NRA Supports Retired Law Enforcement Officers’ Right to Carry

New Jersey State Flag NRA ILA
Yesterday the NRA and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs filed an amicus brief in support of retired, federal law enforcement officers. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Yesterday the NRA and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs filed an amicus brief in support of retired, federal law enforcement officers, who brought suit against the state of New Jersey under the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (“LEOSA”).

LEOSA allows current and retired qualified officers with identification issued by their agency to carry a concealed firearm nationwide, regardless of state law. The plaintiffs here meet those qualifications. Yet the state of New Jersey, in violation of federal law, is still requiring them to get state-issued concealed carry licenses.

“LEOSA is crystal clear here,” said Michael Jean, ILA Director of the Office of Litigation Counsel. “Congress preempted state law and allowed any law enforcement officer who meets LEOSA’s requirements to carry concealed nationwide. The plaintiffs here meet those requirements. They don’t need any other license. New Jersey is wrong.”

The case is Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association v. Gurbir Grewal. It is in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. We will keep you posted on future developments.


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

Subscribe
Notify of
29 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
musicman44mag
musicman44mag
14 days ago

And the answer is! Reciprocity and constitutional carry. When an officer retires he should be a normal citizen just like anyone else. I am tired of preferential treatment of judges, lawyers their daughters sons and cousins like in Kommiefornia. Make it constitutional carry and then I will agree with this law because the point would be moot. I’ve seen law enforcement shoot when qualifying and a lot of them are not any better than your average joe and that is shooting at a target under controlled conditions not in the field under pressure. In addition, people change with time. Imagine… Read more »

RoyD
RoyD
14 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

This sounds familiar for some reason: “I’ve seen law enforcement shoot when qualifying and a lot of them are not any better than your average joe and that is shooting at a target under controlled conditions not in the field under pressure.”

Lakefoot
Lakefoot
14 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

The issue would seem to be one of experience as opposed to accuracy. It would be difficult to imagine that accuracy could be the main consideration as then professional shooters should/could be included in this group.

Law enforcement will have a considerable edge in the education of the laws that surround the use of force not to mention a consistent and considerable margin of both training and experience. Doesn’t mean nobody makes mistakes, but as long as humans are involved those will occur.

Last edited 14 days ago by Lakefoot
RoyD
RoyD
14 days ago
Reply to  Lakefoot

Would, could somebody translate what Lakefoot said because, try as I might, I can’t figure it out.

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
14 days ago
Reply to  Lakefoot

Lakefoot,

If I’m following you, your argument is that trained people with experience should be allowed to carry while people with less than some uncertain set of credentials should not.

IF that is what you are saying, I totally and absolutely disagree. The Constitution doesn’t say that only people who can meet some set of standards are covered by the 2A.

Let me know if that’s really what you meant, because a lot of people are confused by what you wrote.

RoyD
RoyD
12 days ago

And there we have it, crickets, just crickets.

Dave in Fairfax
Editor
Dave in Fairfax
12 days ago
Reply to  RoyD

Yup, I was actually hoping that he’s explain his thinking, but…nothing a day later.

Jeffersonian
Jeffersonian
14 days ago

Yet more backstabbing from Fairfax. Power for the King’s Men, nothing for the peasants.

TStheDeplorable
TStheDeplorable
14 days ago

To my fellow retired LEOs, please be aware some traps that exist due to some poor drafting of the LEOSA. 1) Your permit does not allow you within 1000 feet of a school; you need a state permit for that under the federal safe schools act. That makes driving in any city extremely risky. 2) You are still subject to a state’s ammo bans (so no hollow point in NJ). 3) You are still subject to a state’s magazine capacity bans, even though you qualified with a pistol with a larger magazine (you need a modified mag with lower capacity).… Read more »

Grigori
Grigori
14 days ago

#2 is incorrect as I understand it. Revisions made in 2010 covered hollowpoint ammo. Unfortunately, they did not address mag capacity.

KC
KC
13 days ago

You may want to update California. I reached out to their AG’s office on my first trip there in retirement to ask about their LEOSA compliance given their mag ban BS etc……I was told that in order to carry a concealed weapon I would have to get the permission of every sheriff in every jurisdiction I visited and traveled through, I would have to get a California CCW, which as a non-resident that is impossible, and that I would have to comply with their mag ban. Since they didn’t inform me of this until after I came home and it… Read more »

uncle dudley
uncle dudley
14 days ago

The actions of New Jersey doesn’t surprise me as they are like many other states who don’t follow federal laws such as granting sanctuary to illegals. The republicans had a chance a few years ago when they controlled both houses of congress and the white house but they didn’t push for a national conceal and carry reciprocal agreement into law. The rhinos at the time were afraid of their own shadows and the loss of campaign funding if they moved on it or not winning re-election. Elected officials have a habit of not listening to the people they represent and… Read more »

Old Gun
Old Gun
14 days ago

Is there anyway you can become a LEO for say a day then retire and be able to nation wide concealed carry? Maybe have the local sheriff deputized you? Wouldn’t that make Bloomberg’s day!

nrringlee
nrringlee
14 days ago

Funny, 2AF and GOA support universal concealed carry.

