Police Officers a Privileged Class?


PDA






NIGHTWATCH
June 10, 2004, 04:53 AM
Worth a post...


Police State: Police Officers, a Privileged Class

By Al Lorentz


Have you ever noticed that, when a police officer is killed, every police officer in the city goes on a massive manhunt? The killer is usually apprehended within 24 hours and is of course given a much more severe punishment than if a “regular” citizen had been killed. While I applaud the police officers efforts at capturing a murderer, the fact is, the average citizen doesn’t get the same sort of attention when they are murdered.

When questioned about this disparity in the handling of a murder case involving a police officer as a victim as well as the much stiffer penalty (mandated by law) for killing a cop, the usual answer is “anybody who would kill a cop is a dangerous individual”. To that I say, obviously but isn’t every murderer a danger? I have never seen or heard a valid defense of this obvious preferential treatment given to police officers.

Shouldn’t we treat all murders with the same alarm, disgust and issue the same punishments? We should if we are a society that values equality, justice and the law but obviously we are not. As I have long asserted, we are becoming a two class society, privileged aristocrats and victimized and abused peasants.

I am told that police officers have a dangerous job and this is true but the job is not nearly as dangerous as some make out. Last year, nationally there were less police officers killed in the line of duty than were freeway construction workers. Both were performing vital public service, both losses were tragedies but only one loss is valued, the other is treated as routine, a non-event.

Some other problems I have with the privileged attitude of police officers is the unprofessional practice of extending “professional courtesy”. Basically, if a cop is driving like a jerk, a maniac or just a speeding reckless lunatic and is pulled over, he simply shows his badge and the other cop gives him a wink and a nod and he gets off without so much as a warning. It’s not like this is a secret practice, it is widely known and yet the general public just smiles and continues to grovel.

Before I go on, let me applaud and thank the police officers out there who understand that they are public servants and act accordingly. The most memorable thing I ever saw a cop do was, after a crazed madman attacked a citizen in Houston and ripped the wiring out of his vans engine, a Houston Police Officer in uniform no less, re-wired the van. When he discovered the man was out of a job and on his way to Florida for a new one, he even gave him some money. While that is an extreme case of public service, it is no doubt not the only one.

I knew another cop who, when confronted with a doped up lunatic waving a knife, put a beanbag round in his shotgun, shot the man in the chest and then cuffed him. He could have simply blown him away but he didn’t have to. That’s the kind of man you want to be police chief, somebody who thinks coolly under pressure. Sadly, for every one of these stories of police acting as public servants I can give you three where they act like thugs, assassins or goose stepping toy soldiers.

There exists a gross misconception in our society today that is fueling and adding to the growing police state’s power. I speak of the prevailing attitude by those in law enforcement that they are somehow a special class of people, above the rest of us. To be blunt, they are in fact not above us, they are below us, the term is public servant.

As public servants, law enforcement officers are sworn to uphold and defend the law, but why and more importantly who decided they would have this authority?

The authority was granted initially on a limited basis (the colonists were all too familiar with divine right of kings, autocratic rule and aristocracy and would have no more of that tyranny) for specific purposes. Police officers were hired by town and city councils at the behest of the citizens to protect them from lawless brigands.

When city and town councils began to feel that they were no longer accountable to the people but in fact an autocratic ruling class, it follows that the police departments and law enforcement officers would soon adopt this un-American attitude. Police officers, like any other public servants are not a special and privileged class as they quite obviously believe they are. All public servants are subject to the will of the people so long as that will conforms to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the specific state they work in respectively.

One method that public servants are using to rid themselves of the limitations of Constitutional authority and the restrictions placed on public servants is to illegally change the Constitutions. There are States which have subverted the God Given rights of the citizens as listed and guaranteed by the United States Constitution under the color of law, not to mention a veritable tidal wave of Federal laws and regulations.

By color of law, I mean of course that they have written rules, regulations, codes and other restrictions that sound like laws but are contrary to and often in defiance of existing law, specifically Constitutional law and The Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights by the way is not a list of permissions granted by the government but a list of God Given and inalienable rights that government rightly is supposed to guarantee. Given these two facts, a government that has discarded the original law and adopted illegally its own as well as a government that believes our God given rights can be rescinded by a stroke of the pen, we have a situation of lawlessness, chaos and tyranny that exist within the very halls of the government that was supposed to prevent such conditions!

