exfed2002

In addition to an FID, the following can also be used to purchase handgun ammunition under 2C:58-3.3: 1)Valid copy of a PPP 2)Valid permit to carry 3)A law enforcement ID for sale to an LE official for LE purposes inder 3.3(e) Ranges operated by licensed dealers can also sell de minimus amounts of ammuniton for immediate use at that range under 3.3(g)

It's also great to have your qualifications on record where someone can verify them with a phone call or a message thru NCIC. The only other thing I'd like to see on the card is a statement that the bearer has met the qualification requirements of the AG for active officers. After all, the 3/09 modification to the law specifically cites LEOSA in the eligibility section. FWIW, I make a credit card sized copy of my latest quaification form to carry with my RPO and retired ID. AFA "see no evil" Harvey's memo comment on retirees in NJ, I don't think that has ever been tested and probably won't be.

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. 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.

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.

But the exemption only applies to : (b) Police officers as defined in subdivision thirty-four of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law. © Peace officers as defined by section 2.10 of the criminal procedure law. (d) Persons in the military or other service of the United States, in pursuit of official duty or when duly authorized by federal law, regulation or order to possess the same...... 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.

My impression is that he is defined as a member of an exempt class in NYS since he states he has jurisdiction in NYC. The exemption only applies to active NYS LEO personnel, and active LEO personnel from other states when on official business in NYS. There have been some attempts made to have retirees turn in their "large capacity" mags that they took into retirement. Since the largest mags I have are twelve rounders, I just got a bunch of 10 round mags so I don't have to worry about switching them when using LEOSA in my last OTJ carry weapon. All of my others are either revolvers or semi auttos where the native magazines are ten or under. Even under the old AWB, retirees who took issued large capacity mags into retirement were exempt. Then the states passed copycat laws to show they were tough on crime without much thought as to how they would work. But then most politicians wouldn't know the street if they fell face down in it.

You need to read the state law. NY only exempts you if you are in the state on offcial business. If you are retired or off duty you have to comply with the ten round limit. Other states may vary, but require compliance since LEOSA doesn't (at least, yet) cover magazines. The house version of S.1132 covered school zones, but that never made it into the final bill for passage.

The modification to LEOSA removed ammuniton restrictions, however it did not remove magazine size restrictions.

In the US, the serialized frame/receiver is the firearm. In other countries, it could be different.

Not so unusual, and not so new. I can remember having to either send copies or return a signed statement when I used to buy ammo by mail order in the late 80's.

It's about time. NCIC2000 was supposed to go in for years, and everytime it got close there was a CF that delayed it. So for years we stayed on that hard wired system. My boss was the primary reason I retired, but the thought of how my management would screw up the switch to an IP based system (and blame it on me) was also not a small consideration.

It wasn't when I was the TAC for my agency. OTOH, NYS pistol licenses are on NYSPIN in NYS. I remember trying to do a search for one of our guy's PTP back in the mid-90's. ISTR it was piled away in a Quonset hut at Division HQ. Never did find it.

Per law, it covers all lawfully owned handguns.

They get presented to the judge, adjudicated, and then filed in the County Clerk's office.

Tons of them are applied for and rejected every year. If everybody does this, they can tie up their understaffed local PD with work doing the necessary investigations so that they can complain about why it takes so long to get an FID or PTP..........................................

He may not have any choice. He cannot just issue permits in conflict with outstanding procedures and regulations promulgated by FIU. In any case, a permit issued in violation of plicy and regulations would end up having no force anyway if push came to shove. There would even be a bigger problem if a Chief issued a permit in violation of outstanding policy and regulation and the recipent turned out to be ineligible or used the weapon to commit a crime. Great way to make friends. In any case, a Mayor or "Police Commissioner" on the council has NO say over the running of the police department. This was made clear many years ago when these people thought they could issue orders to chiefs on the way they wanted departments run, permits issued, etc. A constant problem since they want DMV checks and other things to which they are not entitled. What they do do, is force decent chiefs out in disgust.

Most local PDs are understaffed, underbudgeted and have a heavy workload. The same with FIU and the RPO unit. It would be a lot easier if you could just run an NCIC III inquiry with an "F" flag, but that is not alllowed.

Then it was done wrong.

ATF did. In the old days, manufacturers kept stocks of unserialized receivers. If a receiver had to be replaced, it was possible to destroy the old receiver, then place that serial number on a virgin receiver. In that case, it would be considered the same firearm. That is no longer the case, and it would be considered a new transaction, as is leaving a wepaon on consignment. It also may explain some unserailized 1911's of WWII vintage that were suspected of being made of parts taken from the factories by workers a part at a time. These shiopments require an adult signature and cannot be left on a doorstep.

Everything depends on the totality of the circumstances and each case is different. Your goal as a private citizen is to terminate an action that cannot be allowed to continue, and the choice to make a citizen's arrest is yours alone. In terms of safety, you are always better off letting the bad guy get away (removing the threat), as time is NOT in your favor while you are in close proximity to him/her while awaiting an LE response. Also, many bad guys and gals are NOT afraid of guns and know enough about the use of DPF that they are as likely to laugh at you as be afraid of the weapon. Or they may try (and likely succeed) in taking it away from you before you can do anything. Remember, unless you are LE this is likely a new situation to you, whereas the bad guy or gal lives it all the time and may already have plans for such a situation. Another thing to consider is whether you really want to have a weapon in your hand when LE responds because until things are straightened out, you are considered a threat, unless you are personally known to the responding officers (and this appies to civilians as well as off duty or plainclothes LE). I have attached relevant pages from the NJ guide for the use of force. Extract Pages From deadforc.pdf

No law, but lots of places started to get antsy about handing weapons over and started having their personnel armed after the murder of the kid who worked at the Garfield Target Range in the mid-70's.

This is the way it has to be. You cannot expect a local CLEO to issue if the requred documents are not in. And I doubt you will ever see anything in operations instructions to the effect that checks not received within X days are to be presumed to have no negative information. Just about every place is short of personnel and funding, and it affects everybody. Most likely you will see the 30 day rule apply AFTER everything has been received by the issuing authority to prevent things from being sat on or to prevent local councilpeople from attempting to mandate that NO permits be issued (as happened in the 60's).

The LEOSA mod of 2010 pre-empted the ammunition restrictions so he's good to go.

Please do not tell me about what we did, I was there. I am also familiar with federal pre-emption and agency firearms policies. SIG no longer does it in many states, which iclude NY and NJ. Going back to the 70's, our guys in the DCFO could not get any of the deals. Last I did it with Glock was 1988, and before that with Davidons in 1981. The fact is that the weapon eventually will end up in your personal possession, so as FIU noted, you can do the permit now or when you retire. AFA the agency, they did all the letters and received the wepaons, then put them on your property card. You paid for the weapon and it belonged to you. While it was subject to the same controls as government owned weapons, it was classed as a personally owned weapon. So yes, state law does have an impact, unless yuou are going to turn the weapon to government title. A lot of this was before the net, when you could buy from a local store or basically not at all. In those days, most stores would give you an LE discount if you asked. The advantage back then was that you could get better prices from the mail order police supply houses than even the local LE discounts, and you didn't have to do a 4473 if you went the letter route. As a friend of mine, who was the head of FIU told me, the question of whether a PP was needed was up in the air, so it was just easier to do it then than later. But it eventually would need to be done.

Used to be. Not any more. Last I did a direct purchase thru the agency was in 1997. I used to have the manufacturer/dealer fill out the permits or I would do it myself and return them to Division HQ. At that point FIU basically told me to do the permit now or when I retired. Former head of FIU told me they weren't really clear on it, but by now they require the permit since the weapon wil be a personal weapon for use OTJ. AFA as LEO exemptions to the PP process, I seem to recall there was a court case in the late 60's/early 70's where the ruling was that LE were not exempt the PP process for personally owned weapons.