How do Police Officers feel about CHL's


PDA






Harley Man
August 9, 2008, 06:41 PM
I relize I will get just about as many pro's as con's from the Police community when it comes to CHL's / conceal carry / open carry, but I hope there are some officers out there that are willing to express there opinion. I live in Arlington Texas, and when I took my CHL class I asked the instructor this question. He said for the most part the officers that don't think citizens should have gun come from small community forces. The Texas Hwy Patrol thinks it's a good thing, and larger forces are for the most part for it. Anyway like to hear for someone out there in the position to respond.

Proud Viet Nam Vet

If you enjoyed reading about "How do Police Officers feel about CHL's" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
publiuss
August 9, 2008, 06:50 PM
I think as a whole, they don't think citizens should be able to CC. Don't you know they are the only ones trained and capable of carrying a weapon:rolleyes: In my experience it is the smaller jurisdictions that don't have a problem w/it, and Houston&DFW, they don't care for it at all as a whole.

blackcash88
August 9, 2008, 06:51 PM
+1 publiuss. At least around here anyway. :rolleyes:

Ragnar Danneskjold
August 9, 2008, 06:54 PM
I think as a whole, most street officers don't particularly care. It's the chiefs,commissioners, and well publicized dirtbags who give a bad name to the rest.

Zach S
August 9, 2008, 07:30 PM
Sounds about right. Here in asheville NC the officers that I've delt with usually glance at my CHP and hand it back, they never disarm me. A lot of them didnt even ask what and where I was carrying. I simply told one I had my carry permit and I was armed, his reply was "Okay." Didnt ask what I was carrying, or even to see ID or my carry permit.

In a nearby small town my carry permit was used as PC to search my car. Added about an hour to my trip.

Mike Franklin
August 9, 2008, 07:32 PM
Based on my friends I'd say that most big city Cops are told and taught that it's a bad thing while rural and small town LEOs support it.
I think that if you should not carry a gun you ought to be tattooed on the back of the right hand otherwise no problem.

Mike Franklin
August 9, 2008, 07:37 PM
In a nearby small town my carry permit was used as PC to search my car. Added about an hour to my trip.

Having a permit is not Probable Cause to search your vehicle. If you file a complaint ask for a copy of the tape of the stop.
You have to understand that Cops are taught this crap by some butt head who continues to get away with it because citizens allow them to.

Zach S
August 9, 2008, 07:51 PM
Wasnt a stop, it was a seat belt check.

At any given time, there are six officers on patrol in that county. I had a verbal disagreement with one years ago when I lived there, and was constanly harrassed until about eight years ago, when I moved. I'm not filing a complaint against one. Just asking for more harassment in that town. Know folks who have BTDT. One officer that had numerous complaints against him continued to work for the department until he was caught on tape on duty screwing a girl in his cruiser. The tape was sent to the officer's wife rather than the department, which I thought was a nice touch.

I did point out that my CHP isnt probable cause, and that I did not give consent to search. Just seemed to piss him off more.

Drgong
August 9, 2008, 08:01 PM
Zach, which county is this? PM if need be, as I live in Western NC as well...

Archie
August 9, 2008, 08:07 PM
It depends on the agency and the age of the officer involved.

Typically, the 'civilians shouldn't have or carry guns' crowd are the management types who really aren't lawmen anymore. They are politicians and as such try very hard to make their bosses (the city government administrators) happy. So if the mayor is anti-gun, the police chief will be so as well.

A patrolman or junior sergeant who wants to be 'management' will make his (her) bosses happy, and if the upper management is anti, they are anti.

Most ground level officers who have a real grasp of crime and such don't worry too much about regular folks being armed. There are several who have had their bacon saved by armed citizens and those lawmen are pretty much pro-gun. I've even met pro-gun cops on the Los Angeles Police Department, which rather surprised me. One older cop, who is pro-gun, did offer this bit of information; "In the old days, only the cops and the criminals had guns - that was simpler for me."

Younger lawmen (of all stripes) have been 'educated' in the liberal schools and are taught (not always by the agency) to be somewhat elitist; but they don't realize that. The ones who develop some ability to discern people and people's actions tend to be those who are more relaxed and pro-gun. They can see with a fair amount of accuracy who is going to be difficult and who is rational and legit. Those who 'don't trust anyone' are the ones who panic easily and worry about regular folks who are armed.

Just for the record, I've been a federal lawman for twenty-six years now. I think everyone should be armed. I know lots of other officers who agree, disagree and some who can't make up their mind.

