ACT 507 ( formerly HB 495)

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • met7881

    Former Yankee
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 26, 2013
    132
    18
    mandeville,La.
    This bill that passed requires retired LEO's who carry under LEOSA to get another ID from the local sherrif as I read this. So in essence they need 2 id's. Retired creds and sherrif issue. The question is what happens if the LEOSA carrying person does not do this. This law specify's no penalty. Or is it the good ol boy system with retired LEO's. As you can see i am no fan of LEOSA. It creates a privledge class of individuals with absolutly no authority yet can conceal carry in all 50 states with impunity.


    New law requires the sheriff or chief law enforcement officer to issue identification required
    by existing law to each individual who meets the requirements set forth in existing and new
    law for a "qualified retired law enforcement officer".
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,710
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    This bill that passed requires retired LEO's who carry under LEOSA to get another ID from the local sherrif as I read this. So in essence they need 2 id's. Retired creds and sherrif issue. The question is what happens if the LEOSA carrying person does not do this. This law specify's no penalty. Or is it the good ol boy system with retired LEO's. As you can see i am no fan of LEOSA. It creates a privledge class of individuals with absolutly no authority yet can conceal carry in all 50 states with impunity.


    New law requires the sheriff or chief law enforcement officer to issue identification required
    by existing law to each individual who meets the requirements set forth in existing and new
    law for a "qualified retired law enforcement officer".

    So you're against people being allowed to carry concealed in all 50 states?
     

    met7881

    Former Yankee
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 26, 2013
    132
    18
    mandeville,La.
    Of course not. But I am unable to carry in all 50 states unless congress passes the legislation pending in the senate. Treat all equally. retired LEO's have NO authority what so ever. This was feel good legislation to apease the public that all these reitred LEO's will protect up. Bull
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,710
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Of course not. But I am unable to carry in all 50 states unless congress passes the legislation pending in the senate. Treat all equally. retired LEO's have NO authority what so ever. This was feel good legislation to apease the public that all these reitred LEO's will protect up. Bull

    Oh. So is retired LEO being able to carry in all 50 states taking away anything from you? In other words, did you have to lose anything in order for them to have that legislation?
     

    STPHomie

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 25, 2015
    154
    18
    Madisonville
    Oh. So is retired LEO being able to carry in all 50 states taking away anything from you? In other words, did you have to lose anything in order for them to have that legislation?

    Special rules for special people pisses off people who don't get the special treatment. People want equal treatment for all.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,710
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Special rules for special people pisses off people who don't get the special treatment. People want equal treatment for all.

    That didn't answer my questions. But I'm pretty sure the answer to those questions are known. The law allowing it for some takes nothing away from the others. People who are not LEO or former LEO are in the exact same position they were in before the law was passed. Nothing has changed for them. But rather than being happy for the people who did benefit from the new law and pushing for more people to be included, people mad and want everyone excluded until they are also included. I find it curious the OP reasoned "retired LEO's have NO authority what so ever" as the reason for his opposition. The OP seems to be ok with current LEO's benefiting from the law. But as a Louisiana LEO, what authority do I have in Texas that a retired LEO doesn't have? My arrest powers stop at the Louisiana border. But the OP be mad because one person with no authority in Texas can carry in Texas but be ok with another person with no authority in Texas carrying in Texas even though either person carrying in Texas doesn't affect him what so ever. I just find that a curious stance to take.
     

    rcm192

    Sic semper tyrannis
    Staff member
    Rating - 100%
    111   0   0
    May 31, 2010
    6,207
    63
    New Orleans area
    I understand the OPs viewpoint, and I can appreciate it.

    However...I am hard pressed to come up with a reason to go to those states that would not allow me to carry there. They probably suck anyway and have pinkos/BS laws present.

    With that being said I think the more people we have responsibly carrying, the better. Whats wrong with that as a end goal? Id rather have someone responsible than NO ONE at all carrying close by in a **** scenario, god forbid I ever end up in one. Ends vs the means?
     

    Cooterbrown

    Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 4, 2012
    19
    1
    Baton Rouge
    Before the law was passed, there already existed a group people who could carry concealed within all 50 states. Therefore, placement is the same as it was before the law was passed and nothing was lost.

