WashingtonWatch.com - H.R. 2726, The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2007

Comment by ROBERTO OBONG (August 17, 2008, 01:00:00)

Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:00:00 EDT

It is imperative that any individual who served in some form of law enforcement capacity and honorably should be given an opportunity to receive his retirement credential....

Comment by George Burns (July 23, 2008, 01:00:00)

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT

Another issue for retirees is, those of us who have retired and are drawing retirement; that were in military law enforcement. I retired with seventeen plus years, am drawing my retirement pay; worked urban (garrison) and tactical (in the bush) law enforcement, the entire time. I had state certifications in DUI/FST, Speed Detection, FTO, SWAT, plus DoD certifications in Patrol/Narcotic & Explosive Detection/K-9 Supervisor, US Customs Inspection and all the constituional law classes accompanied with decades of change; not to mention ALL the weapons qualifications each discipline requires. While I know that military law enforcement service will take time to be accepted; it is a piece of legislation that Senator Obama has supported. The role of military cops has DRASTICALLY changed over the decades. And that service and training is no less of a qualifier, than that of their civilian counterpart. Which is where many of you began your career in law enforcement....

Comment by Gene (June 7, 2008, 01:00:00)

Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:00:00 EDT

Many department refuse to issue a retiree an Identification card. The first step of HR218 was the issuance of an ID card. So any department who does not want there retirees qualify under HR218, they simply do not issue an ID card which invalidates HR218. No one will address a department who refuses to issue the Photo Id to begin with....

Comment by Hector D. Reyes, ICE (November 16, 2007, 01:00:00)

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EST

I already have 18 years of Federal Law Enforcement Services, I like to has when my retirement arrival the full benefit and privilege, I have at he present time, we as Law Enforcement Officers, made arrests and never know when any those former arrests criminals, became on contact with the retirees officer that could be in any part of the U.S. and the same time retirees officer authorized to carry firearms, could assist any Law Enforcement Agencies around of the country on case of a Emergencies are present....

Revision by webmaster (September 5, 2007, 01:00:00)

Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT

H.R. 2726 would amend title 18, United States Code, to improve the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers.

Detailed Summary

Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code to: (1) include Amtrak and executive branch police officers as qualified law enforcement officers eligible to carry concealed firearms; and (2) revise requirements for certifying retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms.

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 7/16/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Comment by George Weissinger (July 23, 2007, 01:00:00)

Mon, 23 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

It appears that the House version is not reducing the term of eligibility from 15 years to 10 years as the Senate version does. Also, the wording of the text needs to conform to H.R. 218 that specifies 15 years "aggregate service" since some retirees have service with more than one agency. I am not sure if the House version addresses the original impasse in H.R. 218 regarding qualification standards. New York has nothing in place for retirees at this time. The amenendment was supposed to address this problem and make it possbible for retirees to meet the eligibility requirements of HR 218. If anyone can clarify this I would appreciate it. All in all, HR 218 passed into law and this amendment will hopefully make the whole law work much better....

Revision by webmaster (July 19, 2007, 01:00:00)

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

H.R. 2726 would amend title 18, United States Code, to improve the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers.

Detailed Summary

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 6/14/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Status as of July 16, 2007

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

7/16/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Status as of July 16, 2007

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

7/16/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Revision by webmaster (June 15, 2007, 01:00:00)

Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:00:00 EDT

H.R. 2726 would amend title 18, United States Code, to improve the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers.

Detailed Summary

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)

Status of the Legislation

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Revision by webmaster (June 15, 2007, 01:00:00)

Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:00:00 EDT

H.R. 2726 would amend title 18, United States Code, to improve the provisions relating to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers.

Detailed Summary

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 6/14/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Status as of June 14, 2007

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:00:00 EDT

6/14/2007: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.