A retired special operations veteran says Congress should extend nationwide concealed carry privileges to qualified former special operators, matching the protections retired law enforcement officers already enjoy. Supporters argue these veterans bring unique training, judgment, and a track record of public service that make them well-suited to carry responsibly across state lines. Senators and House members have introduced companion bills to expand Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act coverage to this group, sparking debate over certification, recertification, and national reciprocity. This piece lays out the case, the legislative differences, and the practical realities veterans face when carrying as civilians.
Gavin Glasenapp, who served 20 years and 12 combat deployments in the Army, put it plainly: “It needs to happen,” and Republicans pushing the legislation agree. The pitch is straightforward: special operators are “proven men and women” and “they’re specially selected, uniquely trained.” That underwriting of trust is central to why backers say the law should treat these veterans like retired officers for concealed carry purposes.
Advocates point to real-world moments when trained bystanders made the difference between life and death, arguing those outcomes justify expanding protections. When civilians who trained and acted did stop an attack, it reinforced the belief that more responsibly armed, well-trained Americans help keep communities safe. The argument ties into a broader Republican push for practical measures that empower citizens rather than strip rights away.
Part of the legislative fight is technical: the Senate version demands yearly firearms requalification at an active-duty standard and completion of a Justice Department-certified course before nationwide carry is granted. The House version takes a lighter approach, proposing to bring special ops under existing LEOSA standards without additional certification. That difference has turned into a focal point for debate over trust versus oversight.
Glasenapp weighs in against mandatory annual recertification: “I don’t believe the annual recertification requirement should be required for either the proposed special operations forces concealed carry act or the current HR 218/LEOSA,” and he still urges regular training. He argues both communities spend careers training with small arms and maintain a high baseline of competence, though he also acknowledges skills can decline without practice. “There’s going to be continuing training on that,” Glasenapp said.
The proposal’s defenders stress adaptability as another reason special ops veterans merit this treatment, noting their experience operating under shifting rules and jurisdictions. “These are folks that have not only dealt with changing state lines, but different rules and different regulations in different countries,” Glasenapp said. “We’re talking international travel and dealing with rules of engagement that are constantly changing depending on what theater you’re in.”
Training doctrine shows up in the conversation too, not just in formal qualifications but in mindset. “That would be the OODA loop,” Glasenapp said, referencing the observe-orient-decide-act framework special operators use. “That’s kind of become almost a university taught system of being situationally aware. You know, observing a threat and making decisions as far as what your next steps are going to be. And the big thing with that OODA loop is it’s just that: It’s a loop. You should constantly be observing, orienting on things, deciding, acting, and then redoing it over and over again.”
Supporters frame the bill as recognition of continued service and reliability. “Our Special Operations Forces spend their careers protecting the American people with unmatched discipline, judgment, and professionalism,” Sen. Tim Sheehy wrote. “This bill honors that reality by giving qualified special operators the same nationwide concealed carry privileges already afforded to retired law enforcement officers. Our elite warfighters never stop serving, and this bill ensures the law reflects the trust they’ve earned through a lifetime of sacrifice.”
Practicalities matter to families and travelers too, which is why retired officers already benefit from LEOSA. “[LEOSA] allows retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed throughout the country, which is very convenient, actually, because sometimes state laws as far as concealed carry or possessing weapons can be very different when you travel state to state,” Glasenapp said. “So, for example, if you’re a retired law officer and you’re on a cross-country road trip with your family, that definitely streamlines things a lot. You’re not having to check things like a reciprocity app.”
Glasenapp is careful to stress that military habits do not excuse civilian mistakes. “What you’re doing as a civilian carrying every day … is going to be different than when you’re in a combat zone,” said Glasenapp. “Get familiar with local, state and federal law as far as what you can and can’t do,” he said. “You’ve got to make different decisions and act in different ways.”
On the narrower question before Congress, Glasenapp and allies say the record of training, discipline, and judgment in special operations should be enough to grant this narrow expansion of rights. “I certainly hope this passes and becomes U.S. code,” Glasenapp said. “I think it needs to happen.” For Republicans who back the legislation, it’s both a practical safety measure and a matter of honoring service by treating elite veterans the way we already treat retired officers.
Darnell Thompkins is a conservative opinion writer from Atlanta, GA, known for his insightful commentary on politics, culture, and community issues. With a passion for championing traditional values and personal responsibility, Darnell brings a thoughtful Southern perspective to the national conversation. His writing aims to inspire meaningful dialogue and advocate for policies that strengthen families and empower individuals.