Active Law Enforcement: Carrying Weapons Across State Lines

The ability of active law enforcement officers to carry firearms in the United States is governed by the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), a federal law enacted in 2004. LEOSA allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms in all 50 states and US territories, regardless of state or local laws. However, there are certain requirements that must be met for officers to qualify for concealed carry under LEOSA, and it does not grant unlimited authority to carry firearms. The legality of off-duty officers carrying concealed firearms varies from state to state, and there are some restrictions on where they can carry them. This topic has been widely debated and has resulted in several court cases and amendments to the original legislation.

Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA)

The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) is a federal law enacted in 2004. It allows qualified active, retired, or separated law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms in any jurisdiction in the US or its territories, regardless of state or local laws. This means that off-duty police officers who meet the requirements set by LEOSA can legally carry concealed firearms in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and all other US possessions (except the Canal Zone).

LEOSA was enacted to establish "national measures of uniformity and consistency" and to allow officers to carry concealed firearms "anywhere within the United States." The Act provides qualified individuals with the privilege to carry a concealed firearm without requiring a state-issued permit. However, it is important to note that LEOSA does not grant unlimited authority to carry firearms, and certain requirements must be met to qualify for concealed carry under the Act. For instance, individuals carrying under LEOSA are still subject to restrictions on carrying firearms in certain locations, such as Federal Parks and Gun-Free School Zones (GFSZ), and they cannot be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

The definition of a "qualified law enforcement officer" under LEOSA includes current governmental agency law enforcement officers who are authorized to carry a firearm, meet agency standards for regular firearm qualification, and are not under disciplinary action or the influence of intoxicating substances. It also includes retired law enforcement officers who left public agency service in good standing, were regularly employed as law enforcement officers for at least 15 years, have a non-forfeitable right to agency retirement benefits, and have met state standards for training and qualification to carry firearms within the previous 12 months.

LEOSA has been amended several times since its inception, including in 2010 and 2013, to expand coverage and address issues with the original Act. For example, the 2010 amendments specifically included law enforcement officers of the Amtrak Police, Federal Reserve Police, and the executive branch of the Federal Government. The 2013 National Defense Authorization Act aimed to allow more officers to qualify for LEOSA, and the 2014 amendments addressed issues with the original Act. Despite these amendments, LEOSA continues to be a source of excitement and frustration, with some states, like New Jersey, challenging its applicability within their jurisdiction.

On-duty vs off-duty

On-duty law enforcement officers are generally allowed to carry firearms in the US. However, the regulations surrounding off-duty officers carrying concealed firearms are more complex and vary from state to state.

The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), enacted in 2004, allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms nationwide, regardless of state or local laws. This Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush, who agreed with the theory behind LEOSA that law enforcement officers retain their identity, training, experience, and dedication to the safety and welfare of the community, whether they are on or off duty.

LEOSA has provided off-duty officers with greater consistency and certainty regarding their ability to carry concealed firearms. Before LEOSA, an officer who was legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm in one state may not have been able to do so in another. However, it's important to note that LEOSA does not grant unlimited authority to carry firearms. Officers must meet certain requirements, such as completing an annual firearms qualification course and being authorised by their agency to carry a firearm. Additionally, LEOSA does not exempt officers from other laws, such as restrictions on carrying firearms in certain locations or while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

There are several areas considered off-limits to those carrying under LEOSA, such as restrictions imposed by private persons or entities on their property, and those imposed on state or local government property, installations, buildings, and parks. Federal buildings and facilities are also off-limits, and individuals carrying under LEOSA do not qualify for the same exemptions that some state permit holders benefit from in terms of carrying concealed firearms in Federal Parks and Gun-Free School Zones (GFSZ). While there have been no known prosecutions of individuals violating these laws while carrying under LEOSA, it is recommended to obtain a state-issued concealed carry permit in addition to LEOSA credentials to avoid any legal issues.

