ agents. It restricted disposal of surplus fed LE firearms to transfer to other government agencies or destruction. This was later codified under 41 CFR.

Some background:

In the late 1980's and early 1990's many agencies transitioned from revolvers to high capacity 9mm semi auto pistols. This began placing many surplus LE guns on the market at bargain prices. When the 40 S&W round hit the market, some agencies looked to "upgrade" their 9 mm autos for 40 caliber autos. This placed even more surplus police handguns on the market at bargain prices.

Then the 1994 assault weapons ban was passed, which included a ban on high capacity pistol magazines. This made pre-ban high-capacity mags quite valuable. Some of them were selling for $100 apiece or more. Seeing an opportunity, several of the gun companies began offering prior customers one for one swaps to upgrade their existing 9 mm handgun's and magazines to 40 calibers. Glock was the first to do this but others jumped on the band wagon. The gun companies would do an armorer inspection on the trade in guns, replace the springs, and sell the guns with one high-capacity magazine as certified preowned. They would then make their profit by selling the 3 or 4 additional pre-ban high-capacity magazines at $75-100 each.

Shellback
03-13-2016, 05:46 PM
An ideal solution for this problem would be to change CFR Title 41 §101-42.1102-10(5) (c) and amend it so that federal agents/officers are given the option to retain their service weapon upon retirement or certain other limited circumstances and amend the LEOSA Improvements Act to allow retired or separated agents/officers the ability to carry the higher capacity magazines and other accessories (used while on active status) after they have retired or separated.

Just for clarification. After retirement, currently, the officer has to revert to carrying Joe Citizen reduced capacity magazines?

KeeFus
03-13-2016, 05:50 PM
Re the Kimbers...that was a fiasco. ALE is now part of the NCSBI which falls under DPS.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/02/robert-farago/why-did-the-n-c-division-of-alcohol-law-enforcement-buy-150-kimber-1911s/

HCM
03-13-2016, 05:53 PM
Just for clarification. After retirement, currently, the officer has to revert to carrying Joe Citizen reduced capacity magazines?

In states with mag restrictions, yes, unless there is an exemption in the state law.

For example The NY Safe Act does not have an exemption for retired law enforcement so the 7 round (now 10 round) limit in magazines applies to retired LEOs and off duty out of state LEOs carrying under LEOSA.

HCM
03-13-2016, 06:03 PM
Re the Kimbers...that was a fiasco. ALE is now part of the NCSBI which falls under DPS.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/02/robert-farago/why-did-the-n-c-division-of-alcohol-law-enforcement-buy-150-kimber-1911s/

3" kimbers no less. I'm just shocked they didn't work :confused: This is what happens when you have "one guy, who knows best", or at least thinks he knows best, making procurement decisions.

Shellback
03-13-2016, 06:19 PM
In states with mag restrictions, yes, unless there is an exemption in the state law.

For example The NY Safe Act does not have an exemption for retired law enforcement so the 7 round (now 10 round) limit in magazines applies to retired LEOs and off duty out of state LEOs carrying under LEOSA.

Thanks!

OnionsAndDragons
03-13-2016, 09:41 PM
I shared this with some guys, and my wife put it on her social media stuff. Some idiot posted on her feed saying that he would support this when it was for civilians also. Aside from the fact that LEO's are civilians, I'm not sure anyone dumber than that guy exists. Not only does it not cost taxpayers a dime, the public gets to benefit from career expenses involved in guns/ammo/training and make the public a tiny bit safer for free. No agency I have worked for puts retired guns back into service, so no extra expense at all.

When non leo's spend 20-30 years with taxpayer funded weapons/ammo/training and a career arresting bad guys, then I'm all for them getting to keep those guns. I know no one here disagrees, so I'm not attacking anyone, just venting.

This is one of those things where I can see the doofus' point of creating different levels of a right; but the point is moot. There are already different levels of the 2A as the laws stand in these places.

It's a no-brainer good idea for the exact reasons you state, SLG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

WobblyPossum
03-14-2016, 02:20 AM
Signed. I hope it works out because I've always marveled at how wasteful it was to destroy old federal guns instead of selling them. Plus, if retiring Feds can keep their duty guns, they won't have to buy new guns, meaning fewer guns sold. If that doesn't convince the Brady campaign to back this, I don't know what will! [emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

psalms144.1
03-14-2016, 07:52 AM
Just for clarification. After retirement, currently, the officer has to revert to carrying Joe Citizen reduced capacity magazines?Yes, if the officer decides to stay in a place with a magazine restriction, HR 218 does NOT exempt the officer from restrictions after retirement.

