Recently, a vote in the House of Representatives granted police officers nationwide concealed carry privileges. The vote resulted in 221 to 185 for the new government-issued privilege. The bill is called H.R. 354 Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act “LOESA Reform Act of 2024.”
This new government-issued gun privilege rewarded to active and retired law-enforcement officers grants them the freedom to carry a firearm in places like school zones, national parks, and state, local, or private properties open to the public. It also includes certain federal facilities that are accessible to the public. The bill also widely expands the ability for certain law-enforcement officers to cross state lines with concealed carry firearms and reduces the frequency of which retired law enforcement would need to re-qualify in order to meet certain standards.
Aren’t they lucky?
I use the word privilege and I hope you can recognize my sarcasm because I don’t remember the Second Amendment reading, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, as long as those people are current or former police officers.”
Is this a move in the right direction or is this a slap in the face to gun owners across the country? Was this bill introduced under the assumption that police officers, active or retired, are better trained than the average gun owner? Because that is certainly debatable.
Many would argue that this bill was created, introduced, and sponsored because crime has gotten out of control throughout America and due to left-wing disrespect and defunding of police, politicians are finding themselves in a precarious situation of their own making. In what might appear to be an attempt at controlling some of the violence created by irresponsible left-wing policies, the bureaucrats behind HR 354 have neglected the rights of all, to allow privileges to some.
But that’s not all. It would appear that the bill also acts in part to address the obvious and deadly results of the 1990 Gun Free School Zones Act without actually changing the irresponsible law.
Joe Biden introduced the 1990 Gun Free School Zones Act as part of the Crime Control Act, and since it was signed into law, school killings have doubled and increased at twice the rate of increase every 10 years.
H.R. 354 would now allow active and retired police officers to carry on school campus. This does not change the law and therefore still prohibits civilian concealed carriers from doing the same.
So, what is this really about? Somebody got smart and recognized that Joe Biden’s deadly Gun Free School Zones Act is getting children killed, however, the Gun Free School Zones Act still allows unconstitutional authority over the 2nd Amendment and remains in place to benefit politicians. So even though you may have more training than a retired police officer, and you may have more will to protect children in schools, (than someone like Scott Peterson, an armed school resource officer at Parkland, who did nothing to save lives) you are still restricted from possessing a firearm on school campuses.
The irony of this bill is not so much the fact that certain privileges are given to certain people but more the idea that the government has taken a right, turned it into a privilege, and has found a way to make us argue over who deserves that privilege.
All gun laws are unconstitutional, and all should be abolished. This particular one sets a dangerous tone and pits law enforcement gun owners against private citizen gun owners in a way that supports acceptance of unconstitutional gun laws.
Ask yourself if current and retired law-enforcement officers will have a problem with this bill. The answer is probably no, which emboldens Legislators with the power of taking away rights and giving them back in bits and pieces as government issued privileges.
Now, ask yourself how private gun owners would react if those same bureaucrats decided to extend this new government-issued privilege to them. Would they denounce it in its entirety, push to remove the 1990 Gun Free School Zones Act altogether, and end all gun free zones, or would it be accepted and considered a win? Should gun owners accept this special treatment bill or demand Constitutional Carry for all?
Stealing rights from American citizens through unconstitutional gun laws and then rewarding some with the privilege of avoiding those laws in exchange for their support, is like starving your dog and then giving him a treat for rolling over.
About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy
Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information, contact PR HERE
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun-rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun-owners.
I was in SC a couple of weeks ago for a few days of heavy range time with a friend who lives there. An older gentleman showed up with his wife and he was trying to help her learn to shoot. It was a Sig in 380 and I could hear him telling her that the gun was jamming (failure to eject) because, “she was limp wristing it”). He never once told her what that meant that I can recall. Then it jammed good and he asked if anyone had any tools. I did, so I went over. Another guy… Read more »
“Rights” that can be given, and in turn taken away, are not rights in the first place. Rather, they are permissions.
I am unfamiliar with any “permission to keep and bear arms.”
We have had a form of LOESA for 20 years now. This is the latest addition it has been reformed a couple of times. Has it done any harm hard to qualify that, just like has it done any good. Should We have permit less/ constitutional carry nation wide absolutely. Any change that allows more people to carry in more places is a good change. Who is more qualified then another that is wide open question. I have spent more then 4 decades as a instructor. It breaks down like this no mater if civilian, police or military. For 90… Read more »
most police are criminals, sorry guys but anyone that enforces an unconstitutional …they arnt laws more like edictsis a criminal title 18 241 ,and 242 problem is enforcement mechanism of title 18 is flawed,requires a prosecutor that believes in constitution
HR 218 already did this years ago. This is simply an update. Not even a big deal as it was already happening. It’s more political than anything.
All that being said it can be used in the battle for national carry which of course is stalled because so many, even in the so called gun community, are liberal and vote that way.
My rights don’t end with a libtards hurt feelings and law enforcement officers working or retired do not have anymore God given rights than I do . FJB and all Democrats and anyone who promotes rights for the privileged.
Getting votes from LEOs, active and retired, is what this legislation is really about, not enhancing public safety.
RIGHTS, rights are given to mankind by GOD ALMIGHTY, they are not granted by people in governments. In this country at least SOME of those RIGHTS are guaranteed under the constitution. Among these guaranteed, GOD given rights are; life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, to PEACEABLY assemble, to vote your conscience, self defense and defense of others….. and then there is the second amendment which guarantees that ALL free citizens have the RIGHT (and obligation) to keep and bear arms. This right includes the use and carry of firearms for defense, for hunting and sporting, for trading and selling, for… Read more »
The government doesn’t care about dead kids. The government cares about control. Arming police retired or not; on duty or not and across state lines or not gives the government another element of control. What’s sad is that cops will see this as another green light to exercise the control their masters order them to exert. Liars and thieves (read politicians) will always be among us. It’s the enforcers (read cops) of politicians will that are the real traitors.
Dear Author Dan Wos, If you are going to talk law, then you have to use the right terminology. First, our Constitution only gives powers and authorities to governments. Government can not give to others what it does not have. Thus governments can not give Rights to others. What the governments can give (and take back) is license. Rights, privileges, and immunities, in the language of constitutional law are all the same thing, are pre-political, and are given by God to people. Only individuals can have Rights, privileges, and immunities. Rights, privileges, or immunities are impunity from any law, statute,… Read more »