We must stop allowing our public servants to conduct themselves as if they are our lords and masters. When I say this, I also issue a caution because if you should call a police officer a “public servant” you are as likely to get a nightstick across the teeth as you are to get arrested for “suspicion”. Remember, a police officer need have no reason whatsoever to arrest you, impound your car and have you locked in the county jail until you appear before the magistrate.

Start referring to, thinking of, and treating all your public servants as just what they are, servants. When we stop thinking of ourselves as subjects and start thinking as free men and women we will be one step closer to our freedom.

Al Lorentz is a Fundamentalist Christian, father and devoted husband, state chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas. Al has served as a Marine Sniper and later as an Airborne Ranger in the Texas National Guard. He welcomes your comments at allorentz@truevine.net

http://www.lrpworldnews.com/news/index.php?option=articles&task=viewarticle&artid=30&topid=5&Itemid=3

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Officers a Privileged Class?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Delmar
June 10, 2004, 05:41 AM
I might just be taking a swing in the dark here, but to me, if someone was shooting LEO's, who are typically armed, then in a sense, the largely unarmed populace has more to worry about.

Murders have obviously never been a nice thing, but back in the day, most were "crimes of passion", where the killer and the victim knew each other.

Nowadays, we have strangers killing strangers, and the randomness of the murder, plus the restrictions an LEO must function under makes the job of tracking this wacko even more dangerous than before.

Viking6
June 10, 2004, 08:17 AM
The freeway construction worker deaths were accidents; I would think the police deaths, for the most part, were not. I think it's a matter of extremes and I think his ratios for "every one of these stories of police acting as public servants I can give you three where they act like thugs, assassins or goose stepping toy soldiers" may be off since I'm sure all of his findings are anecdotal, not empirical. Some good points about the role of public servants lost in hyperbole.

WT
June 10, 2004, 10:41 AM
Sounds like the writer, Lorentz, has an axe to grind. Maybe he got too many parking tickets.

I'd give a cop the benefit of a doubt.

Hemicuda
June 10, 2004, 10:52 AM
My feeling is that the cop is no better or worse than I am, so if someone killed ME, the murderer should get the same treatment and penalty...

and SOME cops need to realize that just because I tote a gun , (I take my own safety seroiusly!) that It doesn't make ME tha bad guy... (in fact, since I earned the permit, and jumped through all the hoops to make it LEGAL,) I am more like one of the GOOD guys...

notice that I say "SOME" cops... far from all of them cause this problem...

Hawkmoon
June 10, 2004, 11:19 AM
I think Lorentz has valid points. Why should an LEO get a free pass for speeding or reckless driving? Not long ago, in a thread on this forum a police chief from some midwestern city (I think) said regardless of the law, any LEO from any jurisdiction gets a free pass to carry in his town. THAT'S WRONG! The law is the law. Outside of his own state, a police officer is a private citizen just like the rest of us. It's not right to grant him/her preferntial treatment.

Why should LEOs be granted the "right" to carry concealed handguns in every state, while the rest of us can't? I disagree with Mas Ayoob on this one. In his magazine articles, he asks us to support passing legislation to allow LEOs to carry in all states on the theory that this will somehow make it easier for the rest of us.

I'm not buying. Once the LEOs get what they want, 99% of them will call it a day. They won't hang around and continue to support the same inter-state recognition for the rest of us. Maybe Ayoob would, but I wou;dn't bet the rance.

The point is, do LEOs think they are a special class of people? Based on the behavior of the vast majority of them, the answer is clearly Yes, and this is clearly a problem.

JohnBT
June 10, 2004, 12:00 PM
"Start referring to, thinking of, and treating all your public servants as just what they are, servants."

I've worked for the government for 30 years and I ain't no freaking servant. You want coffee? Make it yourself. Want the woodwork dusted? Do it yourself. Your car detailed? Ha. And I don't do windows either.

There's a big difference between public service and being a servant.

John

braindead0
June 10, 2004, 12:21 PM
The freeway construction worker deaths were accidents;
I'd be surprised if 1% were 'accidents', there is nearly always someone at fault.. whether it's for failing to properly maintain their vehicle or driving like an idiot... someone is at fault.

