What People Think
 |
 |
63% For, 37% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
S. 376, The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2007
Revision History 
Below is the revision history of this article.
(Learn how to edit the WashingtonWatch.com wiki.)
(Latest | Earliest)
To look at a past version, click on its date. To compare any two versions, select their radio buttons and click on "Compare Selected Versions." To compare a past version with the current version, click on (cur). To compare a version with the preceding version, click on (last).
Cost per :
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_SN_376.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
George Weissinger
The intent of HR 218 and the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act was to make available, at no additional cost to the public, trained police and peace officers ready and willing to take action in the event of a terrorist act, or criminal event. However, many states prevent the implementation of the provisions of the law by preventing officers from receiving the yearly firearms qualification in order to carry concealed weapons outside the state of residence. S. 376 can correct this impediment by making qualified instructors more available. The bill to amend is lingering in the Senate now and should be passed without any problem. It is a simple amendment that will make the original law workable.
Charles Ruggiero
I am a GS-0083 Police Officer with an agency in the Executive Branch of the US Government. This bill seems as though it would fix problems with LEOSA applicability. However, I have already heard rumblings that some senior personnel in my agency do not, and will not, support our officers being covered by LEOSA. If agency officials are concerned about liability, I think that is a straw-man argument. Liability always rests with the individual carrying the firearm, and besides, our officers are trained, qualified, and are armed every day on the job. I hope this amendment does the trick and eliminates opposition from bureaucrats who do not walk the beat and have no personal exposure to crime and criminal activity.
George Weissinger
On May 17, 2007, the LEOSA was passed by voice vote and updates the 2004 law. See Sen Leahy's release at
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200705/051707.html
the wording includes (f)...or police officer of the exec. branch of the Fed. Gov't.
I am still trying to figure out if the bill S. 376, which passed as indicated is law yet, or if it has to go to the House or not and signed by the President. Anybody out there know the status?
Malcolm WIlliams
As a retired LEO I too would like to know the status of this bill.
Rick Wyatt
S.376 still has to pass the Senate,
then the House then be signed by the president.On the govtrack.us wedsite you are able to get updates.
Rick Wyatt
Sorry it should be website not wedsite, if and when,(most likely not till Jan.08) S376 is passed I think the problem then will be,will departments allow their firearms instructors to qualify retirees.
Malcolm WIlliams
Rick:
Why do you say not before Jan 08 before passage and signing
Rick Wyatt
The House still doesn't even have a bill before it on LEOSA that I can find, so it would have to be presented quickly and passed so the President could sign it into law so it could go into effect by July 1st. Laws go into effect ususlly on July 1st,and Jan.1st. The NRA website has a good update on LEOSA. So at this late date in the year probably it wouldn't become law until at least Jan. 1st.
At least thats my understanding.
George Weissinger
HR 2726 is now in the House Committee. It appears that the reduction from 15 years to 10 years is not in the House version. The qualification standards for retirees is still fuzzy (to me) but maybe it will clarify the impasse in HR 218 regarding same.
Rich Suess (ret P.O.)
Someone out in Wisconsin has to light a fire under Rep. (R) James Sensenbrenner, Committe chairman, he seems to be the "fly in the ointment". The F.O.P in his district needs to come alive on this guy. He claims to be pro L.E. but does not show it.
Adam D. Harris
Can states still enact laws that will prevent LEO from carrying outside there state of residence?
Tom Hogan
Hr 218 never really was clear enough state to state it seems. If a democratic president is elected forget about it ever getting signed anyway!It is funny though guys like Senator Chuck Shumer D NY who has full carry permit would not care anyway. Have you ever heard of a sitting politician convicted of carrying an illegal weapon? Again the law abiding person be it a retired law enforcement person would be arrested and convicted though I bet!