Qualified retired LEOs who meet LEOSA’s standards can carry concealed without a permit, but “that does not mean they cannot be arrested.”  That is what a New Jersey Deputy Attorney General argued in court this week.  The State also argued that retired LEOs have no Second Amendment right to carry and therefore it can prohibit anyone from carrying outside the home.   The State knows the charges will not stick under LEOSA, but its sending a message to all off-duty and retired LEOs to stay away or be inconvenienced by a night in jail.

What the State’s prosecution wing has not done is speak with its civil defense wing, if it had it would know that having a policy of deliberate indifference to the civil rights of anyone can lead to big bucks from a jury.  Nonetheless, until then the State is content with its position and is now targeting two retirees who carried on-call 24 x7 as arson investigators for over 15 years each.  One was a policeman before becoming an arson investigator and the other a military policemen before becoming an arson investigator.

These retired LEOs should be thanked for their service.  They are not being targeted because of anything in their backgrounds, but because the State arbitrarily said carrying on-call as an active LEO for 15 years to investigate arson and environmental related crimes was not enough for a retire LEO permit.  NJ argued that anyone who did not have “unlimited agency carry authority” and “broad general LE authority for all crimes” should be denied a retired LEO permit.  When I informed the Court that this new standard would eliminate many Federal officers, corrections officers, etc… from retired permits in NJ, the State’s deputy AG and County prosecutor did not care.  The State reasserted its right to deny permits to any group.

This attitude of arrogance in the face of the United States Constitution, however, may lead to the judicial abrogation of New Jersey’s Retired LEO Permit Program.  We are expecting a decision soon.

If the Court rules that the program violates the Equal Protection Clause by excluding “similarly situated” LEOs, there will be no permits for anyone until the program is fixed.  The same may happen in MA, IL, and other states that arbitrarily deny permits to one group of qualified LEOs while giving them to other groups.
Information Provided by
Brian J. Smith

Special Agent in Charge, U,S. HHS/OIG/OI (Retired)
Chief of Police, The Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor Bi-State, (Retired)
Federal Goverment, Intelligence Agency (IC) Current
Investigator, NJDOT, OIG, Internal Investigations Unit, (Current)