Hk91-762mm
August 9, 2008, 08:28 PM
My next door neighbor and good friend is a NY state Trooper On the Swat /Mrt detail.
One day he was telling me he was going to shoot to keep current -SO I lent him My HK-91 and gave him a few boxes of Ball ammo and told him to test er out.
There was a method to my madness--Upon its return I asked WELL did your co workers want it banned --His reply NO--They want to know if you want to sell it ????
He then handed me a bunch of boxes of Federal MATCH Ammo to replace what they shot up of mine --and a gallon can full of match empties!
All in all Id say My experiment was a successs!

A man with a gun!
August 9, 2008, 08:31 PM
I've got a California CCW. It's issued buy my local Sheriff.
So, there doesn't seem to be a problem here.

Ragnar Danneskjold
August 9, 2008, 08:34 PM
I've encountered 5 separate LEOs on various occasions(not all law-breaking lol) that were aware of me carrying. Not a single one so much batted an eye or asked a question other than "are you carrying right now?" They were not all from the same dept. either. So in my personal experience, patrol officers really don't care.

denfoote
August 9, 2008, 08:44 PM
Always remember: the Police are agents of the government.
Their attitude and training reflects that government's policy irregardless of their personal views.
Also remember that until said governments were forced by we the people to pass laws allowing it, the CHL , for all intents and purposes did not exist!!!

This brings up the disturbing philosophical question of if the government ordered that all CHL holders were terrorists, and used the information given on the application to raid homes, arrest holders, and confiscate guns, how many police officers would comply with said (hypothetical) order???

It's not as far fetched as you might think!! :scrutiny:

tpaw
August 9, 2008, 08:51 PM
I relize I will get just about as many pro's as con's from the Police community when it comes to CHL's / conceal carry / open carry, but I hope there are some officers out there that are willing to express there opinion.

I put 20 years in the NYPD. I never had an issue with conceal carry or open carry. I investigated many legal carry shootings by non police personnel and have found that in 99% of the times, the shooting was legal and justified. I was wounded one night and it required me to work in the administration office of the precinct for 6 months. As luck would have it, I was in charge of investigating applicants who applied for gun permits. Needless to say, I issued as many as I could. I have always been pro gun. My feeling is the more law abiding citizens who carry a firearm, and know how and when to use it, the safer we all will be.

halfacop
August 9, 2008, 08:55 PM
I think as a whole, they don't think citizens should be able to CC. Don't you know they are the only ones trained and capable of carrying a weapon.........

I can tell you that I would prefer it if every honest, hard working, contributing member of society would carry. I can also tell you that the majority of LEO that I know throughout the country feel this way.

As you all know - we can not be everywhere all the time. People need to learn and prepare to defend themselves, their families and thier fellow man. There is no better time, with all the active shooter issues and threat of terriost activity, along with all the other common place **** that goes down for everyone to step up and take responsability for themselves and refuse to be sheep!

I think if you really got a chance to talk with a diverse group of LEO - you would find out that they are for the 2nd amendment and support the citizens right to arm themselves. If your willing to take on the daily responsability of a CPL, stay vigil, to be there to hold the fort down until LE can arrive and perhaps elimanate the threat before anymore harm can be done..........then God speed and thank you!

Treo
August 9, 2008, 09:11 PM
I know the El Paso County Sheriff's Dept.( or at least the Sheriff Himself) is all for it.

CSPD? Not so much.

Solo Flyer
August 9, 2008, 09:21 PM
My experience,living in 15 states, the more rural the community,the more the officers attitude will run to pro- CCW.
There's much more one on one ,and even outright socializing between LE and residents, in the smaller environments.
I've lived in NYC,San Francisco,Seattle and little burgs of 5,000.There is no comparison in my mind.Give me that Mayberry attitude anyday.

shadowalker
August 9, 2008, 09:25 PM
I think as a whole This is a massive generalization, just like always, everyone, etc. In the states I've lived in those being Alaska, Montana and Idaho the majority of law enforcement are very pro citizen gun ownership, CWL, etc. We get a few new officers or ones from places like California that take a while to come around but most do.

In Ada County (where Boise is located) our sheriff's department puts on a free CCW class, during the class the deputies BEG people to (a.) get their CWL and (b.) to always carry.

Deanimator
August 9, 2008, 09:38 PM
The truth is that it doesn't make any more difference what they think about CCW than it does how I feel about the Federal tax code. You can be as positive or negative about the law as you like... just so long as you obey it.

