Ehrlich Praises Gun Law For Cops

Status
Not open for further replies.

Harry Tuttle

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
3,093
EHRLICH PRAISES GUN LAW FOR COPS
By S.A. Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20050613-104819-1439r.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------
BALTIMORE -- Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. yesterday initiated a state program to license retired police officers to carry concealed handguns, making Maryland one of the first states to implement new federal laws expanding gun rights for retired and off-duty officers.

"This is good public policy that will make a safer state, which is why I am very proud Maryland has led," said Mr. Ehrlich, a Republican.

Surrounded by officers from various local and state law-enforcement agencies, Mr. Ehrlich made the announcement at the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 3 in Baltimore.

The setting underscored Baltimore's high murder rate despite crime-fighting pledges by Mayor Martin O'Malley, a likely Democratic rival to Mr. Ehrlich in next year's governor's race.

Last week, the FBI reported that violent crime in Baltimore increased 4.2 percent to 11,667 incidents in 2004, while the numbers declined in most other cities.

Mr. O'Malley, who took office five years ago promising to lower the homicide rate, but instead watched the city become one of America's deadliest, was not invited to yesterday's announcement.

The mayor yesterday said he was not bothered that the governor held the event in his city. But he said Mr. Ehrlich could do more to reduce crime in the city by reforming state public safety offices such as the departments of juvenile services, parole and probation, and corrections.

"The state and the governor control many of the oars that should be in the water to bring crime under control in Maryland," Mr. O'Malley said. "If we all could work together toward the common goal of making our state safer, we could be making progress more quickly."

Mr. Ehrlich's initiative buttressed the federal Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, which President Bush signed into law last year.

The act allows retired and off-duty officers who meet certain standards to carry a concealed handgun in any jurisdiction. The weapons are barred from airplanes and in other restricted places.

A Maryland State Police database is available to police agencies in other states to identify retired officers with concealed carry permits. Retired officers must have served at least 15 years, retired in good standing and qualify annually with their weapon to receive the permit.

Thomas F. Penoza, treasurer of the national FOP, said at yesterday's announcement that the Maryland program will be a model for other states.

Arizona and Idaho also have implemented the federal law.

Supporters say the law enhances public safety by potentially putting an armed law-enforcement professional at the scene of street crime or terrorism.

Opponents, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police, say state and local authorities should regulate who carries concealed weapons in their jurisdictions.

Leah Barrett, executive director of the gun-control group CeaseFire Maryland Inc., said allowing officers to carry a gun anywhere at any time is "essentially dangerous."

"We have too many guns in this country and too many people carrying them," she said. "Accidents happen."


FOP Lodge No. 3 President Lt. Fred Roussey stressed that only experienced and trained officers can get the carry permit.

"President Bush saw a need for retired officers to carry. Now everyone is armed everywhere," the Baltimore police lieutenant said. "Thank God our governor got behind it right out of the gate."
 
I know little about the various police groups and whatnot, but is it reasonable to assume that FOP is mostly rank-and-file officers while the International Association of Chiefs of Police is mostly/all chiefs?

If so, I find it rather telling that the officers themselves are quite comfortable with this law, while the chiefs are nervous. I wonder if that is reflected in regards to civilian carry?
 
I thought right to carry was already legal for LEO because of the federal law recently signed by Bush?

That stupid hysterical anti must soil her pants every time she sees an armed and uniformed officer. Heaven forbid she see regular citizens bearing arms.
 
I thought right to carry was already legal for LEO because of the federal law recently signed by Bush?
It was -- sort of.

You have to read the full text of the law. Not sure, but I think there's a requirement that retirees be issued "credentials," and as the article stated the retired officers must still qualify annually. Not all departments have stepped up to the plate to provide a mechanism for retired officers to qualify.
 
Accidents DO happen, but they happen accidentally. CRIMES happen because some animal DECIDES to prey on fellow human beings. Law abiding citizens with firearms (retired LEO or not) generally do not make good victims.

Leah Barrett is an idiot IMHO.
 
I think that both the Maryland and the federal legislation is a "feel good" measure.

Lawmakers can say that they have increased "police presence" on the street by allowing anywhere, anytime carry by retired LEOS.

The problem as I see it is jurisdiction and liability.

What it's going to take is a retired LEO from Nebraska intervening during a crime while he and his family are on vacation in Orlando to visit The Mouse.

The Nebraska LEO does not have jurisdiction, nor does he have a DUTY TO ACT. But if he does, and something goes horribly wrong (bystander shot e.g.)
Will the agancy who signed off on his National Carry come to his aid and represent him in court, or will they throw him to the wolves?
 
Will the agancy who signed off on his National Carry come to his aid and represent him in court, or will they throw him to the wolves?
I know damn well my old agency (US Army CID) wouldn't help. We were famous for killing our wounded and eating our dead! :rolleyes:

I'm responsible for my actions. No one else. If I take armed action, no matter what the reason, or the outcome, I will be responsible for the consequences. That's the way it is.
 
Gee gun control groups don't want cops armed either... what a surprise. It is good to see the NRA has taken a page from the gun control groups though. For a long time, gun control groups have sought to split police officers and gun owners into two separate groups against each other - the ol' divide and conquer.

Now the NRA is working the reverse angle of that to show police officers that once the citizens are disarmed you can't expect the elite to trust just any random police officer with deadly force.
 
Leah Barrett is an idiot IMHO.

Your opinion is shared by many.

Her hysterical rantings have caused her credibility to waste away with anybody but the EXTREME leftists.
 
As the article stated, Idaho has already passed and signed this into law (on March 23rd). And I really like it!

CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS BY QUALIFIED RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS (new code 18-3302H) allows for retired officers to carry concealed and pretty much follows the federal law.

The differences between my CWP and a retired LEO's CWP are... ahem... minor. I renew mine once every 4 years; They renew every year. I showed my qualifications (I presented my DD-214) only once; They must show qualifications every year and must have met POST quals within the 12 months prior to their initial application. My CWP is good in some, but not all states; Theirs is good in all 50 states. The fees are pretty much the same as are the renewal methods (background checks by ISP and FBI).

The only real plus, is that automatic reciprocity, which is offset by all the yearly fees and renewals. Most officers I have spoken to will stick to the regular CWP....
 
As we all know from the various news stories posted and copied here, only police officers are professionally trained and qualified to handle guns. Of course, there is some debate about exactly how they handle those guns, but that is not the point here, is it?

Is a retired cop allowed to act in a professional capacity? Can they arrest someone, or issue a citation, or step out of their vehicle and direct traffic, just because they are a retired cop - as opposed to me or you or anybody else that just wants to do any of those things? Does a retired cop have a duty to step up and deal with the BG who is breaking the law by robbing me, or shooting me, in violation of state/municipal code whatever?

Then how come it's OK for retired cops to carry CCW, but plain citizens cannot?

I know, most of us all agree that the denial of the right/privilege (take your pick, I'm not that fussy in this discussion) of the same to the masses does not make sense. But I just want to get the question out - what makes it more OK for a retired cop to carry CCW than for anybody else?
[/rant][/sarcasm][/hissyfit]

stay safe.

skidmark
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top