Green Mtn. Boy
Green Mtn. Boy
14 days ago

Too bad that Negotiating Right’s Away does not,has not supported the 2 nd. amendment as Witten. Not One More Effin Penny!

Cam
Cam
15 days ago

Yea not a fan of special carve out laws. The NRA should support everyone can carry!

Ram
Ram
14 days ago
Reply to  Cam

I hold a similar view of this particular legislation.
I think the need of LEOSA required action, though it is my understanding
that the constitution disdains “preferred” classes. Our non-representing
representatives can’t bring themselves to restore a right, that has been
so successfully, and covertly disenfranchised.

RoyD
RoyD
15 days ago
Sisu
Sisu
16 days ago

And the reason why “retired LEOs” over the general, law-abiding population should have superior protections and not simply look to the 2nd Amendment is ?

Larry
Larry
16 days ago

“LEOSA is crystal clear…’
FOPA is crystal clear, too. NJ just doesn’t give a s*.

RoyD
RoyD
16 days ago

I have always had little to no use for the LEOSA act. When I retired, and before, I carried when I wanted to as long as I didn’t have to pass through a metal detector. And even I did that a couple of times as the hired help they had wanding people were half assed about it and didn’t care about what they were doing. Plus I usually don’t strike people as someone from which they would have anything to worry about. As far as “qualifications” I have seen “law enforcement” shoot and most of them barely pass on a… Read more »

sage419
sage419
16 days ago

Fck LEOSA. They are citizens, just like anyone else. Support Constitutional carry and the 2A.

Ardent Patriot
Ardent Patriot
16 days ago

ALREADY THE LAW: Public Law No: 108-277 (07/22/2004)(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on June 23, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 – Amends the Federal criminal code to authorize a qualified law enforcement officer carrying photographic governmental agency identification to carry a concealed firearm, notwithstanding any State or local law. Declares that this provision 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… Read more »

Grigori
Grigori
16 days ago
Reply to  Ardent Patriot

I believe there was an amendment in 2010 that Obama (I know, hard to believe) signed off on which exempted hollow point ammo for LEOSA carriers in places like (again) New Jersey. It also added classes of Federal LE who could enjoy its benefits, I think. I believe it also allowed for ex (not necessarily retired) cops to enjoy it if they had ten years service under their belt and their old department would issue ID and allow them annual qualification with the retirees.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
14 days ago
Reply to  Grigori

How about military retired that have packed a gun and used it in fire fights against the enemy? I think they are more qualified to carry than LEO or anything that goes under the guys of law enforcement like judges and polititians.

Grigori
Grigori
14 days ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

I would totally prefer that we have nationwide Constitutional Carry for ALL citizens. Any expansion of those rights, I generally support. I would support this for military, too. Sad thing is, the freakin’ “armed” services don’t trust their own people with loaded guns outside of rare, narrowly-defined, circumstances on a range, in a combat zone, or rare situations when guarding high value targets.

They made it available to us and I will partake of any liberalization of law to my advantage while still pushing for Constitutional Carry for all of us.

45crittergitter
45crittergitter
14 days ago
Reply to  Ardent Patriot

“Amends the Federal criminal code to authorize a qualified law enforcement officer non-prohibited person carrying photographic government-issued al agency identification to carry a concealed firearm, notwithstanding any State or local law.”

There. Fixed it for you.

Ryben Flynn
Ryben Flynn
16 days ago

But New Jersey does not issue concealed carry licenses/permits. “New Jersey calls its permit a “permit to carry a handgun” and is a “may-issue” by law for firearm carry, either openly or concealed, but permits are rarely or never granted to the general populace. Permit applicants must “specify in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.” Then it must be approved by both the township’s police chief… Read more »

Finnky
Finnky
16 days ago
Reply to  Ryben Flynn

@RF – What does that have to do with anything? We all NJ is utterly unreasonable. We also know that federal law supersedes state law. Right or wrong, federal law provides protection from state law for current or former LEO. NJ cannot override this federal law, yet the have been attempting to do so. Fed DOJ should have pursued enforcement long ago instead of leaving it up law suits from private organizations.