Cops have as much right to an opinion as anyone else, whether it's brilliant or mind-numbingly stupid. There's only a problem when they try to equate their likes and dislikes with the law. When that happens, careers burst into flames, bank accounts get emptied, and people end up living in mom's basement.

The only weird thing is the genuine surprise the bad ones experience when somebody stands up to them and gives them the rubber hose treatment in civil court... kind of like the armed robber who can't believe that you just shot him in the chest. People like that just never believe that those things will happen to THEM.

oneshooter
August 9, 2008, 09:38 PM
Houston PD, some like it, but most do not. Harris County SD, never had a problem, those that I have talked with support CHL.

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

orionengnr
August 9, 2008, 09:48 PM
Well, since the original poster is in TX, and I am a TX CHL holder, I will reply in that context.

Every Dallas/Ft Wort/Metroplex City Police officer I have had contact with is supportive of Texas CHL holders.

I have heard that the Tarrant County DA is anti, but when I was involved in a traffic accident (and subsequently transported in an ambulance) the Grapevine and Coppell PD that responded were fine. I handed over my PM9 and my CHL while I was on a stretcher; when I was released from the hospital I went and picked it up at Grapevine PD. The officer gave me the police report, gave me my Kahr, and we talked guns for a few minutes.

I've heard the same about Harris County (Houston) DA but have no personal experience.

Bottom line: regardless of what administrators say, what matters is the street level officer. In my experience, most of them have the street smarts and common sense to understand that armed law-abiding citizens are a good thing.

tpaw
August 9, 2008, 09:50 PM
Give me that Mayberry attitude anyday.

AH! Andy of Mayberry, Sheriff Taylor. My dream job in my dream town. Maybe in my next life?.....;)

wyosasquatch
August 9, 2008, 09:59 PM
I talked to two officers this past week about this very subject. One was a police officer and the other was a sheriffs deputy. Both said they support concealed carry and both said they get frustrated with open carry (legal here). They didn't like open carry because it gets called in from the store or somewhere that there is a guy with a gun and all units have to respond to a legal carry.

Dan the Man
August 9, 2008, 11:10 PM
I'll provide a bit of background, so you understand the context. I have been a CHL holder in Texas since the law came into effect. In that entire time, I have had four contacts with police. Three were great, and one was strange-but-fine.

Two years ago, I completed the Peace Officers' Academy and became a Reserve Deputy Sheriff. I am a lead deputy in Patrol. As a reserve deputy, I have full police powers, but the pay isn't as good as the full time folks. :rolleyes:

While working as a patrol deputy, I have had three interactions with Texas CHL holders:

1. I was running radar on a large interstate (speed limit 65 mph). A motorcycle passes me while doing 105 mph. I overtake, and when I turn on my lights, he hunkers down and hits the accelerator. I declare a pursuit, and stay on him at speeds of up to 140 mph. He gets scared, slows down, and eventually exits and stops at a light. After he refuses instructions to get off his bike, I pull him off, handcuff him, and search him. I find a Glock 23 in his back waistband. He tells me he's a CHL (and he is!). I take his gun (he got it back the next day). He is charged with Felony evasion and probably won't be able to own a gun for a while.

2. While running radar on a rural highway (speed limit 60 mph), a Mazda RX8 passes me at 100 mph in fairly heavy traffic. I overtake, turn my lights on, and he pulls over. Driver is a CHL. His wife is in the passenger seat. His two teenage sons are in the back seat. His six year old daughter is unsecured in the front between the seats (one too many people for the seats in an RX8). I solve their problem of 'too many people' by arresting him for reckless, and turning the vehicle over to his wife.

3. While I'm at dinner, a local business owner comes into the restaurant and tells me there is an older man at his nail parlor with a little girl, and they are acting strange. He called the police (responding police were from City PD), but they had not arrived yet, and he was concerned that they might leave. I go over, detain them, and question. It all seems very suspicious. Older man is a CHL holder. 10-yoa little girl is neighbor's daughter. They seemed to me to be going out on an overnight 'date'. City PD responds, contacts mother, who seems surprised girl is with older man. Girl discloses that older man 'likes her too much' and touches her...

So, as you can see, the CHL holders I've met are not too impressive a bunch. But I'm still a big supporter of CHL's, and I'm looking forward to having a good experience with one some day. :)

Our sheriff is not a supporter of CHL's, but the consensus of the rank-and-file in our Department is positive. Of all the officers I know (~100 from various departments small to large), I'd say 80% are supporters of CHL.