Chuck Whitlock
03-14-2016, 08:22 AM
Signed.


Not all the CS-1s were destroyed. At least some of them were given to FLETC. A batch of the 3 inch version were converted to non firing "red handle" guns and another batch were converted for blanks as training guns. There are also still some 4" CS-1's used for live fire. Our trainees get a revolver familiarization class which includes 50 rounds of live fire with the CS-1's.


In my FLETC class, they were used to teach students how to decock and unload revolvers. Apparently they used to do a fam-fire with the basic programs, but stopped that sometime before I got there.

They were also used as props for the crime scene and search warrant training.

Kind of broke my heart.

In my FITP class in Artesia, we did some classroom familiarization and range work with 4" 686's, but they were not CS-1's. I was amazed, and somewhat dismayed, at how many of my classmates had no revolver experience at all.

psalms144.1
03-14-2016, 08:33 AM
I'm a dinosaur, and was at FITP at Glynco on 9/11/01. We were taking a break from our first session shooting revolvers when we saw the second jet hit the WTC. IIRC, we were shooting L-frame smiths of some sort; 2.5" bbls. It was familiarization fire only, and, even back then, less than half the folks in my class had ever held a revolver before that morning. Funny how things change, isn't it?

We still authorize .38 revolvers as personal weapons, but in my entire field office (50+ agents) only three of us have .38s on our personal weapons letters. Ammo is getting trickier to acquire, and we've been told, unofficially, that when the current supply of 158+P SWCLHP dries up, the round guns will leave the authorized weapons list. Of course, I've been told that for about a decade now, and since my agency is only organization in the entire Department of the Navy still using .38 ammo, I'm fairly certain it'll be a middlin-long time before we burn through all of it that's stockpiled. Most of the ball ammo we get for training is from lot #s produced in the mid-late 80s, and the HP is old enough that you need to flake the corrosion off the lead (or leave it, if you want to add to some poor dude's difficulties if you do shoot someone with it).

L-2
03-14-2016, 10:06 AM
The gun laws sucks, that's for sure. My local department, after several months, allowed it's retired G22gen3 guns to be sold for ~$250 if the LEO wanted to buy it. Merely having the LEO retire, didn't provide for selling that LEO's gun to him/her.

I'm not sentimental about owning a department-gun I carried during my career. I'll suggest to any current LEO, to purchase any guns now, as a particular state's law may treat a current LEO differently than a retired LEO.

Trooper224
03-14-2016, 01:08 PM
Aside from the fact that LEO's are civilians,

No we're not. Look the definition of "civilian" up in the mother f***ing dictionary. I really get tired of this, from equally ignorant civilians and military types, both of whom seem to have a chip on their shoulder about a simple definition.

As for the topic at hand, my agency doesn't give us squat when we retire. If we even want to keep our badge we have to pay for it. You'd think that after all that time we'd have at least earned the right to take that little piece of metal with us, especially when no one else will ever use it, but not so. As far as I'm concerned they can keep it when I retire. When we phase out weapons we are allowed to purchase them at a substantial discount. I've always done so, not because I feel any sentimentality towards the company gear, but rather so I can sell them at a nice profit. Given the current climate I'm surprised any of us have such options.

TGS
03-14-2016, 06:22 PM
No we're not. Look the definition of "civilian" up in the mother f***ing dictionary. I really get tired of this, from equally ignorant civilians and military types, both of whom seem to have a chip on their shoulder about a simple definition.

Well, if it's like that.....

...If you also care to look beyond the dictionary, the motherfucking people who decide what constitutes a civilian says that we're a goddamned civilian.

It's certainly not any ignorance, except on your side. Nobody has a chip here except for you.

El Cid
03-14-2016, 07:43 PM
Apparently the Geneva Conventions, 10USC18, and customary international humanitarian law disagree with your dictionary, so it would seem that there's no lack of misunderstanding, chips, and/or shoulders. :)

I sort of put this in the same category as getting excited about clip vs. magazine -- if it makes you feel better, rock on, but it's ultimately not worth picking a fight over. Having said that, I enjoy a cathartic release just as much as the next guy. Probably more.

Concur. It's almost as incendiary as 9 vs 45. I grew up in a military family and spent over a decade on active duty before my career in LE. In the military we had "civilian" employees. AFOSI has three types of agents - Officer, Enlisted, Civilian. In our world a person is either military or civilian. And that doesn't include non-mil LE. I never gave it much thought until becoming a LEO and working with cops (and even some hose draggers) who would refer to private citizens as civilians and do so with so much disdain. It was said in a manner that made it clear they were talking down to/about them. This of course led me to tell them we are civilians and there are two types - private citizens and public servants. Always creates a heated debate. Lol!

SLG
03-14-2016, 08:28 PM
Well, I go away for a few hours and miss the excitement. I certainly thought this thread would be a pretty tame one, but I guess not.

I know what the dictionary says, and I don't know how to reconcile that with what I've been taught and with what has been laid out by others above me. I do know that dictionaries tend to change with the times and politics so maybe that has something to do with it? In any event, leo's are civilians as far as I am concerned. not only is that the "more" correct way to look at it, it is certainly the more useful way to look at it. The "us vs. them" policing mentality often starts out by calling the customers, "civilians". I think El Cid mentioned this as well. the dictionary also mentions firefighters. I don't know any cops who want to be lumped in with them:-0.

Also, I have never been a member of the armed forces, so I cannot pretend to know what they are formally taught about the issue. I do know that after having spent a fair bit of time with all of the branches, a leo's service to country is just not in the same category as a military service member's service to country. An easy way for me to keep that difference front and center is to consider myself a civilian. As in "not a member of the armed forces."

Others are free to do as they wish.

BehindBlueI's
03-14-2016, 08:51 PM
Context, gentlemen, context.

On my department, "civilian employees" are those who lack arrest powers. A military reservist who works as a fleet mechanic would be a "civilian" in that context. This is common usage that's been around for a loooong time. On a military base, I'm a member of "the civilian authorities" these days. Again, usage that's been around for a loooong time.

Depending on what the topic and the context is, I could be a civilian or I could not be a civilian.

LSP552
03-14-2016, 08:54 PM
Depending on what the topic and the context is, I could be a civilian or I could not be a civilian.

Being a retiree is best!

Drang
03-14-2016, 08:55 PM
Also, I have never been a member of the armed forces, so I cannot pretend to know what they are formally taught about the issue.
Things may have changed since I retired, but... nothing.
Hell, I was in ANCOC before anyone mentioned the statutory difference between Regular Army and Reservists.

Sometimes, though, "civilian" is convenient shorthand for "non-Law Enforcement". In a class or other presentation, for example, drawing the distinction may be unwieldy and time consuming, especially if it's one that needs to be made more than once.

SLG
03-14-2016, 09:07 PM
Things may have changed since I retired, but... nothing.
Hell, I was in ANCOC before anyone mentioned the statutory difference between Regular Army and Reservists.

Sometimes, though, "civilian" is convenient shorthand for "non-Law Enforcement". In a class or other presentation, for example, drawing the distinction may be unwieldy and time consuming, especially if it's one that needs to be made more than once.

I was being a little tongue in cheek, but I totally agree with you. However, convenience doesn't make it correct. If it is correct.:-)

DMF13
03-14-2016, 10:54 PM
Context, gentlemen, context.

On my department, "civilian employees" are those who lack arrest powers. A military reservist who works as a fleet mechanic would be a "civilian" in that context. This is common usage that's been around for a loooong time. On a military base, I'm a member of "the civilian authorities" these days. Again, usage that's been around for a loooong time.

Depending on what the topic and the context is, I could be a civilian or I could not be a civilian.Wow, slow down. Logic and common sense will ruin all the irrational emotional ranting. ;)

NCmtnman
03-15-2016, 07:46 AM
I wish you could purchase the weapon when you change weapons in service. My dad has purchased every handgun that he has carried on duty for the last 42 years and it would be nice to be able to do it as an FLEO as well.

Drang
03-15-2016, 02:56 PM
Now I keep thinking that Uncle Sugar should have let senior NCOs buy 1911s when they were replaced!

"Okay, SFC Drang, would you like to purchase your M4...?" AKA "The Swiss Plan." :p

(In case anyone's wondering, when Remington got down to .mil retirees for purchasing the old M24 systems, it was waaaaay too rich for my blood...)

L-M_P
03-15-2016, 10:33 PM
Signed.

This was common in MA for local/state LEOs until the ethics laws were passed. Now doing so is illegal. Anything offered to an officer would have to be offered to the public via an auction (and guns aren't allowed to be auctioned in MA by PDs).

I'd like to see an exception broadened beyond Fed LEOs, but any step forward would be welcome.

