LA Gun

Page 1 of 7 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 66

Thread: HB495

  1. #1
    Former Yankee

    User Info Menu

    HB495

    Has anyone read the text of this bill. If I read it correctly it allows retired law enforcement to carry anywhere in the state with a permit issued by the sheriff. No restrictions. Even LEOSA has restrictions. Am I missing something? Just because you are "retired" law enforcement what gives these individuals the right for unrestricted carry. They have NO law enforcement authority what so ever. They have NO duty to respond and carry no immunity. Being treated as an equal to law enforcement is a problem. Even LEOSA is a bad precident. All CCW are treated like second class citizens . We have to fight tooth and nail to be able to carry to protect ourselves, while "retired" law enforcment just sit back and enjoy the ability to protect themselves anywhere.

  2. #2
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by met7881 View Post
    Has anyone read the text of this bill. If I read it correctly it allows retired law enforcement to carry anywhere in the state with a permit issued by the sheriff. No restrictions. Even LEOSA has restrictions. Am I missing something? Just because you are "retired" law enforcement what gives these individuals the right for unrestricted carry. They have NO law enforcement authority what so ever. They have NO duty to respond and carry no immunity. Being treated as an equal to law enforcement is a problem. Even LEOSA is a bad precident. All CCW are treated like second class citizens . We have to fight tooth and nail to be able to carry to protect ourselves, while "retired" law enforcment just sit back and enjoy the ability to protect themselves anywhere.
    Maybe there will be a "retired" law enforcement officer in those spots to help keep you safe.

  3. #3
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by met7881 View Post
    Has anyone read the text of this bill. If I read it correctly it allows retired law enforcement to carry anywhere in the state with a permit issued by the sheriff. No restrictions. Even LEOSA has restrictions. Am I missing something? Just because you are "retired" law enforcement what gives these individuals the right for unrestricted carry. They have NO law enforcement authority what so ever. They have NO duty to respond and carry no immunity. Being treated as an equal to law enforcement is a problem. Even LEOSA is a bad precident. All CCW are treated like second class citizens . We have to fight tooth and nail to be able to carry to protect ourselves, while "retired" law enforcment just sit back and enjoy the ability to protect themselves anywhere.
    How many people have walked up to you in public when you were with your family and told you they had a problem with you arresting them several years ago? Iím going to guess none. That is one instance why a retired LEO can carry places a civilian with a permit cannot.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Censored by "them"

  4. #4
    Former Yankee

    User Info Menu

    Too bad. Its comes with the territory. Giving retired law enforcement more carry rights is wrong. Maybee we give people who are stalked or victims of domestic violence expanded carry rights also.

  5. #5
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by met7881 View Post
    Too bad. Its comes with the territory. Giving retired law enforcement more carry rights is wrong. Maybee we give people who are stalked or victims of domestic violence expanded carry rights also.
    Carry rights for domestic violence victims and carry rights for retired LEO and mutually exclusive. Having a "too bad, it comes with the territory" attitude shows your dislike for the police. And that's fine. But presenting an emotional argument while standing there stomping your feet like a 12 year old and yelling "it's not fair" won't help prove your point. But I think you'd have trouble selling your point anyway. Rather than getting everyone up to the same level, you'd rather keep everyone down at the same level. Nobody can move up unless everyone does because that's the fair way. But like I explain to my 12 year old, someone else getting something doesn't mean she has to have the same thing. If their getting something isn't taking something away from her, it's not unfair. She should be happy they got what they got instead of whining they shouldn't have gotten it just because she didn't get it too.

  6. #6
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MOTOR51 View Post
    How many people have walked up to you in public when you were with your family and told you they had a problem with you arresting them several years ago? I’m going to guess none. That is one instance why a retired LEO can carry places a civilian with a permit cannot.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    I used to work for a medical insurance company. I've been accosted in public by a former beneficiary because "I didn't pay his medical bills". (He didn't follow the rules of the HMO and it cost him over $10,000 in non-covered charges). While retired and former LEO's can have this problem, so can the rest of us. So why should a former LEO have more rights than the rest of us?

    BTW, in my case,he backed off when he discovered what was poking him in the belly. A S&W snub nose .38. He got REAL polite.
    Doug

    If you do what your enemy expects, you will die.

    Keytruda came, saw, and kicked my cancers ass!

  7. #7
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dougstump View Post
    I used to work for a medical insurance company. I've been accosted in public by a former beneficiary because "I didn't pay his medical bills". (He didn't follow the rules of the HMO and it cost him over $10,000 in non-covered charges). While retired and former LEO's can have this problem, so can the rest of us. So why should a former LEO have more rights than the rest of us?

    BTW, in my case,he backed off when he discovered what was poking him in the belly. A S&W snub nose .38. He got REAL polite.
    So fight to give everyone that right. But until they do, should nobody have it? Should it be an "all or nothing" situation? Should you fight to make sure nobody gets it because not everyone gets it?

  8. #8
    1000 Yard Club

    User Info Menu

    That is where conservatives/republicans typically lose the wars......instead of taking bite by bite they tend to want all or nothing. Liberals have it figured out, you take a bit here then a bit there and before you know it they have taken our freedoms. Just like taxes....if we got a bill for all of the taxes that we actually pay every year there would be a revolution, but they take a bit here, a fee there, etc.
    Can we really still call it "Common Sense"?

    "Life is tough, but its tougher if you're stupid"
    -John Wayne

  9. #9
    Shoot First

    User Info Menu

    The first step to making a logical argument through discussion is NOT stating your disdain for the police.

  10. #10
    Moving forward

    User Info Menu

    For those that want to take the time to actually read the proposed changes to the already existing law that the OP is upset about...

    http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDo...aspx?d=1085654

    Take note of the Present law vs Proposed law statements.

    It looks like the biggest take away is that the CLEO shall issue an ID card to retired Leo and makes sure the insane or fired ones don’t get one. Over simplified version...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •