LEOSA. Reading it will give you better insight and education into the legislative intent of that law. If anything, read pagess 48 and 49. Those two pages go into the debate over the State's 10th Amendment rights, and it even mentions the seed for HR 822 being planted. This was nearly 12 years ago.....and this is where it has come today. Educating youself about the histories of these legislations keep you from panicking about trojan horses. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_reports&docid=f:hr560.108.pdf

policmen) and Amtrak Police. A lot of law enforcement officers who you would not think of as cops in the traditional sense are covered by this law such as lottery commission officers, baliffs and constables. If you want to call anything a trojan horse, that trojan horse was the LEOSA. But the legislation coming out of that LEOSA trojan horse was not gun control legislation. Instead, it's more expansion of gun possession rights. HR 822 is not a new idea. HR 822 was born out of the LEOSA!!!! Over the last 12 years, the LEOSA was strengthened and expanded, and today it is giving birth to HR 822. Yet some people are going crazy trying to claim that it HR 822 is the actual horse itself. Here is a link to the 2004 House Report on...

The 2010 amendment exempted state laws on ammo restrictions allowing off-duty cops (who, by the way, are ordinary citizens with no arrest authority when they are off duty and visiting other states). The bans on hollow points to not apply to them. The amendment also expanded the definition of a law enforcement officer for the purposes of that law. It didn't include just actively employed cops and retirees, but it now includes those who have separated in good standing after working only 10 years. You can work as a reserve jail guard for 10 years, then quit, and you will be immune from state conceal carry laws for life. The expanded defintion also included all law enforcement officers of the Federal Executive branch (such as DoD...

grants to cops that would be greater to ordinary citizens under HR 822. The LEOSA also overrides any state law that prohibits firearms on private property. So, for example, while an out of state citizen who is carrying under the code of that state's law may not take his firearm into a drinking establishment because that state prohibits it, the out of state off-duty cop CAN because he is immune from that state's law. In 2010, the LEOSA was amended. Trojan Horse allowing gun restricting amendments? Hell no!! Instead, it was the exact opposite. In the nearly 8 years that the LEOSA has been law, and it has defended off-duty cops in about 30 state and federal courts. Each time, the LEOSA prevailed and the law became stronger. The...

grants to cops that would be greater to ordinary citizens under HR 822. The LEOSA also overrides any state law that prohibits firearms on private property. So, for example, while an out of state citizen who is carrying under the code of that state's law may not take his firearm into a drinking establishment because that state prohibits it, the out of state off-duty cop CAN because he is immune from that state's law. In 2010, the LEOSA was amended. Trojan Horse allowing gun restricting amendments? Hell no!! Instead, it was the exact opposite. In the nearly 8 years that the LEOSA has been law, and it has defended off-duty cops in about 30 state and federal courts. Each time, the LEOSA prevailed and the law became stronger. The...

To all who are trying to bring this bill down with false claims of Trojan Horses and paranoia of it opening the door for gun restrictions. You need to back 8 years and take a look at the history of how this bill came about. A bill was signed into law back in 2004 called the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). It was codified as 18 USC 922B and C. If HR 22 becomes law, it will be codified in that same section (922) as section C. The LEOSA exempts off-duty law enforcement officers from state conceal carry laws. Because the LEOSA grants "exemption" instead of HR 822's "must abide by state laws," off duty cops may carry nation-wide including in IL and DC. But including the No-Issue states isn't the only thing the LEOSA...

They voted it down because that amendment would be contradicting the bill itself. The bill calls for allowing reciprocity in those states (which "state" includes DC) who have CWP's. Two states don NOT issue CWP's---Illinois and DC. You can't make the bill apply one way to everyone, but make a special exception for DC. IL and DC don't have CWP's, and this bill must respect that. I think we should be allowed to carry nation-wide without infringement, but I also know we cannot make special cases and classes when writing laws.