Fact is I can't even think of an accident, perhaps if your vehicle were struck by lightening and you lost control of it...

This is the same kind of thinking that leads to lawsuits against gun manufacturers.. it's the Gun's fault...blah blah.. B.S.. some person was an idiot..

BigG
June 10, 2004, 12:40 PM
I'd be surprised if 1% were 'accidents', there is nearly always someone at fault

Braindead: What you are describing is the underlying hypocrisy of society -that responsibility can be shucked off and nobody is hurt and nobody pays. There is usually a victim and usually the victim gets shafted.

Dbl0Kevin
June 10, 2004, 02:59 PM
I love all these people who like to bash the police and say how horrible and mean we all are, yet 99% of them love us when they are in need. How quickly the story changes.

As for catching and punishing cop-killers. Come on how can you not understand that? For one thing every police officer out there, regardless of what the supreme court has said, is on the street putting his life on the line for people that he or she doesn't even know. If a criminal is willing to shoot at or kill a police officer there is not much else that he would not be willing to do. Even most hardened criminals are not stupid enough to try to kill a police officer so anyone that does is an extreme risk to the public. Also let's be honest here as this is just the way life works. If someone that you know and can relate to is hurt or killed by someone.....wouldn't you be amped up and do everything that you can to bring justice to that person who did it?

As far as being let off for speeding and other such violations it's done for several reasons. One could simply be stated as being a perk of the job. There are many people who get things at work that I am not able to. Company cars that they can use for personal time, free tickets to sporting events, shows, concerts, free food at the resturant they work at. No one seems to be up in arms when these people get different treatment. The other reason is that by giving out tickets to fellow officers you start wars between depts. This is not good when those same people you could need to depend on the next day to save your life. That being said the stuff that police get let off for while driving, is in my opinion, stupid offenses of which I would not give the majority of citizens either. I speed, most people speed, and unless you are being blatantly reckless or something to the sort I'll be very inclined to let you off with a warning.

mrapathy2000
June 10, 2004, 03:16 PM
I love your title but the article left some to be desired. you did nothing in the article to really push the title.

I will refer to one of my posting which shows that yes in some states the Police officers and other are a privileged class. even when the state constitution says Article1 Section6 of Iowa constitution "All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens."

despite that the state has this law

http://www.state.ia.us/government/d...99724.htm#724.2
724.2 Authority to possess offensive weapons.
Any of the following is authorized to possess an offensive weapon when the person's duties or lawful activities require or permit such possession:
1. Any peace officer.
2. Any member of the armed forces of the United States or of the national guard.
3. Any person in the service of the United States.
4. A correctional officer, serving in an institution under the authority of the Iowa department of corrections.
5. Any person who under the laws of this state and the United States, is lawfully engaged in the business of supplying those authorized to possess such devices.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=82425&highlight=iowa

DMF
June 10, 2004, 03:39 PM
Police ARE NOT a special class. However, comparing a LEO specifically targetted for violence by virtue of his job, to someone that may be ACCIDENTALLY killed while on the job is ludicrous.

LINK: 'Cop's cop' killed in Cobourg - His throat was slashed when he answered a call for help. (http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2004/05/16/461311.html)

Police Search For Suspect In Fatal Shooting Of Sterling Heights, Mich. Officer (http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?id=13608&siteSection=2)

Pennsylvania Officer Shot in Head, Killed (http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?id=13575&siteSection=2)

These weren't accidents these were people specifically targetted for violence because of their job. Not anything like someone being killed in a workplace accident.

This author of the article in the original post obviously has an axe to grind.

Ohen Cepel
June 10, 2004, 04:19 PM
I see them as a priviledged class.

Worse part of it is that in many small towns a kid with nothing more than a high school degree can carry a gun and run the show. He can terminate your life, arrest you, end your career, etc.

Yet, he is above the law unless he committs a serious crime.

I wonder if you pulled a random sampling of 1000 police officers driving records how many have a speeding ticket vs. 1000 "average joes". I'm sure very few police would have as many tickets as the "average guy". Now please don't tell me that they never speed off duty or never get pulled over!

