No defensive use?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If he's not a moron then he's a liar because everybody knows that the best defense (after avoiding the fight altogether fails) is a good offense. Some expert! :rolleyes:
 
I guess the "experts" don't believe in numbers like this gem from the CDC

The researchers found that six percent of the sample population had used a firearm in a burglary situation in the last twelve months. [FN32] Extrapolating the polling sample to the national population, the researchers estimated that in the last twelve months, there were approximately 1,896,842 incidents in which a householder retrieved a firearm but did not see an intruder. [FN33] There were an estimated 503,481 incidents in which the armed householder did see the burglar, [FN34] and 497,646 incidents in which the burglar was scared away by the firearm. [FN35] In other words, half a million times every year, burglars were likely forced to flee a home because they encountered an armed victim.

http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F35
 
Assault weapons have no self defense purpose-so said the Supreme Court in 1994. That is how the AWB was ruled constitutional.
 
Because a crazy LAPD officer on the run for multiple murders would NEVER just show up at your door armed with lots of guns. Nope, you don't need that 'assault rifle' Mr. and Mrs. America.
 
Last time I checked, anything that shoots/launches a projectile, or can hold an edge, has a defensive use
 
Can't believe that they paraded THIS person our to sell this garbage. Beside the fact that his positions are completely illogical and idiotic, he's essentially acting like a buffoon who'd have a hard time selling water to dehydrated marathoners in the desert.
 
wild cat mccane Assault weapons have no self defense purpose-so said the Supreme Court in 1994. That is how the AWB was ruled constitutional.

You've made this claim in other threads as well. When questioned about it you fail to answer. The Clinton "assault weapons ban" became law in 1994 there is no way it could have gone all the way to the supreme court that quickly. In fact it NEVER did. Perhaps you should do some research before repeating this untruth again.
 
does anyone else find it unsettling he said his officers carry guns for solely for "offensive" use...?

Definition of OFFENSIVE

1
a : making attack : aggressive
b : of, relating to, or designed for attack <offensive weapons>
c : of or relating to an attempt to score in a game or contest; also : of or relating to a team in possession of the ball or puck


so hes admitting his officers carry guns to actively attack innocent civilians..........so much for that whole " to protect and to serve" thing, eh?


how this man still has a job, i do not know.
 
so hes admitting his officers carry guns to actively attack innocent civilians..........so much for that whole " to protect and to serve" thing, eh
It is true, in California, where you can get shot for the crime of delivering newspapers...
 
CA Police Chief Ken James

WoW !!! This man is in charge of a law enforcement agency? How can his officers have any trust in this fool. He has no "Command Presence" , stumbles thru his speach. He apperantly had no idea he was going to be recorded. He looked scared and very unsteady. He dosen't make any valid statments. As retired Leo, I have serious doubts about this man's ability to lead a fishing trip. Sir James, if you read this it's ok to reply
 
Last edited:
Because a crazy LAPD officer on the run for multiple murders would NEVER just show up at your door armed with lots of guns. Nope, you don't need that 'assault rifle' Mr. and Mrs. America.

In that specific situation... a gas mask, Nomex suit and a fire extinguisher might be more appropriate :evil:
 
WoW !!! This man is in charge of a law enforcement agency? How can his officers have any trust in this fool. He has no "Command Presence" , stumbles thru his speach. He apperantly had no idea he was going to be recorded. He looked scared and very unsteady. He dosen't make any valid statments. As retired Leo, I have serious doubts about this man's ability to lead a fishing trip. Sir James, if you read this it's ok to reply

He looks like the living embodiment of the Peter Principle in action.


.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top