My advise to CHL holders is use common sense in everything you do, including (but not limited to!) carrying your firearm. Note that none of these CHL holders committed gun crimes.

Regards
--Dan

Dan the Man
August 9, 2008, 11:36 PM
Always entertaining...

but I hope there are some officers out there that are willing to express there opinion

As far as I can tell, of the 20-some responses, three are from sworn officers. It seems there are an amazing number of mind-readers on THR. :p

The truth is that it doesn't make any more difference what they think about CCW than it does how I feel about the Federal tax code.

Not really correct. Peace officers in Texas have a large amount of discretion on how best to enforce laws. From the CHL's perspective, its always best to not break the law. That's the obvious way to avoid trouble. But once a law has been violated, a peace officer can be lenient or tough and still be within their authority under the Code of Criminal Procedures.

For example, let's say I get a call that there is a man with a concealed weapon at a bar. I go and I find the guy. He's a CHL armed in an establishment that makes 51% of its revenue by selling liquor by the drink (i.e. a Bar :)). I can: arrest for the CHL violation, arrest for something else, not arrest but file for a warrant, not arrest but get the guy out of the bar. What I actually do will depend on the attitude and actions of the violator. But you can see how different peace officers will make different decisions based on their view of CHL's.

Regards
--Dan

Mr White
August 10, 2008, 09:28 AM
My cousin is a cop in suburban Pittsburgh and he's more of a gun nut that I am. I suspect that he became a cop just so he could carry a gun at work.

When I see him, the talk always turns quickly to guns; what we've acquired since we last talked, that we're currently carrying, pros and cons of each, etc. I haven't seen him since the Heller decision. That should be an good conversation.

Harley Man
August 10, 2008, 09:55 AM
Dan the Man thank for your input, I found it informative and enlighting. I appreciate you and your fellow Police Officers for what you do everyday protecting and serving.
Side Bar Thread...Back in April 08 I did a ride out with Arlington PD, what a great experience that was, which left me with a highten level of respect for our guy / gals in blue.
Keep up the good work out there.

Proud Viet Nam Vet

Deanimator
August 10, 2008, 03:03 PM
Not really correct. Peace officers in Texas have a large amount of discretion on how best to enforce laws.
But discretion WITHIN the law is still what the law allows.

I don't expect breaks from the police, just that they not violate the law.

Using discretion, even based on the attitude of the suspect, isn't a problem. Giving somebody a break because they're polite isn't a problem. Giving them a hard time [within the law] if they're being a jackass isn't either.

Enforcing your WHIM as law, is a BIG problem.

The latter is where virtually ALL of the worst recent open carry incidents have gone badly off the rails. If you're going to arrest somebody for something, you'd BETTER be able to go to the statute, at least after the fact, and cite the provision being violated. In WAY too many cases, not only can't the officer do that, there's simply nothing in the law even VAGUELY like what the person's being [falsely] arrested for. Take for instance the guy recently arrested for among other things "having hollowpoints" and "crossing state lines while being armed". No such laws exist in the jurisdiction where he was falsely arrested (and a magistrate SAID he was falsely arrested). I'll bet money that none of them can demonstrate that they were ever taught those "laws" in an academy class, by a supervisor, or by a prosecutor either. Clearly, the officers who arrested the man had a reckless disregard for the law and the rights of the public. They're going to pay big time for it too.

Sam
August 10, 2008, 03:12 PM
Since when is it important what your servant thinks.
Since they are public servants, and drawing their paycheck from the citizenry, policy wise they are not entitled to an opinion, they are entitled to a paycheck so long as they do the taxpayers bidding.

If they do not care for that, they can do like I did and go into another line of work.

Sam

Gentleman Ranker
August 10, 2008, 04:52 PM
Sam (Today, 03:12 PM) #30 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4799274&postcount=30) says:

... they are entitled to a paycheck so long as they do the taxpayers bidding.
And which taxpayers would those be, exactly?

I'm not trying to be contrary, but you might want to think about some of the implications of that PoV. It could take you to some places you'd rather not go.

regards,

GR

okiebuckout
August 10, 2008, 05:09 PM
I had an encounter yesterday with a police chief of a small town in the panhandle of Oklahoma. I sped up about a block too soon. When he asked for my license, I showed him my permit and told him I was carrying. All he did was asked "What are you carrying?". I told him a Glock 30, which he simply replied, "Cool." He saw my VA id card and proceeded to talk about the army with me. It ended with a warning and off I went. He didn't seem to care at all that I was carrying. He also saw my hunting rifle case in the back and asked me about it. He just seemed curious. No excessive questioning or anything. All and all it was a positive experience.