Then there is the whole issue of buying LEO items on letterhead. I know that it's not supposed the happen. However, many of those items very much end up in the officer's private possession.

Simply put. They do not play by the same rules as the rest of us.

Now please don't take that as bashing them. That is not my intent. They do a job that I would not want to do and that many others would/can not do.

El Tejon
June 10, 2004, 04:27 PM
Depends on how you define privilege.

The are exempt from a bunch of laws and are given enhanced status/protections under the law. In fact, their lives are worth more than non-LEOs.

However, considering what they have to put up with day after day. I'm not so sure that they feel "privileged.":D

1911Tuner
June 10, 2004, 04:45 PM
Of course they are...amongst themselves. Every cop that hears of another cop being murdered is filled with rage because he understands. It's
a brotherhood. Several others come to mind. The Masonic Order...
Combat veterans of the same campaign...Truck drivers, etc. They tend to close ranks and stand together when trouble looms It's human nature, and among law enforcement officers, it's a survival aid.

Support your local police and keep them independent.

Cheers!

Tuner

braindead0
June 10, 2004, 04:48 PM
However, considering what they have to put up with day after day. I'm not so sure that they feel "privileged." Well, nobody forces them to take the job.

I think some of the problems today are caused by affirmative action laws forcing agencies to hire people that have no business being LEO's; just so they can meet their quota. :fire:

DMF
June 10, 2004, 05:17 PM
Well, nobody forces them to take the job. You're right no one forced me to take this job, and I think about that everytime I have to spend 5 hours in room being nice, and friendly, to a truly evil person, so that I can get a confession. Because a confession may mean the 6 year old boy that got molested might not have to spend 5 hours on the stand at trial.

I think about it everytime I knock on a door, and wait to serve a "low risk" warrant, hoping the person on the other side doesn't decide today is a good day to kill a cop.

I think about it every time I have to search some of the most filthy and disgusting places you could ever imagine, in an effort put some violent offender in jail. Places where you feel like gagging, both from the smell and look of them. Where bugs, and rodents have nested and will gladly take a bite out of you.

I think about it as I run a case I know will not lead to an arrest, or conviction so that we can clear someone falsely accused. It won't get me a pat on the back, or a promotion, but it is just as important (sometimes more important) than the cases that go to trial.

I think about it all the time. I don't do it for privilege, or glory, or any other reason you may dream up. I do it because I don't want that 6 year old kid traumatized anymore, I know that "low risk" warrant may lead to the arrest of a serious criminal, I know that no one else will be hurt while a violent offender is incarcerated, I know that person falsely accused deserves to be cleared. I do it because someone must collect the facts and speak for the truth.

Yeah, no one forces me to do this job, but I do it anyway.

1911Tuner
June 10, 2004, 05:30 PM
DMF said:

Yeah, no one forces me to do this job, but I do it anyway.

Thank you for that.

Vermonter
June 10, 2004, 05:34 PM
Good article.

Typical LEO responses.

As to the issue of a "cop killer" being more dangerous to others - the others aren't trying to arrest/kill them. In the criminal's mind it's self-defense.

I could go on, but it's pointless, I'll get labelled as a cop-hater, if I haven't been already.

Dbl0Kevin
June 10, 2004, 05:38 PM
Good article. Typical LEO responses.

If you think you can do any better go right ahead........

mrapathy2000
June 10, 2004, 05:42 PM
Police ARE NOT a special class.

so I can go out and buy magazines classified as LEO/Mil only?

dont know bout you but I am classified in another group and they dont have badges.

Art Eatman
June 10, 2004, 05:45 PM
I'm limiting my views to the issue of the intensity of searching for a cop-killer, okay?

We have delegated to government the job of some amount of full-time protection of the citizenry against criminals. The police are therefore our "Thin Blue Line" between the rest of us and whatever evil exists on the street.

(Note that the U.S. has in general a much smaller number of street cops than many other countries.)

Anyhow, about the only way to keep arrogance from developing among street-goblins, to keep them from thinking that cop-killing is as escapable as other killings, is to create a belief of certainty that killing a cop is a Big Mistake.

Police as a deterrent to crime is as much psychological in the street-goblin community as it is physical. Our police can never be allowed to be seen as losers in an arrest situation, in a crime-solving situation, to the greatest extent possible. Otherwise, street-goblins would become more brazen than they already are.