State and local laws

However, it is important to note that LEOSA does not grant unlimited authority to carry firearms. To qualify for concealed carry under LEOSA, officers must meet certain requirements, such as completing an annual firearms qualification course and being authorized by their agency. Additionally, LEOSA does not exempt officers from other laws and restrictions, such as carrying firearms in certain locations like federal buildings, federal parks, and gun-free school zones, or while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

While LEOSA has been amended over the years, including the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act Improvements Act of 2010, which expanded coverage to include certain federal law enforcement agencies, the act continues to be a subject of debate. Some states have interpreted LEOSA differently, with some refusing to grant the privilege to qualified individuals or not issuing LEOSA identifications. The act has also been alleged to be used by unqualified civilians to bypass local laws by obtaining law enforcement credentials through financial or political ties.

It is worth noting that LEOSA does not replace the need for proper training and certification. Officers carrying firearms under LEOSA are expected to meet the standards for qualification in firearms training as determined by their former agency or the state in which they reside. This includes meeting mental health qualifications, as assessed by a qualified medical professional, and possessing valid photographic identification issued by their agency. While there have been no known prosecutions for violations of LEOSA, it is crucial for individuals to be aware of the specific requirements and restrictions of the act to avoid unknowingly violating the law.

Requirements and restrictions

The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), enacted in 2004, allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms in all 50 states and US territories. However, there are certain requirements and restrictions that must be adhered to under this federal law.

Firstly, it is important to note that LEOSA does not grant unlimited authority to carry firearms. Officers must meet specific requirements to qualify for concealed carry under the act. These requirements include completing an annual firearms qualification course and being authorised by their agency to carry a firearm. Additionally, officers must be employed by or retired from a local, state, or federal law enforcement agency. Retired officers must have served in good standing for at least 10 years and have a non-forfeitable right to retirement benefits. They must also meet the state standard for firearms qualification at their personal expense.

Another key restriction of LEOSA is that it does not exempt officers from other laws and restrictions on carrying firearms in certain locations, such as Federal buildings, Federal parks, and Gun-Free School Zones (GFSZ). It is important to be aware of these off-limit areas, as ignorance is not a defence against violating firearm laws. Furthermore, LEOSA does not override restrictions imposed by private persons or entities on their property.

While LEOSA provides a level of consistency for off-duty officers carrying concealed firearms across state lines, there are still variations in how it is interpreted and implemented by different states and local law enforcement agencies. Some states allow LEOs to carry concealed firearms without identification, while others refuse to grant this privilege or issue the necessary credentials. It is recommended that officers obtain a state-issued concealed carry permit in addition to their LEOSA credentials to ensure compliance with varying state laws.

Finally, it is worth noting that LEOSA has been criticised for allegedly being used by unqualified civilians to bypass local gun laws. This is achieved by becoming an auxiliary or reserve officer through financial or political ties to local jurisdictions. However, no officer has refused to apply to LEOSA on moral grounds, and there have been no known prosecutions of individuals violating these laws while carrying under LEOSA.

Legal cases

The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) is a federal law in the United States that was enacted in 2004. It allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms in any jurisdiction in the country, regardless of state or local laws, with some exceptions.

People v. Peterson (2008)

In this case, the defendant was indicted for the unlawful use of a weapon, specifically a modified rifle with a barrel less than 16 inches in length. The court dismissed the case, citing the LEOSA and stating that the state failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the firearm was illegal under state law.

South Dakota v. Smith (2008)

In this case, several off-duty law enforcement officers and a firefighter were charged with weapons violations for carrying concealed firearms in a bar in South Dakota. The LEOSA was used as a defence, and the court dropped all weapons charges against the law enforcement officers, except for the firefighter.

Ronald Duberry Case (2016)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington D.C. Circuit ruled that Washington D.C.'s Department of Corrections could not prevent retired corrections officers from carrying concealed firearms, as guaranteed by the LEOSA.

Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association v. New Jersey (2022)

A coalition of retired federal law enforcement officers and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association sued the state of New Jersey for not honouring their carry rights under the LEOSA. The federal court agreed and struck down two provisions of state law, stating that they violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

It is important to note that while the LEOSA provides broad privileges to carry concealed firearms, there are still some restrictions and off-limit areas, such as federal buildings, private properties with restrictions, and certain exemptions for federal parklands and Gun-Free School Zones (GFSZs).

Frequently asked questions