why guns?

Poper said:

Well said.

Click to expand...

Samuel Colt was more succinct.

Waveski said:

I am surprised and troubled by your attitude towards law enforcement officers.​

Click to expand...

As am I!

Thanks for the link. Just read it twice and conclude that the author has reasoned well.

GunnyUSMC said:

Most people that mistrust law enforcement are criminals or people that don’t really know someone in law enforcement.

Click to expand...

There are officers in both sides. Running as EMS speed me to work hand in hand with many of them.
Of the many I dealt with, 2 were dishonest, arrogant, etc.
Overall, I respect law enforcement. It's sad the few give the majority a bad name.

This thread is pretty typical of what' going on these days ... "Why Guns" turns into a thread about why law enforcement officers aren't on the side of citizens. I'm SO tired of this.

What I am more curious about is how many liberals are for confiscation/bans/abolition and supposed gun free world. I know plenty of liberal minded folks from many different backgrounds and the vast majority of them are really only for universal background checks, maybe registration, etc. What they would call common sense gun laws, I suppose. From their viewpoint they are still pro-gun and from my viewpoint I agree but they are not pro-2A.

How many are truly anti-gun? As I have pointed out, there is a difference between being anti-gun and being anti-2A, philosophically and politically.

I just love it when someone insults my profession based on the actions of a few in a topic. And then states that they don’t want the topic to turn into a LEO bashing.

Lost me at “waiting period” ...

Shimitup said:

This is the line that perplexed me "As a white middle class American male, I don’t really need a gun, and don’t own one, because I’m reasonably sure the police would show up in a hurry if I were in trouble." Followed by all the anti cop rhetoric. He does certainly need to rethink that one, as Taliv pointed out the police cannot protect us nor do they have the duty to, they can't that's our job.

Click to expand...

X2

Old Dog said:

When I saw the video of all the NYPD officers rushing back INTO the WTC as the towers were burning, it reaffirmed what I already knew.

Click to expand...

If I understand you correctly, "what you already knew" is that most police officers that you had experience with were in the professional due to a desire to help those in need. Did I understand you correctly?

the one piece I don't think was mentioned in that article, and the article covers some theory that is not commonly discussed, so - for that it was pretty good, but as others have pointed out - the article has some content that throws a few red flags. the one piece of theory on 'why guns' is also the way it keeps things sort of honest. if nobody knows who has guns, even the people who don't are protected by a matter of keeping one another honest. this is why IMHO, a lot of home owners, who don't own guns, are still protected by the fact they very well could have them, and someone who might invade their home, can't know one way or the other. even people who are completely living in an anti-gun fantasy world, are protected by this. not unlike freedom of speech protects people's speech, where their ideas might end up causing them to loose their free speech, the speech is still protected. the ideas and realities are certainly filled with a lot of irony.

bdickens said:

Imagine, a liberal who understands - and agrees with - the real purpose of the Second Amendment.

Click to expand...

I think you would be surprised at the number of gun owning 'liberals'....

So, from reading this it seems that the author supports the right but personally declines the responsibility to rely on others,(the police), for his families safety..?

Click to expand...

When out and about with my family, I rely on myself in case anything goes pear shaped. I have great respect for LEO, know more than few personally, but they "aren't there", when you might need them. Meaning, to get LEO to 'help' takes time, time you may not have.

taliv said:

sorry it came across that way. it was not my intent to insult any profession.

again, i'm not bashing LEOs or their profession. or insulting them. I'm just saying individuals cannot depend on them for protection, for lots of reasons, and therefore individuals should be responsible for their own safety.

Click to expand...

I believe that everyone should own a gun for protection.
It is true that the police can not be everywhere all the time to protect everyone.
But most fail to realize that when it comes to their own family, they are not even able to protect them all the time. This is where law enforcement comes in. You rely on law enforcement to keep the peace by enforcing the laws.

In my humble opinion, the article was controversially inclined. I did not find it well-reasoned, at all. Nor did I find it to be "reasoned well," whatever that means. After reading it, all I know about its author is that he considers himself middle class and that he doesn't have to own a gun because he thinks that the police will protect him but he isn't going to depend on the police to protect him because he is middle class. Something like that. Really.

As for our police and law enforcement, lots and lots of people depend on them for protection. Not everybody can or does or even wishes (for whatever reason) to own a gun. They call the police if they have a problem. As they should. As they will. As I have. As I will; need be.

I respect law enforcement. I expect the same, in return. I have yet to be disappointed.

It is naïve to talk about law-enforcement as though they are somehow above reproach. I respect what they do as much is anybody. Their job is next to impossible in large part because of all of the ridiculous laws that are on the books.
Most of my interactions with law-enforcement have been good over the years but I’ve also been in court where the officer lied to cover his own mistake. Only a fool believes that law-enforcement will not use what you say against you.
As Ronald Reagan said “I am from the government and I’m here to help you” is the scariest thing an individual can hear.

Walkalong said:

taliv is 100% correct, no matter how much we admire and appreciate LEO members, you can't depend on them to always be there at the moment help is needed, it just simply isn't a reasonable expectation of time and resources.

Click to expand...

The above statement regarding the realism of logistics is valid , but it is not consistant with the statements made by taliv in #8.

bearcreek said:

If I understand you correctly, "what you already knew" is that most police officers that you had experience with were in the professional due to a desire to help those in need. Did I understand you correctly?

Click to expand...

Yes.

I'm surprised at the direction this thread turned (well, not really, since that tends to happen every time "law enforcement" is mentioned; perhaps that should be as taboo a phrase as the phrase "NRA" has been lately.)

In post 25, I called out what I hoped was a typo in post 14. The lack of a response indicates it apparently wasn't.

Based on what I have read in this thread, before posting number 25, and since, I'm glad I didn't read the article.

MedWheeler said:

I'm surprised at the direction this thread turned (well, not really, since that tends to happen every time "law enforcement" is mentioned; perhaps that should be as taboo a phrase as the phrase "NRA" has been lately.)

In post 25, I called out what I hoped was a typo in post 14. The lack of a response indicates it apparently wasn't.

Based on what I have read in this thread, before posting number 25, and since, I'm glad I didn't read the article.

Click to expand...

I read the article and it was about as good as a crap filled chocolate cake. At first it looks good but once you really got into it, it starts to leave a bad taste in your mouth. It appears to have been written by a moderate liberal.

I too am awaiting some follow up comment on the distasteful reference made in 14.

This is still The High Road , yes?

GunnyUSMC said:

Most people that mistrust law enforcement are criminals or people that don’t really know someone in law enforcement.

Click to expand...

Having been victimized by one local PD officer that used "entrapment" on me (and a female lawyer who failed to inform me of "exemptions" to the charge), another that perjured himself in court (but I won the case), a third that said "I don't care about the law. I'm gonna book you anyway!" (case dismissed before trial when complaint was filed), and their captain who went into a rage in his office and had a shouting match with me, I probably have reason to distrust this particular department. When all you seem to get are "bad apples", you are likely to be disillusioned.

I'm pretty sure I've seen it abbreviated that way too. SCROTUS as in Supreme Court Ruling of the United States. I'm pretty sure that's what was meant, either that or a typo, the T is right next to the R. Either that or who cares.....

JTHunter said:

Having been victimized by one local PD officer that used "entrapment" on me (and a female lawyer who failed to inform me of "exemptions" to the charge), another that perjured himself in court (but I won the case), a third that said "I don't care about the law. I'm gonna book you anyway!" (case dismissed before trial when complaint was filed), and their captain who went into a rage in his office and had a shouting match with me, I probably have reason to distrust this particular department. When all you seem to get are "bad apples", you are likely to be disillusioned.

Click to expand...

I never said that their weren’t any bad cops out there, but for ever bad one out there there are hundreds of good ones.
In my 19.5 years as a police officer, we have lost 10 officers in the line of duty. I knew all but one of them and a few were close friends. But every time one of our brothers fell, we kept working to keep our city safe.