The "privilege" IMO is not of cop and non-cop. It has to do with the general concept of the sanctity of those who are society's guard dogs.

That's the way I see it, anyhow. The issue of individual behavior of people in that Thin Blue Line is another matter.

DMF
June 10, 2004, 05:46 PM
Good article.

Typical LEO responses.

Bad article.

Typical cop-hater responses.

In the criminal's mind it's self-defense.Oh, so that makes it OK? In the child molester's mind he's just "loving the child" or "teaching the child." I guess you think that's OK too.

I could go on, but it's pointless, I'll get labelled as a cop-hater, if I haven't been already.Just like I got labeled a "typical LEO."

Ellery Holt
June 10, 2004, 06:15 PM
Dbl0Kevin writes:

I love all these people who like to bash the police and say how horrible and mean we all are, yet 99% of them love us when they are in need. How quickly the story changes.

Yes, you are exactly right. It's just as you say. Doesn't it remind you of the disfunctional relationships that exists between some husbands and wives; Wife gets abused and pushed around by arrogant, bullying husband, but when the wife really needs a man she's glad he's around. She suffers the abuses because there are times when she 'needs' him.

I think most of us would agree that relationships like that are not good. Wives shouldn't tolerate those abuses. Women like that should learn to take care of themselves, and by doing so would come to see that they don't need to put up with a bunch of crap just because they wouldn't feel 'safe' without a 'man' around.

Vermonter
June 10, 2004, 06:20 PM
Let me clarify a few things -

I never called any individual a "typical LEO", I was merely talking about the general direction of the responses from the people who identified themselves as LEOs. "This job is hard" "All jobs get perks" etc etc.

I never said a criminal killing a cop was ok. I was trying to point out that a criminal killing a cop who's chasing them is not the same as them killing a civilian who is not chasing them.

I think being labelled a "cop hater" for speaking up just proves the point that cops think they are a priveledged class that shouldn't be questioned.

I would be nice if cops would stop that type of behavior and tear down the "thin blue line". It would result in a lot more respect.

Dbl0Kevin
June 10, 2004, 06:53 PM
I would be nice if cops would stop that type of behavior and tear down the "thin blue line". It would result in a lot more respect.

So basically you don't believe in any kind of brotherhood, comraderie or special bond between a certain group? I find that strange since by being a member here and posting you are becoming a part of a group of firearms owners who stand behind each other and help each other in times of need.

But your right.....why on earth should police officers be entitled to a similar type of brotherhood?

sendec
June 10, 2004, 07:48 PM
"In the criminal's mind it is self defense" - The last time I heard that logic it was from a, well, criminal .
The cops are a special class. Call'em what you like, centurions or sheepdogs, they are not the same as everybody else. Yes, we chose the professsion voluntarily, some so they could throw their weight around, some for a steady check, and some who thought they could do Good Things and Make The World A Better Place.

I have always thought that requiring police service from everybody would reduce the bitchin'. As for professional courtesy, I have given and received it, and sometimes not. But I'll give any citizen the same break, if they can assure me that when I am rolling in the alley with some tweaked out crackhead that they will break the laws of physics to get to me and help, and if I dont make it out that they will teach my kid to throw a ball, and help my widowed wife to pump out the basement when the water heater leaks and I am not there to fix it, and tell the pups why certain unit numbers are'nt in use, because they belong to those guys and girls whose pictures are in the lobby, and that my daughter can hide my shield in the boquet of flowers she is carrying during her wedding, when one of my former partners walks her down the aisle. Will you do that for me? After all, we'll die for you.

I voluntarily became a cop, and I loved it. I spent half my career doing kiddie crimes, the worst of the worst (DMF?) and while I may not have accomplished much, some kids are in better shape than when I found them. Now your complaint that my mags carry 3 more rounds than yours may have some validity. But in the big picture, I really do not think it matters.

NIGHTWATCH
June 10, 2004, 08:09 PM
I really dont see this so much as a cop v.s citizen issue. Although the article aims in that direction. LE and its behavior, as any government force, agency or body, reflects the larger question of respecting individual American sovereignty. And the place of master (the people) and servant (govt) within that dynamic, under the supreme inherent law of our constitution.

