Today is Wednesday, October 01, 2014rss RSS feed
Letters to the AmmoLand Editor

Letters to the AmmoLand Editor: Got something on your mind? Let us know and you can see it here.

North Pole, Alaska --(Ammoland.com)- Major Harl, this is in response to your article, “Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Allows Military Police to Concealed Carry in 50 States” ( http://tiny.cc/aw8t7w ) being run on Ammoland and other locations on the web.

I am not impressed with your article, as it is a mixed bag of truth, speculation and pure BS. First, I understand YOU believe you may be the first retired USAF Security Policeman to be issued credentials to carry concealed under the revised LEOSA law…BUT…I would not recommend you attempt to pass that off outside Wisconsin.

There is NO provision in the Federal Law that authorizes any State to issue credentials for any Federal Law Enforcement agency and certainly not for any branch of the military.

I quote: “926C(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 indicates 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.

As a Retired USAF Security Policeman, the State of Wisconsin is NOT “…the governmental agency for which the individual (YOU) is employed…” and the State of Wisconsin has no authority granted under the Federal LEOSA Law or from the DOD to issue any credential to you for concealed carry, contrary to the Wisconsin Law (yes, I read it). The only thing the State is authorized to do under this law is to provide certification of weapon qualification according to the required standards.

Other comments, such as;

“One issue of the newly amended H.R. 218 is any active duty military policeman can with proof of current handgun qualification carry a concealed handgun out in the civilian world of all 50 States.”

Or;

“According to H.R. 218 any military cop from any branch of service (to include a reserve or Guard cop) can acquire their own privately owned handgun and carry it concealed off base.”

…are completely wrong, careless and reckless on your part and will only serve to get Private Bailey or Airman Snuffy in a world of hurt and probably end their military career if they follow your guidance. The photographic credential from the employing agency is also required for current military police members. The military ID card doesn’t meet the Federal Law requirement.

Your last statement in regards to “…the DoD is working the issue with intent to come up with DoD directed certification credentials for current and qualified former military cops to carry concealed under H.R. 218.” is correct and those credentials will be the ones to satisfy the Federal Law requirement…NOT some other State issued credential for a Federal Law Enforcement Agency or the military.

See the four Air Force LEOSA memos’ here; http://1.usa.gov/1gk3esh

My only hope with sending this is that you will act to correct this grievous error before yourself or any other military member, active or retired, acts on the information you provided and gets themselves in some deep kimche’.

William S. Perry, Jr., SMSgt, USAF/AKANG (Ret)
31 years, 11 months and 17 days Active Duty and ANG service in Security Forces
North Pole, Alaska
wsperry@gci.net
  • 7 User comments to “Rebuttal – ‘LEO Safety Act Allows Military Police to Concealed Carry in 50 States’”

    1. The way I read Harl’s article says it is up to each state to decide if retired military police, security forces, or master-at-arms you can qualify and carry a concealed handgun. Read it for yourself.
      “If you are retired military police, security forces, or master-at-arms you can qualify and carry a concealed handgun. Each State has (I believe-don’t quote me, (New Jersey may not)) set up an application procedure for former Federal law enforcement (this includes old military cops) members to acquire an H.R. 218 based concealed carry permit that has to be honored in every state.”

    2. M A Stanton on December 10, 2013 at 11:20 AM said:

      Richard Nugent R FL. is working on a bill to make CCW legal in ALL states just like a driving permit!

    3. Tom Morse on December 10, 2013 at 12:22 PM said:

      Someone is going to get burned with this type of incorrect info leaking out. Just hope it won`t ruin any ones life.

    4. Dave, that’s not the meaning of HR 218. Under the LEOSA, no permit is required.

    5. They’ll all play “heck” trying to carry concealed in CA, which recognizes nobody else’s permits.

    6. Dave, if you read the law, it is not up to the states to decide. It’s going to be up to the appropriate military branch to issue the proper credentials in accordance with the law. The states only involvement is the weapons training certification for the retired LEO’s that reside in their state.

    7. If we spend tens of thousands of dollars training people in the military to handle firearms safely and responsibly we should trust them to go through the process of obtaining a permit and being able to carry a firearm in public. Those that went through heavy combat situations obviously need more evaluation. Thanks for trying to set the record straight about the article.

    Leave a Comment

    • Sign up Ammoland for your Inbox

      Daily Digest

      Monthly Newsletter

    • Recent Comments

      • Ben: I can certainly see how there would be a need for EVERYONE at the fair to be armed, in light of all the...
      • VT Patriot: Thanx Wild Bill. This sums it all up pretty well. We have to stop these moronic libs from destroying our...
      • Tom: The real kicker is that “mass shootings” are so rare that the government feels compelled to...
      • TJ: As 1389AD stated above: “Acting like a lady or a gentleman (as the case may be) lends credibility.”...
      • watchdogman: Geez Dave Riegler! What makes you think the dimocrats will cease destroying this country. Or are you...
    • Social Activity

    • Most Popular Posts

    • AmmoLand Poll

    Copyright 2014 AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News | Sitemap | Μολὼν λαβέ
    14219280
    14821808