Jump to content
Nick T

H.R. 218 and States with smaller mag cap laws

Recommended Posts

And the local department and politicians. I have friends in departments that have embraced LEOSA, and others in departments that have changed their rules to make it virutally impossible for their officers to carry out-of-state based on LEOSA.

 

I meant specifically vis-a-vis a retiree or OOS officer getting charged with the HP's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry misread your intentions. I agree with you on mag restrictions. They are simply stupid in there intended purpose. If someone wants to do a mass shooting, they will bring enough to reload and continue to shoot, whether the mag can hold 5 or 50 rounds.

 

VT shooter reloaded 17 times. Most of the mags he had that day were 10 rounders. The only thing mag restrictions are effective at accomplishing is aggravating the law abiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends entirely on the County Prosecutor. I dont recall if its the current sitting Prosecutor in union County, but there has been at least one that has barred his Investigators from carrying under LEOSA their Duty Weapon, or ANY Firearm with which they have qualified with their department...essentially requiring them to have a second Off-duty, that they are technically Unqualified with (Even if they paid for a Qual on their own dime) to travel outside the state with. He ALSO attempted to push the same direction on the Chiefs, but was told to go pound sand....CP has a lot of oversight on the Local municipal departments but not THAT much, although I dont doubt he would try to do some kind of County-Level administrative nonsense just to see if it'd work. I have NO DOUBT that that guy wouldnt choose to charge a retired cop, or Out-of-State cop with the Hollowpoints if he were involved in a defensive shooting. it's a PITA, but it's just easier to carry EFMJ, Critical Defense, or Pow-R-Ball

 

In Ocean County, the Prosecutor prohibits Officers from carrying their "dept owned weapons" out of state. I'm guessing to shield agencies from liability if the gun is used out of state where the Officer doesn't have jurisdiction. This doesn't apply to Officer owned off duty weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last I looked the NJ AG recognizes LEOSA but says if you are a NJ resident retired LEO you still need to get a RPO permit from the state. In essence, the AG says Federal law applies to everyone except NJ residents. I don't expect a rewrite of the law regarding hollow points and retirees and I don't expect a retiree to be charged just for hollow points either.

 

 

Hahaha, this is NJ. I would bet a years pay that there are lots of prosecutors in this state that would charge you for this, especially if, god forbid, you were involved in a shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hahaha, this is NJ. I would bet a years pay that there are lots of prosecutors in this state that would charge you for this, especially if, god forbid, you were involved in a shooting.

 

There surely are prosecutors that would want to chargd you. However, prosecutors make their names on their conviction rate. One of the side effects in plea bargaining is the prosecutor gets a conviction even if it may be for a lesser offense. The last thing the liberal take guns away from all the common folk prosecutor wants is a case on possession of hollowpoints by a retired LEO thrown out on the basis it is contradicting Federal law. Such a prosecutor does not want a precedent set that is contrary to what they believe.

 

Mere involvement in a shooting is not a green light for a prosecutor to pursue criminal charges. If the shooting is obviously a good shoot a prosecutor would be stupid to pursue a prosecution. If there are some questions about the shooting a prosecutor might let their politics get involved in charging the person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As long as you are authorized by your department to carry it, and you are a sworn officer, you are not bound by the magazine capacity. NY's AWB which also covers mag capacity exempts LEO's as a blanket group, not only NYS LEO's...at least that's how it was explained to ME. Like I said, I've only carried a 1911 since the mid 1990's off-duty, and a Detective Special before that, so capacity wasn't a concern. of course the a**-chewing I received from some crusty old NYPD Desk Sgt when I tried to check my weapon in, Like we were initially TOLD to do as a rookie was pretty Epic.

