I'm a retired LEO (Municipal) from NJ, qualified w/ a retired ID card, retired badge from agency. I can carry in 49 states, but NOT NJ, the state I served and live in b/c I have to apply for a CCW from the NJSP--which they routinely deny the 1st time, and then you have to re-apply and repay a 2nd time before they approve you--and only good for 2 yrs... If anyone knows different re: NJ, please let me know.
LEOSA was recently amended to make it easier, not more difficult, to carry a firearm if one had left an LEO position after 10-years (it used to be 15-years) in good standing, or retired in all 50-states regardless of state law. The only requirement is that the former LEOs have to successfully complete the same firearms training (per Commission or POST requirements) as active LEOs in the individual's state of residence on an annual basis. I complete my annual re-certification training through a Police Department in Tennessee, which is where I reside. In other words, the state cannot require any more than Federal Law requires. End of story.
I have no respect for a State that will try to circumvent a law by creating hurdles. The U.S. Supreme Court made their intolerance clear with its recent decisions addressing citizens ability to carry a firearm. Hah! I doubt that they (the USSC) would tolerate a state trying to circumvent the law as it pertains to us.
In short, the State of New Jersey should be ashamed of itself. As long as you successfully complete your annual training, the State cannot say a thing about you carrying in the State of NJ. They have no say..., no choice, and are legally bound by the law, just like any other citizen is bound by the law of their state.
The key, in your case, is the training. In Tennessee, the state recently attempted to make it mandatory for all eligible LEOs (former and present) to obtain an application from POST ($150 cost or something like that), that could not be sent by U.S. Mail, in order to undergo the training. Being a retired federal law enforcement officer I would not agree to such nonsense. They recently changed it to cover only state-wide eligible LEOs (state, county, local). Some police chiefs have refused to deal with this process (I cannot blame them - what a nightmare, but a money maker for the state), making it difficult for retirees to get the required training. I can foresee a federal cause-of-action in the very near future to stop this hurdle. There is little doubt that some states desire to challenge this law, but the U.S. Constitution allows the federal legislature to address and promulgate laws governing such issues, which makes the states non-compliant if they attempt to circumvent this process.
Our rights, and I do mean our rights, as provided by Congress, need to be fought for with all due diligence. Anything less would be the personal surrender of these rights, and others may needlessly be made to suffer as a result of a perception, rather than legal sanction, and this should never be allowed.
Last, but not least, my credentials provide me with no right to carry a firearm without the annual training required by law. You may have all the pieces (official ID and badge) to make this work for you, but to activate this process you will need to complete the annual training. Once the annual training has been successfully completed, then you will have the legal right to carry in 50 states, not just 49 states.
An important caveat here are the restrictions where you can carry your firearm within each state after qualifying under LEOSA. For example, many states do not allow a person to carry a firearm in a bar, but some do. I think all states prohibit the carrying of a firearm in a government office building (only criminals can do this, since they could care less about these laws). In other words, know your restrictions within these rights. This is not the same as when we were active. You will not have the right to carry the firearm anywhere you desire, since there are restrictions. The only sign that confuses me is when a private business has a sign posted, showing a handgun with a circle and a slash through it, with the words "except law enforcement." This can have many interpretations. If the intention is to only allow "active" law enforcement, then it should include the word "active." The reason for the confusion is that an owner may not want just anyone carrying a firearm, but active and retired LEOs under LEOSA may be welcomed. Who knows? I left my crystal ball in my last job. I am not good at guessing games. Good grief! This may need to be resolved through legislation in the future. My rule is, when in doubt, don't carry it. Of course, you may develop your own rule in this regard.
Hopefully, this information will assist you in being better prepared, and better prepare you for the future.
All the best ....