The Anti's agenda


PDA






jeepmor
December 18, 2006, 05:06 AM
What do you think about the anti's wanting to take the guns from private citizens and simultaneously continue to arm the Law Enforcement organizations with the very weapons they are confiscating/outlawing from us.

ie Outlaw 50BMG from California, then California law enforcement agencies call Barrett to order some of his fine long guns to employ in their own police forces. I suppose there are many examples of the same in the Chicago region with Daley and crew, but I just can't think of any off the top of my head.

BTW - Hats off to Mr Barrett for his stance to the Cali Enforcement organizations. If you ban them for the civilians, you LEO's don't get them either.:neener: :neener: :neener:

Please feel free to offer up any conspiracy theories you want, it'll be good reading.

jeepmor

If you enjoyed reading about "The Anti's agenda" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Zoogster
December 18, 2006, 05:28 AM
Something I wrote about this earlier in regards to police being held to the same standards and how it would benefit us all. It is not an 'us vs them', after all we are all supposed to be equals so it is an 'all of us'.


I have often thought this is the best solution. The laws would change to sensible ones that enabled police to do thier jobs. Police are one of the few large groups of the public that realize the importance of firearms and would be strongly outspoken in support of the right to keep and bear arms both on and off duty. However because they are not subject to most nonsense firearm laws they are effectively silenced. They no longer have motivation to speak on behalf of the RKBA because it is a fight that does not pertain to them. In fact because they are not subject to gun laws it would actualy make it easier on them to do thier jobs by supporting nonsense gun laws because it means less stress by running into less guns possessed by law abiding people.
People often take the perspective that most benefits themselves in politics regardless of it being right or wrong in general. Police want a police state, it is easier to police. It may be more dangerous and less free for the average person open to victimization by criminals, but it is easier to be a cop and do your job in a police state.

The best way to have gun laws that reflect thier need in defensive and even offensive roles is to force the police to be outspoken in support of them. I tire of hearing the argument that certain weapons are for killing large numbers of people, yet entire teams of cops utilize them for raids on single individuals or a coupe people. If the anti's hype was to be believed the police would be armed with single shots when going in with a dozen officers to raid one person. Forcing police to stand side by side with us in defense of the RKBA would lead to common sense gun laws.

Having police in Los Angeles with .50 Barretts they feel are necessary for certain situations, yet promoting thier ban by every single CA citizen seems ironic. Or needing AR15's in some of thier cars just in case, yet banning the average person from even having them in thier house. Nevermind the swat teams and thier armaments. If police feel they are necessary for thier self defense when they highly outnumber the bad guys, and have the element of surprise, then why are they only needed for killing large numbers of people if a normal person wants one? Police need all the rounds thier gun was designed to carry with a standard magazine when they wear body armor and have backup, but you only need 10 or less even if outnumbered far from help.

Yes I think if police had to fight for thier rights side by side with everyone else the public and antis would be forced to listen to just how important firearms are by the people they feel are thier protectors (but we know often arrive in time only to hold someone responsible after the fact.) The gun would cease to be an evil object and would be seen as a necessary tool that is just missused by a small percent of society, not an evil babykilling machine we would all be safer without. Police are organized, outspoken, and directly consulted on issues of RKBA, putting them on our side by making them identify as one of us and not as a seperate and superior branch of society entitled to rights above and beyond a mere normal citizen would give the antis an opponent they would be unable to outmanuver.

ArfinGreebly
December 18, 2006, 05:35 AM
While there are various reasons one might be "anti" I think the most pertinent flavor is the pernicious, political activist kind.

Many people are "anxious" about weapons, having no training, experience, or even contact with them. Others have just heard "bad" things. Still others have some defining event and are actually afraid of them.

That leaves us the ranting, fire-breathing, politically motivated crowd.

I will divide them into two basic camps: those who feel peace must be purchased at any cost, and who are afraid of weapons, and those who feel that people must be controlled, and who know weapons will frustrate that plan.