Alright good to know. Thanks for the heads up. I asked my range master via email... Still waiting on a response. But what u said is what I was told in the academy. Good to know that I am not bound to magazine restrictions in other states. Thanks again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There surely are prosecutors that would want to chargd you. However, prosecutors make their names on their conviction rate. One of the side effects in plea bargaining is the prosecutor gets a conviction even if it may be for a lesser offense. The last thing the liberal take guns away from all the common folk prosecutor wants is a case on possession of hollowpoints by a retired LEO thrown out on the basis it is contradicting Federal law. Such a prosecutor does not want a precedent set that is contrary to what they believe.

 

Mere involvement in a shooting is not a green light for a prosecutor to pursue criminal charges. If the shooting is obviously a good shoot a prosecutor would be stupid to pursue a prosecution. If there are some questions about the shooting a prosecutor might let their politics get involved in charging the person.

 

While they might not get the conviction for the hollow points, the plea deal might include becoming a prohibited person, never again allowed to own firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to know that I am not bound to magazine restrictions in other states. Thanks again

 

What you were told is WRONG.

 

Unless you are on official business in NYS, you are bound by PL265 mag capacity restrictions, and are not exempt under PL265.20. Read the law.

 

1. Possession of any of the weapons, instruments, appliances or

substances specified in sections 265.01, 265.02, 265.03, 265.04, 265.05

and 270.05 by the following:................

11. Possession of a firearm or large capacity ammunition feeding

device by a police officer or sworn peace officer of another state while

conducting official business within the state of New York.

 

Lots of NYS LEOs are getting really pi55ed off about this upon retirement as they are supposed to dispose of their high capacity mags that they carried when they were OTJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

While they might not get the conviction for the hollow points, the plea deal might include becoming a prohibited person, never again allowed to own firearms.

 

I brought up plea bargaining not specifically in regards to an out of state or retired LEO being charged with hollowpoints only but to illustrate how show how it helps prosecutors keep up their conviction rates.

 

If you were an OOS or retired LEO charged only with possession of hollowpoints why would you take a plea to something that Federal law would get you out of? If one were charged with this it would most likely be better to ask for a hearing rather than a trial as you would want someone to follow the law (a judge) rather than let emotions get involved as you would with a jury. A worst case scenario would be the prosecutor would have to be stupid as well as the judges until it got to a Federal court where it would be overturned. Judges don't like to make decisions they know will be overturned in Federal courts.

 

Someone mentioned that the NJ AG hasn't issued any guidelines regarding carrying of hollowpoints under LEOSA since the change. The reason for this is simple. The Federal law trumps the state law and the NJ AG is not going to issue guidelines that are contrary to Federal law or admitting defeat.

 

There was also mention that all state laws have to be followed carrying under LEOSA. Well...yes and no. LEOSA starts out by saying "Notwithstanding any other provisions of the laws of any State...". Notwithstanding means in spite of. This really addresses the hollowpoint and magazine capacity issue. The need for amendments to LEOSA is due to states like NJ that like to write laws telling you not what's illegal but telling you what you can do.

 

The only exception LEOSA gives is recognizing the right of restricting firearms on private property or on State or local government property. There was a case in South Dakota in the past few years. Some OOS off duty LEOs were involved in a justifiable shooting in a bar but were charged with carrying in the bar, a violation of SD law. The judge ultimately ruled that as these LEOs were carrying under LEOSA they could not be charged with carrying in the bar because the state of SD had no right to restrict firearms there because the state didn't own it. This ruling only has impact in SD but could be used in an argument anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So wait, I feel dumb asking this, as I feel it's been said at least 30 times in this thread alone.... Is an ACTIVE LEO, from the state of NJ, allowed to carry HP ammo in NJ? And can someone link the lines they found this in IN HR218 for me? I've combed over this thing at least 20 times, and I can't find anything about prohibited or unprohibited ammo types....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait.... I think I answered my own question, and then asked another... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act (yes, I know, it's wiki, bear with me please)

 

In the 2010 amendment section, it says:

 In addition the definition of a firearm was expanded to include any ammunition not prohibited by the National Firearms Act of 1934. This was done to exempt qualified active and retired law enforcement officers from the prohibitions against carrying hollow-point ammunition that is in force in New Jersey (except for their peace officers and active federal law enforcement officers) and a few other locations.

