Posted on 08/01/2002 3:31:34 AM PDT by Pern
Gun rights organizations say legislation under consideration in the Senate that would allow active and retired police officers to carry a gun out of their jurisdictions – even across state lines – discriminates against ordinary Americans, many of whom are forbidden from carrying a gun even locally.
The bill under consideration is called the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (S-2480) and was authored by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
According to a statement from his office, the bill would "permit current and retired federal, state and local law enforcement officers to carry their firearms to be prepared to assist in dangerous situations."
"Off-duty and retired officers should be permitted to carry their firearms across state and other jurisdictional lines, at no cost to taxpayers, in order better to serve and protect our communities," Leahy said at a hearing on the measure July 23.
"Our bill would permit qualified law enforcement officers and qualified retired law enforcement officers across the nation to carry concealed firearms in most situations," he said. "It also preserves, however, any state law that permits restricting a concealed firearm on private property and preserves any state law that restricts the possession of a firearm on state or local government property."
The Connecticut Democrat explained that under the provisions contained in his bill, for a cop to qualify, he or she "must be authorized to use a firearm by the law enforcement agency" where they work, "be in good standing with that agency, and meet any standards established by that agency to regularly qualify to use a firearm."
Retired officers, meanwhile, "must have retired in good standing, been employed at least five years as a law enforcement officer unless forced to retire due to a service-related injury, have a non-forfeitable right to benefits under the law enforcement agency's retirement plan, and annually complete a state-approved firearms training course," he said.
Gun rights groups say laws that allow only federal agents and police officers the right to carry a weapon virtually anywhere in the U.S. while denying that same right to most Americans create a special "protected class" of citizen and is essentially unconstitutional.
"We would like to support [Leahy's] bill as soon as it's amended so that everybody else would have the same legal ability to carry," Larry Pratt, head of Gun Owners of America, or GOA, said.
Leahy's bill "offers further entitlements to police officers" over the rights of citizens, Pratt said. And while GOA supports the work of police, he said the bill "gives officers a special perk that, constitutionally, belongs to everybody."
Angel Shamaya, founder of Keep and Bear Arms, a gun rights news and information website, said he was able to assemble "the largest coalition of opposition" to an earlier House version of a similar bill "by gun rights groups ever."
Calling such bills "evil and destructive," Shamaya said that after compiling his organization's "cops only concealed carry" documentation, he concluded that he would rather police "support decriminalization for the average person to carry" concealed weapons.
He said if cops can't support citizen concealed carry, "it's unrealistic" for police to expect the citizenry to support concealed carry for officers outside their own jurisdiction.
Gun rights groups also say the support of Leahy's bill offered by some lawmakers and national police groups is hypocritical because often they support stricter gun control measures for much of the public.
For example, Pratt said, the national "Fraternal Order of Police, which supports [Leahy's legislation], does not want you and me to be able to carry" a concealed weapon.
When asked if the bill would make police a "special protected class," David Carle, a spokesman for Leahy, refused to answer directly. "Police officers already use armaments for their work," he said, then referred WND to the hearing statements of his boss.
Carle also did not address a question regarding concerns by some national police organizations that officers who may have to use their weapons outside of their jurisdictions could face liability problems.
Naomi Seligman, a spokeswoman for the Violence Policy Center, a noted gun control group, refused to even discuss Leahy's bill with WorldNetDaily.
"I don't want to talk with you," she said.
But William Johnson, a former Miami prosecutor who is currently the executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, says his group not only supports the Leahy bill, but would back similar legislation for regular citizens.
"If a citizen is already licensed, has passed the appropriate background check to make sure they're not a felon, and has been trained, we wouldn't object," Johnson said.
They're a bunch of clowns anyway.
When asked if the bill would make police a "special protected class," David Carle, a spokesman for Leahy, refused to answer directly.
IMO LEO's are already part of a 'protected class'. How many times do we read about a LEO thug that has killed or maimed an innocent citizen while performing his/her 'duties'. And do they get prosecuted?
And the difference between qualified CCW permit holders and these officers is ....what?
Not a damn thing. These officers and retirees have no more arrest powers crossing state lines as you and I do. They are still subject to local jurisdictions, so this bill would only segregate those individuals from ALL law-abiding qualified concealed carry permit holders.
The FOP should change to FLOP.......the Fraternal Lame Order of Police.
If you don't support H.R. 218, you hate cops.
I hate dirty cops and cowardly cops that hide behind a badge.
They called here a few days ago, looking for a donation. I think I freaked the guy out when I started explaining to him why I shouldn't give. He hung up on me, the Socialist pig!!
There can be no 'favorites' or 'protected class'. Once it starts, it won't stop. Just look at the recent history of all these new gun laws.
Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
Indeed. That's not what it leads to at all.
-archy-/-
Deal?
Shooter, I usually agree with you, but not this time. Why should a retired cop have any more right to carry a gun than you or I? A retired cop is a civilian, just like us. The entire idea of a small class of people with rights that are elevated above the masses is contrary to the ideal of equality under the law. I am for the idea of cops and retired cops being able to carry nationwide - but ONLY in the context of nationwide reciprocity for CCW holders, just like there is nationwide reciprocity for drivers licenses.
Also, Harpseal is correct that once this bill passes, the issue is dead - no bill to have nationwide reciprocity will ever get out of committee, let alone passes into law. CCW holders and those who want to be but can't due to their state's laws should uniformly oppose this or any similar legislation. Nationwide CCW reciprocity is the only way to go.
And BTW, Sarah Brady probably approves of the proposed legislation - she's only against the ordinary people having guns, not various agents of the government.
Hey, great. I'm batting 100% with you.
Sorry if I had to make you write the post because we are in agreement with each other. My sarcasm was directed in two places.
One, it was the point that this may be the first article that I have ever read that didn't mention the NRA, the only organization that the Anti's fear.
The second sarcastic reply was to the head of Keep and Bear Arms, an anti-NRA individual if I ever saw one. He has a website where he complains about the NRA and reports the old thirty year old mistakes. I couldn't resist the cut against him in supporting a Bill that denies someone the RKBA.
I am in complete disagreement with this Bill. Every time I saw a group of those cop politicians supporting the 'toon, I could just choke. Now those same $%&@#(*&) want their rights?? If they want to carry outside their juristictions let the hypocrites fight for a National CCW.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.