"Under the “Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act” (HR-218) qualified active and retired law enforcement officers are permitted to carry concealed handguns nationwide. The law amends the Gun Control Act (18 U.S.C. Chapter 44) to exempt qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from state and local laws prohibiting the carry of concealed firearms."
Plain and simple, why doesn’t this apply to military veterans? I’m a veteran of the US Army, and a military police officer for that matter. However, I live in Illinois, one of then most unfriendly states to law-abiding gun owners in the entire union.
I’m just not sure why someone would believe that a former military officer, trained in some of the most advanced tactics in the world, wouldn’t make a great civilian ally to any LEO who happens to find themselves in trouble. I’m not saying it happens very often, but wouldn’t you feel a bit safer knowing that a veteran with a gun was sitting next to you on the CTA? Especially in Chicago, which has a ban on handguns all together.
Obama keeps talking about a civilian defense force, let’s start with qualified veterans being given Federal Concealed Carry Licenses, just like retired LEOs.
Related posts:
- What's the age to get a license to carry a concealed firearm?
- Gun-free zones fail; concealed carry laws work?
- License to carry a concealed firearm in PA and WV?
- Are there different classes you can take that allow a civilian to own and/or carry certain firearms?
- If you don't have a concealed pistol license..?
- How are armored car guards allowed to carry a firearm in IL?
- 2nd Amendment and the delineation of fully automatic weapons?
- Will someone tell me where I'm mistaken?
- Will someone tell me where I'm mistaken?
- Firearm licensing question?
Only a small percentage of the entire military carry weapons on a regular basis.
In addition, there are plenty of people in the military that have criminal histories and would not meet the requirements for a concealed carry permit in their home state.
I realize the majority of the military is well qualified and trustworthy, but having a blanket law such as HR 218 would allow thousands of persons with criminal backgrounds to carry weapons.
One final requirement for HR 218 is having the power of arrest. Military members do not have that authority, outside of the MPs.
people just fail to see that gun laws don’t work
Interesting, I agree, this is very ironic…
Awesome idea, I would support this 100%.
Thanks for your service!
You’re right and I agree with you. But I don’t think MPs have ever fallen under LEO for some odd reason. It may have something to do with Posse Comitatus, or just the fact that MP’s main function isn’t always LE.
you can blame the home land security under Obama. they save that veterans are possible terrorist alond with christians.
combat wounded
Did you not read Napolitano, memo she sent by accident to the DHS?
She basically told them if you are a
veteran
republican
federal LEO
you are a potential person to loose it and be a homegrown terrorist.
I can’t speak for Illinois, but in Michigan, Veterans are allowed to concealed carry except for the obvious reasons – a felony conviction or diagnosed with a relevant type of mental illness.
About the only concern I’d have as a citizen regarding vets being armed are that many vets return with undiagnosed conditions like PTSD that might impair their judgement. Assuming the military, the health system and the VA are all doing their jobs, these types of situations should be easy enough to spot and address, though.
Thanks for your service to our country!
That’s not what the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act says. your description is so vague.
in order to even be CONSIDERED to carry a weapon under the LEOSA first off, you have to be an employee of a governmental agency. only a small % of veterans are.
Also, just because you’ree a veteran, do you have statutory powers of arrest? i doubt it, which means you cant carry a gun under LEOSA anyways.
I’m a veteran. served 3 tours in iraq. was in the initial invasion OIF with an infantry unit.
i don’t want to carry a gun. what would be the point? who would make the laws deciding if someone is viable to even carry the gun?
PTSD? think of that one? who’s going to decide on what grounds makes one veteran able to carry a gun but another veteran cant?
it would cause so much more needless tension, discrimination would go through the roof.
he does not like guns in the hands of the public ex vet also
i’ve known veterans who freak out when they hear a helicopter. do we need them getting all shooty? maybe we should go around giving all the homeless drunk drugged out veterans guns – it’ll make them more effective beggars.
MPs aren’t considered law enforcement in the eyes of the Federal Government; if you don’t believe me apply for a Federal LEO position. Also, the reasoning to allow retired LEOs to carry is for their protection from people they have dealt with in the past, not just because they were trained.
According to our constitution everyone is allowed to carry a gun. There have been countless attempts to limit this RIGHT; however every single one of them only affects law abiding citizens. Criminals don’t give a rats A$$ what the law says and will do whatever they feel like.
Gun Laws only pertain to those who abide by them.
I think it’s ridiculous that as soldiers we fight to uphold the constitution but we can’t bear arms. We carry weapons on a daily basis every hour on the hour over seas but we can’t have weapons at home. If your are an nco or an officer you should have a different procedure to obtain a gun permit. I got denied here in NJ because of issues that I had with my sons mother years ago. I never had a conviction or a restarining order finalized. In fact the second time I had a problem with her she punched me in my face and I called the cops but since here in NJ atleast in Clifton dops don’t need anything but a GED to get on the job they took me in. Now I have to walk around with this on my record even tho I am a proud veteran of OIF. Married with 3 children and a business owner. I not only got denied but the prosecutor at the hearing said ” how do we know you are not the next unibomber”. After I took an oath to protect this country form foreign and domestic terrorists. It’s a slap on my face to have him say that. I were this uniform with pride to protect the rights of him and the ignorant judge and the police officer that denied me my right as a US citizen and a soldier. So be it. God knows what is in my heart and my faith will have to carry me through this because it feels pretty bad to be labeled unsafe by people that have no experience to a combat zone or having your squad depend on you for guidance.
Actually, MPs wouldn’t have the authority to arrest someone of a military installation within the U.S. either, Only C.I.D. in the Army has jurisdiction on or off a post. @Justin