If cops, judges, politicians and the lot are not being subjected to the same laws that govern the people. Than we are now speaking of outlaws. Public servants who, for whatever reason, believe themselves exempt from the laws that they enforce. This is tyranny and corruption anyway you read it. There is nothing more dangerous to me than a public servant who acts beyond the law. And no greater definition of a criminal. :fire:

DMF
June 10, 2004, 08:25 PM
I spent half my career doing kiddie crimes, the worst of the worst (DMF?)I've had a variety of cases, and yes, those dealing with victimized kids are the worst.

mrapathy2000
June 10, 2004, 09:07 PM
Now your complaint that my mags carry 3 more rounds than yours may have some validity. But in the big picture, I really do not think it matters.

you may not think it matters out of ignorance it doesnt change the fact you are privileged.

your so called 3 more rounds I couldnt care less. you see 3 rounds. for a pistol. me I see 90 rounds for a rifle. how do you feal bout that. the common citizen is restricted by 90 rounds vs leo with m4 and 100 round magazine. little high and unlikely in most situations how about more realistic 20 rounds. sure preban are around for most guns 30 rounds. pretty old used and high in price and we got LEO's buying them up instead of buying LEO only junk driving prices up more so than the mere law has already done.

in my state LEO/military can use short barreled rifles/shotguns and have fullauto. not one citizen that is not a FFL dealer can own one despite the federal regulations. background check,finger prints,$200 tax and months of waiting. we dont get the privilege. yet that doesnt matter to you cause it doesnt affect you. so go ahead sit on your HighHorse. I am not anti LEO I am against breaking the constitution of the state I live in so a class can get its privilege. :cuss: :fire:

Ignore \Ig*nore"\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Ignored; p. pr. & vb.
n. Ignoring.] [L. ignorare; pref. in- not + the root of
gnarus knowing, noscere to become acquainted with. See
Know, and cf. Narrate.]
1. To be ignorant of or not acquainted with. [Archaic]

Philosophy would solidly be established, if men
would more carefully distinguish those things that
they know from those that they ignore. --Boyle.

2. (Law) To throw out or reject as false or ungrounded; --
said of a bill rejected by a grand jury for want of
evidence. See Ignoramus.

3. Hence: To refuse to take notice of; to shut the eyes to;
not to recognize; to disregard willfully and causelessly;
as, to ignore certain facts; to ignore the presence of an
objectionable person.

Ignoring Italy under our feet, And seeing things
before, behind. --Mrs.
Browning.

Ignorance \Ig"no*rance\, n. [F., fr. L. ignorantia.]
1. The condition of being ignorant; the want of knowledge in
general, or in relation to a particular subject; the state
of being uneducated or uninformed.

Ignorance is the curse of God, Knowledge the wing
wherewith we fly to heaven. --Shak.

2. (Theol.) A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge
which one may acquire and it is his duty to have. --Book
of Common Prayer.

Invincible ignorance (Theol.), ignorance beyond the
individual's control and for which, therefore, he is not
responsible before God.

Privilege \Priv"i*lege\, n. [F. privil[`e]ge, L. privilegium an
ordinance or law against or in favor of an individual; privus
private + lex, legis, law. See Private, and Legal.]
1. A peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor; a right or
immunity not enjoyed by others or by all; special
enjoyment of a good, or exemption from an evil or burden;
a prerogative; advantage; franchise.

Iowa Constition:
http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Constitution.html
ARTICLE I.
BILL OF RIGHTS.
Laws uniform. SEC. 6. All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.

http://www.state.ia.us/government/d...ode/cd99724.htm
724.1 Offensive weapons.
An offensive weapon is any device or instrumentality of the following types:
1. A machine gun. A machine gun is a firearm which shoots or is designed to shoot more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.
2. A short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun. A short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun is a rifle with a barrel or barrels less than sixteen inches in length or a shotgun with a barrel or barrels less than eighteen inches in length, as measured from the face of the closed bolt or standing breech to the muzzle, or any rifle or shotgun with an overall length less than twenty-six inches.
3. Any weapon other than a shotgun or muzzle loading rifle, cannon, pistol, revolver or musket, which fires or can be made to fire a projectile by the explosion of a propellant charge, which has a barrel or tube with the bore of more than six-tenths of an inch in diameter, or the ammunition or projectile therefor, but not including antique weapons kept for display or lawful shooting.

