Washington, D.C., the capital city of the greatest nation on earth, should also be a beacon of freedom and all the liberties our citizen enjoy. Unfortunately, Washington, D.C. has become synonymous with the stifling of rights- at least when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. Thankfully the courts have recognized the need to stop this and have struck yet another blow for right verse political whim.
For the last eight years, the political leaders of our nation’s capital have never missed an opportunity to prevent law abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutionally protected right to bear arms – no doubt encouraged by the current administration’s own attitude towards the matter. Despite a despicable level of violent crimes, city officials have repeatedly refused private citizen’s requests for concealed carry permits and pursued those individuals determined to protect themselves rather than the criminal who preys upon them. It appears that law enforcement officers were painted with the same wide brush – until some of them decided to fight back.
Four current and former District of Columbia Department of Corrections officers applied for the necessary identification cards needed to qualify with and carry their off duty firearms under 2004 Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). However, then-Corrections Department Director Tom Faust stated “I will not certify an application request for carry of a concealed weapon under LEOSA for retired employees, as corrections officers do not meet all the required elements necessary,” referring to a department decision concerning employees lacking the authority to make arrests as outlined in LEOSA requirements.
The four employees disagreed, claiming that their department identification cards stated they were officers of the District of Columbia with the power to make arrests. Although the officers agreed that that authority was limited, that was irrelevant and outside the city’s scope or discretion. It seems the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia agreed.
In a 2-1 decision, the Court sided with the officers, each of whom claimed they had received death threats and even been targeted by former inmates, in determining the city had indeed overstepped its authority. In the majority opinion, the judges stated “(Congress) left no discretion for a state to revise the historical record of an individual qualified law enforcement officer.”
Although the decision may still be appealed and does not automatically apply to all corrections officers nationwide, due to varying wording in statutory authority to make arrests, this is none the less a big win. Not only does it protect the rights of off duty and retired law enforcement officers to protect themselves, it also signifies a shift in recent court opinions concerning the 2nd Amendment. No longer may local anti-gun politicians count on the court to simply take their word for it or accept their limited interpretation of the law in determining when or where a law abiding citizen may exercise their right to be protected.
Disclaimer: The content in this article is the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of US Patriot Tactical.
Latest posts by Tom Burrell (see all)
- 5 Features to Look for in Tactical Pants - 12 January, 2019
- Looking Ahead: 5 Most Anticipated Products of 2019 - 8 January, 2019
- REVIEW: Propper Genuine Gear BDU Trousers - 2 January, 2019