cuerno de chivo
Moderator
IIRC, in CA certain guns like Kel-Tec's .32 are not available to civillians, but LEOs can purchase them. What hoops do these LEOs have to jump through in order to purchase such guns?
TIA
TIA
CA LEO purchase of restricted weapons
- Thread starter cuerno de chivo
- Start date
Rob Pincus
New member
Actually, while CA may be different (usually is...), I was shocked to find out that Cahingun's interpretation was not upheld by our local ATF office recently. My Dept had a guy resign under some pretty ugly circumstances. Last year he had bought an LE semi-auto AR on letterhead. The main advantage was a discounted price and a colapsable stock. Well, after he left, the situation was brought to the attention of the chief. As I understand it, the chief had the local office of the ATF contacted, who advised that under these circumstances, the former LEO could keep the weapon.
Like I said, YMMV and I was very surprised (and disappointed, I might add.).
While I doubt that anyone is actually going to go through the torture of getting hired by a PD (backgrounds, Polygraphs, etc..) and then go through an academy just to get a pre-ban semi AR for under $800, the concept still could drive another unwanted rift between Cops and RKBA'rs..
Personally, I only own 2 LE/MIL hicaps, which I purchased for use in a weapon that I am qualified with for offduty carry (two actually, G23 & G-35). The only others that I have are the three the dept issued me for my duty gun. I refuse to by "LE" guns or mags on letterhead that aren't actually going to be used as part of my job.
Like I said, YMMV and I was very surprised (and disappointed, I might add.).
While I doubt that anyone is actually going to go through the torture of getting hired by a PD (backgrounds, Polygraphs, etc..) and then go through an academy just to get a pre-ban semi AR for under $800, the concept still could drive another unwanted rift between Cops and RKBA'rs..
Personally, I only own 2 LE/MIL hicaps, which I purchased for use in a weapon that I am qualified with for offduty carry (two actually, G23 & G-35). The only others that I have are the three the dept issued me for my duty gun. I refuse to by "LE" guns or mags on letterhead that aren't actually going to be used as part of my job.
cuerno de chivo
Moderator
Rob
"(O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency? [Back]
No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer's retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U. S. C. 922( v)( 4), (w)( 3)]"
The above is from http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#o9 . Unless the above has changed, it would seem the ATF was wrong in saying that the LEO could keep them. Unless he transferred them to the Dept. and the Dept. then transferred them back to him?
"(O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency? [Back]
No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer's retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U. S. C. 922( v)( 4), (w)( 3)]"
The above is from http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#o9 . Unless the above has changed, it would seem the ATF was wrong in saying that the LEO could keep them. Unless he transferred them to the Dept. and the Dept. then transferred them back to him?
Rob Pincus
New member
Like I said, Cuervo, I couldn't believe it, but it is reality. Regardless of what common sense or the written opinion dictates, the opinion of the field office to our dept was that the individual may keep the weapon...
'course two years from now he could get busted for possession of an illegal weapon and the PD could even get in trouble... who knows!
'course two years from now he could get busted for possession of an illegal weapon and the PD could even get in trouble... who knows!