GRB
August 10, 2008, 05:33 PM
I am a federal LEO. I do not think anyone should have a CHL. Of course that is because I do not think anyone should be required to obtain a license to be at liberty to exercise their rights. I am very much against gun registration, carry licenses, permits and the like. You should not need any of that in order to carry.

In fact I would like to see every able bodied person over the age of 18 being required own, qualify with, and carry a firearm; but then I guess that would volate sme other right. Oh well, it was a thought.

I am all for responsible carry though. So I would like to see people not forced but urged to get some basic training, and then to qualify at least twice yearly (qualify at any range, by any certified firerams instructor, no state certification just NRA or something like that).

All the best,
Glenn B

GRB
August 10, 2008, 05:38 PM
Since when is it important what your servant thinks.
Since they are public servants, and drawing their paycheck from the citizenry, policy wise they are not entitled to an opinion, they are entitled to a paycheck so long as they do the taxpayers bidding.

Are you kiddng or are you just absolutely rude and nsulting to the nth degree when it comes to public servants. We may be public servants, but we are not your slaves as you seem to think. Can you realy be that out of touch with the reality of being a civil servant or in the military service.

I am a public servant, a federal law enforcement officer. I am entitled to my rights and liberties just as is anyone else even if I work for the government. Guess what that means, I am also entitled to form my own ideas and I can have my own opinions, and I can even write replies to highly insulting posts such as yours. I can also vote in elections - can you imagine that with me being a public servant! Also remember this - I pay taxes too, probably a lot more than many other Americans. If I pay more taxes than you, does that mean your opinmion does not matter as much as mine. Any logic in your point of view eludes me.

All the best,
Glenn B

The Lone Haranguer
August 10, 2008, 05:43 PM
I can only speak to one personal experience. The Glendale, AZ PD officer who pulled me over for (allegedly) speeding and weaving seemed to have no problem with it. He only asked me one perfunctory question about having weapons in my vehicle, only because (he said) he saw my CCW as I was getting out my license. Then I was let go with just a verbal warning. I cannot say whether having the CCW helped in this. It certainly didn't hurt. AZ has long allowed open carry, and CCW has been in place for a dozen years or more.

Aguila Blanca
August 10, 2008, 07:19 PM
I talked to two officers this past week about this very subject. One was a police officer and the other was a sheriffs deputy. Both said they support concealed carry and both said they get frustrated with open carry (legal here). They didn't like open carry because it gets called in from the store or somewhere that there is a guy with a gun and all units have to respond to a legal carry.
I still maintain that's an issue of not properly training and instructing the dispatchers. Police officers should respond to reports of illegal activity. If open carry is legal in a jurisdiction, when someone calls in that they saw a man with a gun, the dispatcher should ask, "What is he doing with it? Is there a crime being committed?" If the answer is (as it would be in these situations) "He has a gun in a holster on his belt," the dispatcher should simply inform the caller that it's perfectly legal and to have a nice day/evening. There is no justifiable reason to scramble the troops to investigate a report of "Suspicion of lawful activity."

I am a federal LEO. I do not think anyone should have a CHL. Of course that is because I do not think anyone should be required to obtain a license to be at liberty to exercise their rights. I am very much against gun registration, carry licenses, permits and the like. You should not need any of that in order to carry.
Glenn, I submit that, at least based on my experience with a couple of Federal law enforcement agencies (working with them, not for them), you are very much an exception. Most (again, in my experience) very much think that they are a class apart and above, and that the citizens who pay their salaries are serfs.

And I ain't kiddin'. It would be wonderful if more LEOs (at all levels of jurisdiction) were like you and a few others on here.

c1ogden
August 10, 2008, 10:21 PM
This cop thinks its stupid.


I think its stupid that you can't carry in some locations.
(Depending on the state - parks, hospitals, govt buildings, sporting events, schools, public transportation, parades, restaurants, banks, bars, airports, malls, etc.)

I have no restrictions, why should you?




I think its stupid that you have to announce yourself to any cop that approaches you.
What happens when you're with people who don't know (and shouldn't know) that you're armed?

I don't have to do that, why should you?

JWarren
August 11, 2008, 07:50 AM
c1ogden wrote:

This cop thinks its stupid.


I think its stupid that you can't carry in some locations.
(Depending on the state - parks, hospitals, govt buildings, sporting events, schools, public transportation, parades, restaurants, banks, bars, airports, malls, etc.)