Chuck Whitlock
03-17-2016, 11:32 AM
No we're not. Look the definition of "civilian" up in the mother f***ing dictionary. I really get tired of this, from equally ignorant civilians and military types, both of whom seem to have a chip on their shoulder about a simple definition.


..If you also care to look beyond the dictionary, the motherfucking people who decide what constitutes a civilian says that we're a goddamned civilian.


Apparently the Geneva Conventions, 10USC18, and customary international humanitarian law disagree with your dictionary, so it would seem that there's no lack of misunderstanding, chips, and/or shoulders. :)

I sort of put this in the same category as getting excited about clip vs. magazine -- if it makes you feel better, rock on, but it's ultimately not worth picking a fight over. Having said that, I enjoy a cathartic release just as much as the next guy. Probably more.


Context, gentlemen, context.

Regardless of which definition is or isn't used, LEO's are most definitely agents of the government. I don't get worked up about it either way.

HCM
09-09-2019, 09:58 PM
Bumping this with some background on the original Clinton Executive Order which barred federal LE Agencies from disposing if guns to individuals.
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/01/07/us/us-law-agencies-told-to-destroy-gun-surplus.html?fbclid=IwAR1slY6l68z1bL2312nJs_AVDmhf hAw1oPSHVsh-w3Ccax80El9xtI5bQ30

JHC
09-10-2019, 08:26 AM
That was easy

babypanther
09-10-2019, 12:17 PM
Signed. I regret daily not being able to buy my P2000.

Pistol Pete 10
09-10-2019, 12:35 PM
Wrong forum for that, Pistol Pete 10. Please respect the LE forum rules

Suvorov
09-10-2019, 02:27 PM
Done. I would love to keep my Pistol!

blues
09-10-2019, 02:53 PM
Too late for me...but...signed.

TGS
09-10-2019, 03:07 PM
Too late for me...but...signed.

Well, no kidding it's too late! Didn't you guys carry a cutlass when enforcing customs laws?

"Tally ho, lads. No letter of marque. First catch of the day!"

:cool:

blues
09-10-2019, 03:11 PM
Well, no kidding it's too late! Didn't you guys carry a cutlass when enforcing customs laws?

"Tally ho, lads. No letter of marque. First catch of the day!"

:cool:

Aye. Boardin', hoardin' and whorin'.

CWM11B
09-10-2019, 04:08 PM
Done.

RevolverRob
09-10-2019, 06:44 PM
I signed the petition.

But I would definitely like to see pictures of this cutlass that blues used back in the olden days, were you also issued a Duck's Foot Pistol, blues?

blues
09-10-2019, 07:01 PM
https://66.media.tumblr.com/357e5f290ed7399121a01d7896fd6a29/tumblr_n49bmjtTRX1rai9pto1_400.jpg

Joe in PNG
09-10-2019, 07:02 PM
Well, no kidding it's too late! Didn't you guys carry a cutlass when enforcing customs laws?

"Tally ho, lads. No letter of marque. First catch of the day!"

:cool:

A brace of Queen Anne flintlocks as well, I suspect.

KPD
09-14-2019, 10:18 AM
Signed

I never knew this about FLEOs. I assumed every type of Police got their duty pistol given to them or could purchase it at retirement.

In my office we are all issued at least two handguns. We get to pick one upon retirement that is given to us and the rest we get a chance to buy. Whenever our surplus and disposed evidence firearms are put up for auction we get to buy them from the FFL at their bid price. That assumes the FFL agrees to those terms. The FFL is asked if they will sell them at the bid price to the retired Agent. It isn’t a forced or contractual thing, just a handshake agreement. We haven’t had one yet decline to do it though.

FNFAN
09-14-2019, 01:11 PM
Signed. I have a reoccurring nightmare about Springfield Pro's being cut in half with a torch!

HCM
09-14-2019, 01:17 PM
Signed. I have a reoccurring nightmare about Springfield Pro's being cut in half with a torch!

Even prior to the EO/CFR the FBI did not sell GOV property guns.

They have however, had the option for personally owned weapons which meet their regulations.

They also have generally kept examples of prior duty guns for historical, training and public relations purposes.

Thompsons are a big hit on Citizen’s academy range day.

Joe45
09-14-2019, 01:51 PM
Signed!

Drang
09-14-2019, 07:56 PM
https://66.media.tumblr.com/357e5f290ed7399121a01d7896fd6a29/tumblr_n49bmjtTRX1rai9pto1_400.jpg

Mister Magoo was Customs...?






(I bet you thought I was going to go with "Thurston Howell III", didn't you?)