The "peace at any cost" crowd can be educated. There's a lot of baggage to stow, but it can be done.

The "people must be controlled" bunch are the ones that you are in constant, unremitting conflict with. They are actually dangerous.

They are the reason we have lobbyists.

jeepmor
December 18, 2006, 08:51 AM
Yes, I would like to see the immunities bestowed upon Law Enforcement and Public officials removed such that we all get the same consequences for crime, and all the other privileges that come with the respective positions.

Whom I kidding.

PILMAN
December 18, 2006, 09:44 AM
I know a lot of anti's who own guns, yet they are pro gun control. Basically they feel they are responsible and yet don't trust the rest of the population to own guns. Kind of contradicting if you ask me. It's like the person who has a sports car and says no one else should be able to own one.

DesertShooter
December 18, 2006, 10:46 AM
Let's get a few things straight, instead of having this go into police bashing!

#1: The average "street cop" is NOT against citizens having guns! They also do NOT want a police state!

#2: There are NO "immunities" for the police! They are subject to the same laws as everyone!

#3: The police do NOT "far out-number" the bad guys! In Los Angeles County, CA, there is well over 100,000 gang members....and that isn't counting non-gang member criminals! The total number of LEO's in Los Angeles County is approximately 17,000 (Does that sound like a lot? The geographically small City of New York has approximately 43,000 LEO's, and that doesn't include LEO's in other jurisdictions within that county!)

#4: The main reason why you will not hear the average "street cop" speaking pro- on RKBA issues is because their agency/department heads feel that it is a "politically sensitive" issue. Then, add that most police agency/department heads are "politically motivated"....THEY are the voices that you hear that are anti-gun! Their voices do NOT reflect the overall feelings/thoughts of the rank-and-file members!

Let's start doing some thinking before placing the blame on people that are looked upon as being the "authorities". Sure, a few of them DO over-step their bounds, but they usually pay for their misdeeds! And, if there were NO "authorities", the entire world would become a "zoo"!

Lastly, I'm sure that we all (or at least most of us) support our troops. Many of you may have walked over to a uniformed military person and expressed your appreciation for their service. Well, when was the last time ANY of you approached one of your local police officers to say anything appreciative? In a very real way, police officers are ALSO "troops"! Maybe by opening up some friendly dialogue with a police officer would make you change your mind about them! On the other hand, you can continue to shy away from the police, and hope that they don't have an "us-against-them" attitude!

Zoogster
December 18, 2006, 01:31 PM
#3: The police do NOT "far out-number" the bad guys! In Los Angeles County, CA, there is well over 100,000 gang members....and that isn't counting non-gang member criminals!

My point was that when they confront them they far outnumber them, not that they are a greater portion of the population. In almost every planned operation where the evil 'assault' weapons are employed the police go in force far outnumbering the single or few individuals at the location. Since these evil assault weapons are only designed "to kill large amounts of people" according to the antis, and there is a dozen cops and a couple suspects they should have no need for something that has to kill large numbers of people right? Or why do they need more than 10 rounds in thier pistol, there is usualy more of them when they are in danger than there is of me if I am in danger, yet I have a 10 round restriction. Yes I know why police need these things, their defensive needs are not that much different than the rest of us, and thier offensive needs usualy give them superior numbers and the element of surprise, so they need it even less then.

My point is I know they could make excellent points as to the need they have for tools they need no more than the rest of us, so make them equal to us in rights. Wasn't a cornerstone of our nation's ideology that all men are equal under the law? Wouldn't it be great to turn on the TV or radio and see police supporting Pro self defense agendas because they are subject to the same limitations of the law as we are?

