Monday, 19 May 2025

Gun-Rights Activists Criticize House For Passing Concealed Carry Legislation

100 Percent Fed Up
Hits: 5

The House of Representatives passed legislation expanding the carrying of concealed weapons for current and retired police officers.

Second Amendment advocates criticized the bill for not protecting the same inalienable rights for law-abiding Americans.

“The House just voted 229-193 to grant police special nationwide concealed carry freedoms that are still being denied to law-abiding Americans,” Gun Owners of America wrote.

“I’m pleased today the House passed my bipartisan LEOSA Reform Act, which offers real solutions to address threats such as terrorism and mass shootings by ensuring that our retired and off-duty law enforcement officers can exercise their right to concealed carry – no matter where they live or visit,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) said.

“These measured changes will make existing law stronger and more workable for those who seek its benefits while maintaining the rigorous standards that currently apply,” he added.

ADVERTISEMENT

“I applaud the House for passing the bipartisan Law Enforcement Officers Safety Reform Act. As the co-lead, I was proud to work with my colleague @RepDonBacon to address the challenges retired and off-duty officers face with concealed carry so they can keep serving our communities,” Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) said.

“I remain steadfast in my support for the men and woman who put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe,” he added.

“Today, the @HouseGOP passed a bill to REMOVE regulations limiting concealed carry rights for law enforcement officers. Whether on duty or off, these brave men and women always do what’s needed to protect our communities. They’ve earned the right to carry, and we’re making sure they can do so to keep both themselves and our communities safe,” Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX) commented.

The Reload reports:

HR 2243 represents one of the few gun-related bills that has a chance of making it through the Senate and into law. It shows how potent law-enforcement interests remain on Capitol Hill, with Congress willing to carve out numerous special exceptions to federal, state, and local gun laws for current and former cops.

Still, the Senate version introduced by Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana has only gained a handful of co-sponsors to date. All of them are Republicans. An identical bill from the last Congress never gained Democratic co-sponsors and didn’t make it out of the Judiciary Committee.

But the sizeable support House Democrats gave to the bill, even if the majority of the party still voted against it, suggests it could garner a similar level of support in the Senate if it makes it up for a vote this time around.

Police groups celebrated the bill, claiming it is necessary to protect law enforcement from targeted attacks. They also argued more police carrying firearms in public, whether on duty or not, would improve public safety.

“This vital legislation allows qualified retired and active law enforcement officers to carry firearms across state lines and in public spaces such as national parks, school zones, and other public properties,” Major County Sheriffs of America executive director Megan Noland said in a statement. “For law enforcement officers, the ability to carry a firearm across state lines and in public spaces ensures their continued ability to protect and respond effectively, enhancing safety for both officers and our communities.”

“While the purpose of LEOSA has always been clear, several actions at the federal, state, and local level have prevented its proper implementation and altered or watered-down key provisions of the Act,” Vincent Vallelong, President of the NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association, said.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, not everyone was happy with the bill. Some gun-rights activists see it as an affront to civilian gun carriers, who remain bound by the restrictions officers will be allowed to sidestep under the bill.

The bill faced intense scrutiny on social media.

“This is wrong, and I say this as a former cop who qualifies for LEOSA. If the House can pass legislation that gives a carve-out to cops for magazine capacity bans and gun-free zones via federal law, why aren’t they doing the same for ALL AMERICANS?” Luis Valdes, the Southeast Regional Director for Gun Owners of America, said.

Other X users commented:

Luis Valdes writes per Daily Caller:

Unfortunately, many politicians today are of the opinion that certain constitutional rights, or the exercising of them in particular situations, should be reserved to only some. For police officers, this is manifested in laws that routinely afford them greater Second Amendment rights than the general public. This is wrong.

This week is National Police Week, a noble and somber time to reflect on the courage and sacrifice of so many peace officers. Tens of thousands will gather in the nation’s capital to commemorate the occasion, which will culminate with Peace Officers Memorial Day on May 15.

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to move a slate of bills with law enforcement tie ins, one of which would further expand Second Amendment rights to carry concealed firearms to off-duty and retired police. While I would personally benefit from the legislation, I cannot support a bill that would create special privileges for some when they should in fact be afforded to all citizens.

The Second Amendment doesn’t say “the right of the duly sworn police to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This right is afforded to “the people,” the general public.

Those who wear the badge or have in times past are undoubtedly part of “the people.” But our nation was founded on principles of equality, not classes, nobility or aristocracy. Our rights are unalienable, and legislation like this violates that basic principle.

ADVERTISEMENT

All Americans deserve the full access and restoration of their rights, not just those who carry a piece of tin in their wallet. I know many in law enforcement feel the same way, but often they are silenced by their political overlords with the threat of career blacklisting.

Furthermore, I know they, like me, don’t believe that only a select class of citizens should be empowered to carry nationwide. Why should an officer’s spouse, friend or loved one be stripped of their Second Amendment rights when they cross an imaginary line?


Source link

Search