I have no restrictions, why should you?




I think its stupid that you have to announce yourself to any cop that approaches you.
What happens when you're with people who don't know (and shouldn't know) that you're armed?

I don't have to do that, why should you?


This cop is welcome to a cup of dark roast at my house anytime he makes it through South MS.

Thanks.


-- John

Powderman
August 11, 2008, 08:17 AM
I believe in reasonable restrictions.

For instance, if you should decide to buy a Solothurn 20mm anti-tank rifle, you should be cautioned strongly never to attempt to fire it from an unsupported position.

In addition, if you own an M1 Abrams main battle tank, you will be required to assist in repairing the road if your track shoes become so worn that they chew the pavement.

Finally, if the 155 howitzer of your dreams becomes yours, you should understand well that the shrapnel fan can be quite large, and only promise to fire it in the appropriate setting.

Other than that, I give no thought to it. What part of "shall not be infringed" do some people have problems with?

I have contacted many people who turned out to be carrying valid CCW permits (or as we call them in WA, CPL's). The official part of the stop takes usually about 3-5 minutes. The part where I turn off the overheads, possibly move to another location, jaw about various tasty firearms and give each other directions to our various ranges and gun clubs can take a bit longer.

Downrange
August 11, 2008, 08:41 AM
Some excellent posts here. Glenn, we need more like you. And why oh why (unless NJ law requires it) do people "announce" to an LEO they encounter that they are carrying??? Or not???
Unless the LEO asks me, I'm volunteering nothing. I don't need a pat on the head, or some acknowledgement that we are somehow brothers in arms here. If the LEO is one of the "good ones," he/she will probably not even ask, and I won't tell.

I realize there is some anecdotal evidence that people were "let go with a warning" when the LEO realized they had a CCW, but I don't think this should be an opening gambit in an encounter.

In VA, I am told, at least, the database CCWs show up in is the same one as Judges, Justices of the Peace, etc. If true, I'll take that as a good sign, and keep mum until asked! Other states - other rules may apply - I feel sorry for anyone who has to live in NJ anyway! ;)

ferretray
August 11, 2008, 08:47 AM
I'm blessed to be living in Texas, but we are still working on some of the inane restrictions y'all are talking about.
As far as informing a LEO of ones CCW status, thats required during an "Official" interaction with LEO's.
Due to the nature of my work, I come in contact with quite a few, usually veteran, LEO's. I've never hears a Texas Law Dog
spout anti-CCW rgetoric. I guess I can take an informal poll and get back to y'all. I'm willing to bet that the results will show an overwhelming support for armed "Civilians".

FCFC
August 11, 2008, 10:36 AM
Since when is it important what your servant thinks.
Since they are public servants, and drawing their paycheck from the citizenry, policy wise they are not entitled to an opinion, they are entitled to a paycheck so long as they do the taxpayers bidding.

Are you kiddng or are you just absolutely rude and nsulting to the nth degree when it comes to public servants. We may be public servants, but we are not your slaves as you seem to think. Can you realy be that out of touch with the reality of being a civil servant or in the military service.

I am a public servant, a federal law enforcement officer. I am entitled to my rights and liberties just as is anyone else even if I work for the government. Guess what that means, I am also entitled to form my own ideas and I can have my own opinions, and I can even write replies to highly insulting posts such as yours. I can also vote in elections - can you imagine that with me being a public servant! Also remember this - I pay taxes too, probably a lot more than many other Americans. If I pay more taxes than you, does that mean your opinmion does not matter as much as mine. Any logic in your point of view eludes me.

A fine counterpoint, Glenn B. I like it and certainly agree with it. Except for the strawman argument about "slaves." The poster you quoted only went as far as the term "public servant." I don't think inferring something he "seem[s] to think" helped your otherwise very good logic. Actually, it detracted from it.

Sam
August 11, 2008, 11:05 AM
Are you kiddng or are you just absolutely rude and nsulting to the nth degree when it comes to public servants. We may be public servants, but we are not your slaves as you seem to think. Can you realy be that out of touch with the reality of being a civil servant or in the military service.

Mr. Bartley,
I am not kidding or intending to be rude or insulting. I spent 2 years as a Detroit policeman and 27 years on active duty (not guard or reserve) in the military and I am well aware that you are entitled to an opinion. During all those years, I was a public servant. I am quite proud of that fact.
I clearly state the fact that your opinion is officially of no consequence. You are not an elected official and it is not your place to establish policy. It is your place to follow policy established by elected officials who are answerable to the citizens.