    Just because the status quo was the same before Act 507 doesn’t make the special privileges OK.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,710
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Just because the status quo was the same before Act 507 doesn’t make the special privileges OK.

    Sure it does. Again, the law takes nothing away from those not covered by the law and is one more step toward allowing everyone nationwide concealed carry. If you offered to allow the banning of certain rifles based on specific cosmetic features that do not affect its lethality, or as the liberals call them, assault weapons, how many liberals would stand up and say "no, it's either all weapons banned or no weapons banned." None. If you're sticking to the all or nothing, all you're accomplishing is holding everyone back. This law does not reduce people to second class citizens. Nothing changes for the people not included. The law doesn't reduce anything for the people not included. Anyone not included can proceed exactly as they proceeded before. If congress repeals the silencer portion of the NFA, are you going to be against it because the SBR portion isn't included? I certainly hope not. If your only options were to keep the LEOSA or repeal the LEOSA, which would you choose?

    No offense, but I have conversations like this with my 12 year old daughter.

    12 YO: It's not fair. The teacher gave Curt bonus points today for nothing.
    Me: Did those points come from your grade?
    12 YO: No.
    Me: Does your grade depend on Curt's grade?
    12 YO: No.
    Me: Do those bonus points affect you in any way?
    12 YO: No.
    Me: If the teacher gave you bonus points, would you give them back because Curt didn't get them too?
    12 YO: No.
    Me: Then you shouldn't be butthurt about those points. In fact, you should be happy for Curt.
     

    STPHomie

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 25, 2015
    154
    18
    Madisonville
    But rather than being happy for the people who did benefit from the new law and pushing for more people to be included, people mad and want everyone excluded until they are also included.

    Can you point out some LEO only laws that were later expanded to include the rest of us?
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,710
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Can you point out some LEO only laws that were later expanded to include the rest of us?

    Not off the top of my head but neither can I think of any federal laws involving LEOs not acting under color of law that weren't expanded to the rest of us.

    If your only options were to keep the LEOSA or repeal the LEOSA, which would you choose?
     

    m1k3

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Mar 25, 2012
    67
    8
    Central, LA
    In my opinion, any LEO that has served the rest of us deserves any special privileges that we can give them regardless of whether the rest of us eventually benefit or not!!!!
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    Some of this sounds really.....uh...socialistic? Is that a word? Can I coin that term here and now?

    I didn’t wanna say snowflakish.... I mean I did but I didn’t say it. Well I guess I did say it..

    Never mind just ignore me... I’ve been drinking
     

    LACamper

    oldbie
    Premium Member
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jun 3, 2007
    8,629
    48
    Metairie, LA
    Someday I'd like to see Washington DC and certain historical parts of New England. I'd like to be able to carry. I see this bill as a stalling tactic on the left in giving nation wide reciprocity. I have no problem with retired LEO's carrying, unless it delays my ability to carry. We might have done better to tell the left to shove it and push for nationwide.
     

    STPHomie

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 25, 2015
    154
    18
    Madisonville
    Not off the top of my head but neither can I think of any federal laws involving LEOs not acting under color of law that weren't expanded to the rest of us.

    If your only options were to keep the LEOSA or repeal the LEOSA, which would you choose?

    I support the repeal of all gun laws.
     

    981GT4

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Aug 31, 2016
    418
    18
    Slidell, LA
    Can you point out some LEO only laws that were later expanded to include the rest of us?

    This bill that passed requires retired LEO's who carry under LEOSA to get another ID from the local sherrif as I read this. So in essence they need 2 id's. Retired creds and sherrif issue. The question is what happens if the LEOSA carrying person does not do this. This law specify's no penalty. Or is it the good ol boy system with retired LEO's. As you can see i am no fan of LEOSA. It creates a privledge class of individuals with absolutly no authority yet can conceal carry in all 50 states with impunity.


    New law requires the sheriff or chief law enforcement officer to issue identification required
    by existing law to each individual who meets the requirements set forth in existing and new
    law for a "qualified retired law enforcement officer".
    Can you point out any Leo only laws give them special privilege other people cant get? Besides LEOSA?


    Maybe if you want carry in all 50 states, feel free to apply to your local police department.

    do 30 years of services, dealing with the worst of society on a daily bases, with **** pay.


    untill then stfu..
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom