I was actually having this conversation with a friend last night. It is a very touchty subject because of the difficulties, but I can completely see how this line of thinking IS beneficial to lightening up gun laws. My question is, Why do LEOs need high capacity magazines? Why do they need folding stocks on their rifles? Why do they need short barrels and suppressors? You can not possibly answer those questions without admitting that civillians should have the same rights, unless you are talkng about "dirty cops" which is a whole different ball of wax.
If the logic is that they need access to a "heavier" arsenal to combat the criminals, then why is it fair that while those criminals obviously have equal weapons to the police, the population is not allowed to be equal. I say make a law removing exemptions from LEOs, then the only way they can "fight fair", is by campaigning to lighten the laws themslves. The cops OBVIOUSLY don't want to be outgunned by the criminals, and by fighting such a law, they would be admitting that what's good for the goose is definitely NOT good for the gander.
If the logic is that they need access to a "heavier" arsenal to combat the criminals, then why is it fair that while those criminals obviously have equal weapons to the police, the population is not allowed to be equal. I say make a law removing exemptions from LEOs, then the only way they can "fight fair", is by campaigning to lighten the laws themslves. The cops OBVIOUSLY don't want to be outgunned by the criminals, and by fighting such a law, they would be admitting that what's good for the goose is definitely NOT good for the gander.