#1: The average "street cop" is NOT against citizens having guns! They also do NOT want a police state!
I beg to differ. They may not realize it or call it that but they want to be as safe and secure with as little stress on the job as possible. Guns in other peoples control make them nervous even when in the hands of responsible law abiding citizens because of the nature of thier job. Finding a gun in a routine stop is sure to make the police flip out in most of the high population states. Simply seeing or hearing a gun is present instantly changes the dynamics of the encounter because that is thier training. it suddenly is life and death, and your rights are the least important aspect. A police state is merely one where the police have the word of LAW and thier word is absolute. Where they can do thier job without concern of tiptoing around rights of those they police, because it is for your safety, and they can accomplish more when not held back by such rights. It makes it easier on them. Are you telling me they do not support every step in that direction? China has very easygoing police who are polite and yet they can and do have people arrested/executed for minor things if they are offended or feel it is in the best interest of safety whether or not something was truly done. Thier is no silly due process interfering with thier job, or citizens confident because they have rights. China's people fear the police and do exactly what they say to the letter. Are you telling me LEO's or thier departments do not seek that same level of power and if allowed would not attain it here? Police usualy want a police state, because unless looking at the big picture, it just makes more sense to them.

#4: The main reason why you will not hear the average "street cop" speaking pro- on RKBA issues is because their agency/department heads feel that it is a "politically sensitive" issue. Then, add that most police agency/department heads are "politically motivated"....THEY are the voices that you hear that are anti-gun! Their voices do NOT reflect the overall feelings/thoughts of the rank-and-file members! Yet they are part of a leftist union that does radicly support gun control. In California and many other states the police, nurses, teachers, and other civil servants etc are part of far left Unions that fight for thier benefits, pay increases etc but also give contributions to and have police officers speak for the leftist candidates in return. In fact most peace officers are automaticly part of these unions with a percent of thier paycheck going towards supporting them. The unions in turn support the left agenda and help finance the politicians that favor it. The pro labor candidates (communism was nothing but the labor party on top taken to its conclusion) are directly financed and given political speakers from these organizations to adress the voters. This is why you see police supporting bans, or nurses and teachers for this prop or that prop. The unions speak for them, and by financialy funding them because they also happen to be the ones that have lobbyists fight for thier standard of living the police in general are left supporters.

The left has always been anti, they see the perfect end result with the government holding the reigns over every little aspect of life and a Utopia able to exist from thier pristine governing. The fact that government is often self serving and much less financialy savy (your taxes do not go far when spent by people that spend like government does) than people holding thier own money escapes them. The less government you can get by with the better off your society is both economicly and in terms of liberty. Our founding fathers understood this and that is why they thought they limited government to a few key necessary components. They could have never forseen that thier clause mentioning 'interstate commerce' could be interpreted and stretched to mean just about everything under the sun was subject to government regulation. If you doubt the thriftiness of government then you have never been a government contractor. They routinely pay several million for a job worth 10% that price. Private business or individuals would have been motivated by profit and be more savy, but government is not spending thier own money. In fact government will only give the full amount to a department the following year if they spend every penny they are given that year even if they don;t need it.

Government rarely shrinks, for as people are hired to fullfill government roles these people base thier financial security, and retirement on this job overseeing something. So even when thier department ceases to be necessary they invent excuses to stay employed. The fat is almost never trimmed. This is another reason why you limit government to what is absolutely necessary, not every little thing that sounds like a good idea.

ArmedBear
December 18, 2006, 01:47 PM
Well, when was the last time ANY of you approached one of your local police officers to say anything appreciative? In a very real way, police officers are ALSO "troops"!

Perhaps you are unaware of how the Posse Comitatus Act makes all the difference in the world. The troops aren't paid to see ME as a potential enemy of the state. Cops are, and they do.

Maybe by opening up some friendly dialogue with a police officer would make you change your mind about them!

Or maybe doing just that has helped me to see what I didn't understand before: a lot of street cops DO support a police state. Typically, they don't even realize it. In my experience, cops here buy into every truism about marijuana leading inevitably to PCP use and heroin addiction, that people (other than them, of course) can't be trusted with CCW, etc.

I am grateful for some of what cops do, but it's a mixed bag. Conversations with cops have made me feel a tad less supportive.

Now this IS California, so it's different from some places. It's illegal to smoke outdoors in city parks including Balboa Park, which takes up a good portion of the city, Port District land, and County parks here. CCW is nonexistent, and the cops I've talked to sure don't support it except for themselves.

Cops in the neighboring city give tickets for the primary offense of smoking in an enclosed car. Yes, they pull you over for smoking in your car with your windows rolled up, and give you a ticket for it. No joke.

So forgive me if I don't see our local police in the same way as I see the Marines I've known. That's not cop bashing; it's just reality. And with common courtesy to all, I take each individual as he/she is.

brufener
December 18, 2006, 05:51 PM
#2: There are NO "immunities" for the police! They are subject to the same laws as everyone!

While your post is technically correct, it is very misleading. Yes police are subject to the laws just like you and I. However, many laws are written so that they do not apply to the police.

Here is an example: If you live in DC you may not have a handgun unless it was registered before 1976. However, police are exempt from the registration requirement. In fact, the majority of (if not all) police officers in DC carry a handgun at all times when they are working.

The argument is that there should be no police exemptions in weapons laws. If the weapon is good enough and/or necessary for the police, it is good enough and/or necessary for civilians.

Of course other, non-weapon, laws giving police special privileges/powers are necessary. For example, police have the power/authority to stop someone for a traffic violation (or any misdemeanor). I would suspect that most of us do not want every citizen to have the power to make a "citizen's arrest" for traffic violations or misdemeanors.

jeepmor
December 19, 2006, 02:42 AM
Facts are facts and these people sharing their experience and opinions on this matter appears to be legitimate claims that can be directly observed. I do not consider facts that are simply not pretty bashing. We have a president that cannot properly manage a campaign against insurgents. This statement is not pretty, but it is indeed.....a fact.

Like the border patrol issue. Simply because I want Mexicans to enter into this country legally DOES NOT make me a racist.

Simply because someone points out their experience with Law Enforcement; like being ticketed for smoking in your own car is not bashing. It's an example of how whacked out the laws are becoming and how the police capitalize on it financially. This particular law is already preposterous, but the police enforcing it only contributes money to the coffers and doesn't really solve anything. And I don't smoke, but people's freedom to do so in public places should not be trampled on by the likes of me. In a restaurant, that's different, but out on the sidewalk or freeway, it's a bit much don't you agree?

I'm stating that there are factions of .gov employees that get away with violations that the most of us non.gov's simply cannot. If you don't believe that, ask a cop who gets carted off to jail for DUII and who gets a ride home from the same officer for the same infraction. We lowly serfs go to jail, the LEO gives his brethren a ride home. I know a former officer, I know how it works, don't delude yourself and think its different. This fellow is a friend of mine and got the ride home, from state patrol. And he admitted to me that he was over the limit. He told me the story firsthand. Me disagreeing with this policy does not make me a cop basher whatsoever simply because you don't happen to agree with my point of view that this is not kosher. These are facts, not perceptions.

And for the record. I have family who are in Law Enforcement, the other is a Marine. The Marine is more respectful in general to everyone and the one in Law Enforcement has a big dose of the stereotypical 'holier than thou attitude' I've seen exhibited in SOME police officers. I won't generalize to the whole population, but you have to admit it does become a personality for some of them. I see this as the problem regarding the police. But I've also worked in a hospital and seen how callous doctors become towards others. It is a defense mechanism of the psyche at the root, nothing more.

Erebus
December 19, 2006, 02:09 PM
#2: There are NO "immunities" for the police! They are subject to the same laws as everyone!

Untrue, in MA at least we have "DA LIST" of approved firearms and the AG gets to ban any weapon he deems "unsafe". He uses consumer protections laws to do it. Police are immune and can buy any firearm they wish.

I have a friend that just bought a brand new Glock and I can only buy one that was made before October of 1998.

If you enjoyed reading about "The Anti's agenda" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!