 

With it citing http://beta.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-bill/1132/text

 

So.... If I was an active duty LEO in NJ, I could carry HPs? But if I was a active duty FEDERAL LEO in NJ, I can't...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So.... If I was an active duty LEO in NJ, I could carry HPs? But if I was a active duty FEDERAL LEO in NJ, I can't...?

 

NO!

 

Keep in mind with Wikipedia, you are getting somebody else's interpretation. That site is field with errors and BS on a variety of issues.  Us "older" folks tend to relate the title to encyclopedia, which we all know was a fact filled book back in the day. Wikipedia is NOTHING like that.

 

LEOAS is now federal law.  While it was working its way through Congress, it was given a name, which was HR 218.  That means it was proposed by the Hour of Representatives and was bill #218 that came up.  Once signed, it was incorporated into federal law.  All of federal law is under the United States Code or USC for short.

 

There are 51 Titles to the USC and each section has sub-sections. (See:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text )

 

LEOSA was codified under Title 18 (Crime & Criminal Procedure), and broken down into two sections:

a) 18 USC § 926B - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers  (See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926B )

--> Look at section E-2:  "...includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act"

    ....Since HP's are NOT banned by the National Firearms Act, they can be carried.

 

b) 18 USC § 926C - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers  (See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926C )

--> Look at section E-B:  "...includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act"

    ....Since HP's are NOT banned by the National Firearms Act, they can be carried.

 

 

The number of rounds in the magazine is a separate issue.  Every state is going to handle it their own way.  Lets talk about NY for example:   

1) On duty and employed/empowered in NY or fed:  no limit

2) On duty and employed/empowered by any state but NY:  no limit

3) Off duty and actively employed/empowered in NY or fed:  no limit

4) Off duty and actively employed/empowered in any state but NY:  subject to 10 round limit 

5) Retired and was employed as a LEO in NY or fed:  no limit

6) Retired and was employed as a LEO in non-NYS or fed: subject to 10 round limit.   

 

If you are not on G business and traveling to other states, active or retired, do carry and don't worry about your HP's, but do some homework first on how many rounds you can have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO!

 

Keep in mind with Wikipedia, you are getting somebody else's interpretation. That site is field with errors and BS on a variety of issues.  Us "older" folks tend to relate the title to encyclopedia, which we all know was a fact filled book back in the day. Wikipedia is NOTHING like that.

 

LEOAS is now federal law.  While it was working its way through Congress, it was given a name, which was HR 218.  That means it was proposed by the Hour of Representatives and was bill #218 that came up.  Once signed, it was incorporated into federal law.  All of federal law is under the United States Code or USC for short.

 

There are 51 Titles to the USC and each section has sub-sections. (See:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text )

 

LEOSA was codified under Title 18 (Crime & Criminal Procedure), and broken down into two sections:

a) 18 USC § 926B - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified law enforcement officers  (See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926B )

--> Look at section E-2:  "...includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act"

    ....Since HP's are NOT banned by the National Firearms Act, they can be carried.

 

b) 18 USC § 926C - Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers  (See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926C )

--> Look at section E-B:  "...includes ammunition not expressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act"

    ....Since HP's are NOT banned by the National Firearms Act, they can be carried.

 

 

The number of rounds in the magazine is a separate issue.  Every state is going to handle it their own way.  Lets talk about NY for example:   

1) On duty and employed/empowered in NY or fed:  no limit

2) On duty and employed/empowered by any state but NY:  no limit

3) Off duty and actively employed/empowered in NY or fed:  no limit

4) Off duty and actively employed/empowered in any state but NY:  subject to 10 round limit 

5) Retired and was employed as a LEO in NY or fed:  no limit

6) Retired and was employed as a LEO in non-NYS or fed: subject to 10 round limit.   

 

If you are not on G business and traveling to other states, active or retired, do carry and don't worry about your HP's, but do some homework first on how many rounds you can have.

 

Thanks for the clarification sir!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...