The most significant governmental problem we face in the United States today, is that certain persons in government at all levels think they are entitled to inject their personal opinions into their duties as they see fit, without accountability, ie.. acting as if they were the master and not the servant.
They are in fact public SERVANTS. Not slaves, public servants. Your job as a public servant, is to carry out public policy, not establish it and such, officially your personal opinion is of no consequence. Your job is to carry out the "will of the people" not to inject you own personal values and feelings into their lives. If public servants were to follow your thought to it's logical conclusion, any military member could solve our foreign affairs issues in his own way, by assassinating an offending foreign leader because he thinks it's the best solution? We have LEO's and bureaucrats doing the same thing every day, abusing citizens and denying them their freedom and causing them harm because they try to establish policy instead of carrying out policy. Thankfully they are no where near the majority. No one has insinuated that you are one of them and you should not be too hasty to come to their defense, lest you be tainted by their misbehavior. You are known by teh company you keep.

Public servants are in fact just that, servants. I spent a long time as one and never felt demeaned by it. If that term is offensive to you, then you need to go into a different line of work. You are free just like I was to seek employment in the private sector where you may publicly espouse any opinion you wish.

Sincerely,

Sam Damewood

M203Sniper
August 11, 2008, 12:01 PM
How do Police Officers feel about CHL's

Is it illegal? :confused:

NO! :what:

Who Cares. ;)

Tarvis
August 11, 2008, 12:15 PM
A deputy that shoots USPSA with us said he thinks everyone should carry a gun.

Mike Franklin
August 11, 2008, 12:19 PM
I approach everyone as if they are armed in some way, cautious not paranoid. I have no problem with citizens carrying a gun. I don't agree in a license to carry, I don't agree with a license to vote or having to show LEOs your travel permit papers.

Sam, I have no idea where you got that train of thought but it suddenly made me think of long lines of German soldiers marching with their right hand extended. I serve the public at large, I do not have to agree with everything each citizen believes. I do answer to a much higher authority than either the public or the Laws of Man.

rduckwor
August 11, 2008, 01:08 PM
I am a federal LEO. I do not think anyone should have a CHL. Of course that is because I do not think anyone should be required to obtain a license to be at liberty to exercise their rights. I am very much against gun registration, carry licenses, permits and the like. You should not need any of that in order to carry.

In fact I would like to see every able bodied person over the age of 18 being required own, qualify with, and carry a firearm; but then I guess that would volate sme other right. Oh well, it was a thought.

I am all for responsible carry though. So I would like to see people not forced but urged to get some basic training, and then to qualify at least twice yearly (qualify at any range, by any certified firerams instructor, no state certification just NRA or something like that).

All the best,
Glenn B

Glen Bartley: If the federal government was staffed with people like you, paying my taxes would be a pleasure.

Stay safe out there.

RMD

Sam
August 11, 2008, 01:20 PM
Mr. Franklin,
I am glad that you answer to some higher authority than yourself, but as a public servant, it is not your place to make policy any more than it is that of Mr. Bartley, or myself when I was a minion of the government. It is why we have a constitution and an elected government.
Just how do you feel that being accountable to the citizenry is analogous to Nazi Germany?

I think you should re-read my post.

Erik
August 11, 2008, 02:50 PM
In my experience approxiamtely 85% of LEOs are pro 2A, with most of them being pro CCW.

Mannlicher
August 11, 2008, 03:56 PM
All I am going to say it that its a good thing cops don't write the laws, or pass on their Constitutionality.
Now if we can just get them to remember that they are public servents and employees, we all might get along better.

asarthur
August 11, 2008, 04:39 PM
I live in Maylene Alabama. Here the three most common vehicle decals are Bama, Auburn and Browning. About 15 months ago, a guy held up a bank, shot and killed two female employees (one 7 months pregnant) and took the female manager as a hostage. A passerby heard the shots, called police on his cell and took out his rifle. Before the police arrived, the robber and his hostage came out. The guy asked the dispatcher what to do, but she wasn't much help. He got a clear shot and put a 30 cal hole in his thigh. When the police arrived, he was giving the perp first aid.

I would have let him bleed out.

