Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 103

Thread: H.R. 6105 - LEOSA Reform Act

  1. #1
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia

    H.R. 6105 - LEOSA Reform Act

    *If you're not a LEO and are butthurt, this thread isn't the place to bitch about you not having LEOSA*

    I received this email today and wanted to share given FLEO obviously only represents a small fraction of LEOs throughout the US.

    Write your reps, let's make it happen. The bill can be viewed here. Note: the text isn't uploaded yet, but I guess there's the link for you to check back in the future.

    I don't know how #6 is going to work out.

    Quote Originally Posted by FLEOA
    FLEOA has recently joined the fight for LEOSA reform with the introduction of H.R. 6105, the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) Reform Act

    You can see the bill here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-.../6105/all-info

    This bill was introduced with the support and technical expertise of the Society of Former Agents of the FBI, Association of Former Agents of the US Secret Service and NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association.

    In summary, the bill looks to reform vagaries in the law in six areas:

    1. The Federal Gun Free School Zone Act (GFSZA):

    Current law does not exempt LEOSA personnel from carrying in so-called gun free school zones. In light of the horrible history of school shooters, it would seem prudent to allow law enforcement officers to be armed in and around schools.

    2. The Common Carrier Conflicts:

    LEOSA certified law enforcement officers don't have specific authorization to be armed on "common carriers." In light of the targeting of "common carriers" by terrorists and DHS preparedness mandate for emergency response personnel, it would seem an armed law enforcement officer aboard "common carriers" makes sense.

    3. The National Park Rules:

    Federal regulations prohibit weapon carry in a national park with no caveat for LEOSA certified officers. Since LEOSA is a federal law, it should apply on federal property.

    4. Magazine Capacity Limitations:

    Some states have instituted magazine capacity limits without proper caveats for law enforcement officers. This presents issues for officers crossing state lines and retiring with their duty weapon. It also contravenes the intent of LEOSA.

    5. Qualification Standards:

    Different states have different regulations with how retired law enforcement will qualify. This is again an area that states have filled in a LEOSA gap. The standards should be the same across the country and simplified.

    6. Private and State Property Otherwise Open to the Public:

    LEOSA allows private persons to ban weapon carry on their property and allows states to ban weapon carry on state property. If the purpose of LEOSA was to permit qualified law enforcement offices concealed carry waivers, having "patches" of application and non-application only diminishes the scope of LEOSA.
    *If you're not a LEO and are butthurt, this thread isn't the place to bitch about you not having LEOSA*
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  2. #2
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Yeah, I just got the email as well. I'll wait a bit and try to find out more before shooting off emails to Burr, Tillis and Meadows.
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  3. #3
    This would be great. Especially the school caveat. Considering that one of the first responding officers at Parkland was off-duty, and doing work on the ball fields. He had to borrow a gun from a brother officer.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    USA
    #4 (The National Park Rules) is not quite right, methinks. Current federal law applies state law to the carrying of firearms in national parks. Some states have laws that mirror LEOSA. In such states, active and retired LEOs can legally carry in national parks without any additional state permits.

    Not squarely addressed in the list above is the issue of off duty carry in federal buildings (whether a visitor's centre at a national park or a local post office).

  5. #5
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Français View Post
    #4 (The National Park Rules) is not quite right, methinks. Current federal law applies state law to the carrying of firearms in national parks. Some states have laws that mirror LEOSA. In such states, active and retired LEOs can legally carry in national parks without any additional state permits.

    Not squarely addressed in the list above is the issue of off duty carry in federal buildings (whether a visitor's centre at a national park or a local post office).
    What I remember is very similar to what you're saying...I think I read that if the current or former LEO had a state license that had reciprocity with the state the Park was located within, then you were good to go as far as carrying within the park. I don't know about the structures, however. That's something I don't even remember reading one way or the other.
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI
    Sure hope we can get this passed!

  7. #7
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Yea I think you can carry In a national park if you can carry in the state it's located in. I'm I wrong ?

    What are common carriers ?

    I'm not sure I agree with the private property thing. I love liberty and I love private property. Even if the people use it for foolish things or have stupid/ bad values.

    As a whole , I really like it. Hope it works out.
    Last edited by TheNewbie; 06-20-2018 at 09:56 PM.

  8. #8
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewbie View Post
    What are common carriers ?
    Companies that transport passengers and / or freight.
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  9. #9
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by blues View Post
    Companies that transport passengers and / or freight.
    So Amtrak and Greyhound ? If we could carry on trains that would change my attitude towards taking a cross country train trip.

  10. #10
    Site Supporter Crusader8207's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Claremore, OK
    I was thinking not the long ago the LEOSA needs an update. I will write my reps tomorrow.
    www.hero911.org
    Hero911 when seconds save lives.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •