Retired California Law Enforcement Officers Want to Keep Their Rifles

Retired California Law Enforcement Officers Want to Keep Their Rifles

Over the last decade, California law enforcement agencies have allowed their officers to purchase their own rifles for on-duty use. Many of these rifles are considered “assault weapons” under California’s draconian gun laws, and therefore cannot be purchased or owned by civilians.

Additionally, these officers have been forced to turn in their rifles once they retire.

As reported by the Associated Press, “A lobbying group in California says it will pursue legislation [in 2012] that would allow police officers to keep assault weapons after they retire … the Peace Officers Research Association of California, which represents rank-and-file personnel, is reacting to an opinion issued last year by the state attorney general's office. It states that officers must turn in their weapons when they leave law enforcement work.”

“Over 7,600 officers have bought such firearms since the California began allowing the practice 10 years ago. The association's president, Ron Cottingham says that the attorney general's opinion punishes retiring officers who bought their own weapons while they were employed.”

Source:  Associated Press

Recommended AR-15 Resources:

New! The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. III

New! The Gun Digest Buyer's Guide to Tactical Rifles

The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. I

The Gun Digest Book of the AR-15 Vol. II

Gunsmithing the AR-15, How to Maintain, Repair & Accessorize

Find more gun books, DVDs and downloads at


  1. My first inclination here is to say that they should be allowed to keep the expensive rifles that they had to pay for themselves in order to do their jobs. On the other hand, why should they be given any special treatment? Regular citizens can’t own those rifles in the People’s Republik of Kalifornia; why should they be able to? If they don’t like it then they should get the hell out of the PRK, or join together to get those ridiculous, unconstitutional laws overturned!!!

    I couldn’t be a police officer. I would get fired because I WOULD NOT enforce an unconstitutional law regardless of what ANY local, state or federal government–or ANY court–said about it! Period.

  2. As purchasers of their own firearms, I believe they should be allowed to keep them. But since they are retired, or leave for other reasons and become regular Joe Citizens they should abide by California assault weapons laws. The firearms should be converted by police armorers to comply with all regulations such as a 10 round maximum, bullet button, no silencers or flash suppressors and permanent defeat of any fully automatic fire function. After all, the intent is to release these weapons for “sporting purposes” and these features are not allowed (per CA regulations). I can see real problems occurring when these firearms are no longer desired by the retired officers and they try to sell them to other citizens. Welcome home officer….

  3. I don’t blame them. They should be allowed to buy them at cost. Just make sure they’re California legal. 10 round magazines, bullet buttons, offlist lower receivers and no militaristic features.

    Why does anyone need one of these anyway?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.