Mike Franklin
August 11, 2008, 05:00 PM
As a LEO I have a great deal of leeway as to how the law is enforced and even what charges are filed in a situation. I am not a robot programmed to respond the same in every situation.
JSYK, Agencies are frequently given the authority to write administrative law by Congress or State Legislatures. I don't agree with it and you likely don't even know about it.
And we are Servants of the Public at Large not any individual. You might be interested to know that by Case Law LEOs are not held accountable for protection of individual citizens, only the public at large.
There's also a big difference in a Servant and a Slave. If a Law was passed today telling me to round up members of a certain race or to disarm all gun owners, I wouldn't enforce those Laws. If that makes me a bad Servant then fire me. I have seen the newsreels of the German Police swearing allegiance to Adolph Hitler because the legally passed Law told them to.

Sam
August 11, 2008, 07:02 PM
Mr. Franklin,
I don't think you and I have any disagreement.

Unfortunately I am 'highly regulated" by one of those agencies and I d@mned well don't like it. They have a well documented track record of not playing straight either.

As for folks like Adolph, I think we all agree on how to handle that, even if they do manage to get elected. We just have to pay strict attention to them, we know the what but not the when. I believe that Mr Jefferson put it best:

"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"

Sam Damewood

tpaw
August 11, 2008, 09:02 PM
Since when is it important what your servant thinks.
Since they are public servants, and drawing their paycheck from the citizenry, policy wise they are not entitled to an opinion, they are entitled to a paycheck so long as they do the taxpayers bidding.

If they do not care for that, they can do like I did and go into another line of work.

Sam

Sounds like your a disgruntled employee Sam. Something bit YOU in the a$$.

Sam
August 11, 2008, 09:38 PM
Not at all tpaw,
You obviously didn't read and comprehend the entire series of posts.

I was a career Public Servant, enjoyed it and am proud of my service. I am a taxpaying citizen, fully conversant with the Constitution of the United States, and I believe in what it stands for.
I am intolerant of those that believe they are entitled to privilege beyond that accorded their fellow citizens, and of any public servant that feels he is entitled to exercise arbitrary and capricious behavior in the performance of his or her duties.

Nothing has ever bitten me in the @$$ and survived the experience.

tpaw
August 11, 2008, 10:28 PM
I am intolerant of those that believe they are entitled to privilege beyond that accorded their fellow citizens, and of any public servant that feels he is entitled to exercise arbitrary and capricious behavior in the performance of his or her duties.

I understand now, and I could not agree more. Thank you for your response.

bushey83
August 11, 2008, 10:52 PM
I work for a small town department, 6 full time officers, and 4 part timers, and a population of only 2,500 residents. I am FULLY FOR the right for citizens to conceal carry!! As far as I know most of the guys in depts. around me feel the same way. I think as long as you pass a firearms training course, have the proper background checks done, and are made to re-certify every so often like I have to every couple of months, why not!?!

FCFC
August 11, 2008, 11:01 PM
I am FULLY FOR the right for citizens to conceal carry!!...I think as long as you pass a firearms training course, have the proper background checks done, and are made to re-certify every so often like I have to every couple of months, why not!?!

This is a good idea, I think. To re-certify all CCWers periodically. Seems to me if it's good for the LEOs that it would be good for the CCWers (and OCers?).

hoosier8
August 11, 2008, 11:18 PM
Aw Sam! As for folks like Adolph, I think we all agree on how to handle that, even if they do manage to get elected. We just have to pay strict attention to them, we know the what but not the when. I believe that Mr Jefferson put it best:

"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"

It gives me great pleasure to see you speak of the absolute wisdom of the founding fathers. It is with these words that I take comfort in the ability of our great nation to survive attacks, from without and within.

Under an attack from within, it will not be the responsibility of our LEOs to respond or not respond to whatever the command of the day will be, but will the responsibility of the ordinary citizen. Whether we are allowed CHLs or not is of no consequence as our right to keep and bear arms must not be infringed! The battle for our rights will be just that, a battle, and I hope our LEOs will be on the side of the people.

blackcash88
August 12, 2008, 06:53 AM
I work for a small town department, 6 full time officers, and 4 part timers, and a population of only 2,500 residents. I am FULLY FOR the right for citizens to conceal carry!! As far as I know most of the guys in depts. around me feel the same way. I think as long as you pass a firearms training course, have the proper background checks done, and are made to re-certify every so often like I have to every couple of months, why not!?!

Uh, yeah... Would you feel the same way about the bolded part if YOU had to PAY out of pocket for range time, targets, ammo, etc and take TIME off from your REGULAR paying job??? We don't all work in LE and get to shoot/train/qualify for FREE, where that training is part of your job because it's REQUIRED. Get real, dude. :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "How do Police Officers feel about CHL's" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!