http://www.state.ia.us/government/d...99724.htm#724.2
724.2 Authority to possess offensive weapons.
Any of the following is authorized to possess an offensive weapon when the person's duties or lawful activities require or permit such possession:
1. Any peace officer.
2. Any member of the armed forces of the United States or of the national guard.
3. Any person in the service of the United States.
4. A correctional officer, serving in an institution under the authority of the Iowa department of corrections.
5. Any person who under the laws of this state and the United States, is lawfully engaged in the business of supplying those authorized to possess such devices.
6. Any person, firm or corporation who under the laws of this state and the United States is lawfully engaged in the improvement, invention or manufacture of firearms.

sendec
June 10, 2004, 09:27 PM
Sir, as an individual LEO my access to Class 3 weapons, AOWs, SBRs and DDs is the same as everyone elses' - I fill out the same forms, go through the same checks and pay the same taxes as you do. My agency may have these, but that is no different than the military. I believe some states even strip retired and ex-officers of normal cap magazines.

Contrary to what you may believe, its not all beer and babes. I have'nt seen a Beta Mag used in LE in, like, forever. The agencies I worked for were hard pressed to put tires on cruisers, let alone provide guns. (Many of our long guns were confiscated ones that the court remanded to the agency - you dont see those reviewed in SWAT, do you) Try to keep in mind, also, one basic truth: the odds of any given cop getting into a gun fight are tiny. All other things being equal, the odds of any given citizen getting into a gun fight are tinier by far. If you are uncomfortable with the capacity of your firearm, I would recommend making sure you get hits with whats you gots (This from a guy carrying a 1911). Dont get all sour grapey and begrudge us our tools. Are you angry because we have them, or are you angry because you do not?

As for offensive weapons, uh uh no way - everything I have up to and including the precision rifles are defensive weapons - I dont "offend" anybody:D

Skippy
June 10, 2004, 09:43 PM
Sendec,

I liked that post!!

mrapathy2000
June 10, 2004, 09:54 PM
Sir, as an individual LEO my access to Class 3 weapons, AOWs, SBRs and DDs is the same as everyone elses' - I fill out the same forms, go through the same checks and pay the same taxes as you do

no you dont fill out the same forms or go through the same checks and pay the same taxes as I do. In Iowa only LEO's defined in Authority to possess Offensive weapons get to. I am not privileged. IF it ever changed I would love to endure the $200 tax the fingerprints and months waiting per federal law. I would still disagree but it would be better than I am now.

you do offend someone. the anti's. but thats not such a bad thing. then again the anti's will most likely never affect LEO's privilege. the bad thing is it offends the common non-leo citizens in states where theyre weapons privileges are less than, not equal to LEO's and others defined by Iowas Authority to possess offensive weapons. despite Iowas constitution saying
Iowa Constition:
http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Constitution.html
ARTICLE I.
BILL OF RIGHTS.
Laws uniform. SEC. 6. All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens.

if millions ignore or are ignorant of one section of the constitution why not ignore or be ignorant of the rest of the sections. shouldnt LEO's enforce the constitution as well as the code? Iowa is but a clear example I have would love to see other individuals from other states to type fourth with contradictions and cry foul. I am just glad I do not live in Illinois or California or other states where people do not enjoy the same rights and privilege which enable them.

Orthonym
June 11, 2004, 03:47 AM
It was back in 1970, or thenabouts. I was poking around the dorm at Ga. Tech, trying to entice a cat to come out of the bushes, when one of the security guards noticed me and came up to see what I was doing. Now this was a time when it was still unheard of that colleges would have actual police forces, with (I think) illegal police powers. This was a nice old retired guy, and we got to talking. I don't remember how the subject came up, but he said something (as near as I can recall) about how "cop killers" didn't get punished as harshly as they deserved. Now, I was nice to the old guy, and didn't want to p*ss him off (it had dawned on me by this time that he was probably a retired policeman), but I remember feeling shocked that anyone would think a cop's life worth more than that of any other human being.

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Officers a Privileged Class?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!