cops are not law enforcers that is a still born rosemarys baby that morphed from peace officer. judges are law enforcers . a cop cannot give you a fine or a jail sentence. a cop gives you a date with the law enforcer the judge. a lot of cops say oh you guys are making it us against them sorry boys you made it us against them when you got your first tank
Closing the Police Loophole. Support list. Refusing LEO sales.
- Thread starter joeschmoe
- Start date
- Status
HorseSoldier
Member
As previously noted, LEOs take an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution (along with state and local laws), and advocating overthrow of the US government is a beyond-red flag political stance for not getting into law enforcement work. (This actually probably comes up more here in Alaska than elsewhere, since we have a third political party dedicated to secession from the union and independence for Alaska as a sovereign nation.)
If one takes those oaths seriously, and places a sworn oath over pensions, putting a roof over your and your family's head, etc., then, from the perspective of a former LEO, I don't know how anyone can work as a police officer in places like Chicago, NYC, or California. In those settings and various others the police are a tool of a government that is in a state of insurrection against the US Constitution by unlawfully violating Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
I absolutely understand that feeding and housing ones family and other similar obligations absolutely complicate the issue for lots of people in this situation and many, many others but there is a heavy dose of hypocrisy in trying to wrap loyalty to the US Constitution and opposition to those who would do it harm as being central to LEO work in those jurisdictions where the elected governments are the insurgency against that document and the institutions and rights it mandates.
Deanimator
Member
It's painfully simple:
An LEO can claim to support and defend the Constitution or he can enforce unjust and unconstitional laws and take advantage of the exemptions they provide (as well as the establishment of a de facto if not de jure caste system).
Pick ONE.
When somebody holds himself above his fellow citizens and is complicit in the deprivation of their fundamental rights, he cannot make any claim on their sympathies. To try to make them guilty for resenting their oppression is simply contemptible.
Even if they just stayed out of the debate then I could understand not wanting to be dragged into the politics.
...but, since they are the first ones front and center at each of these attacks on our rights and propaganda campaigns to paint all gun owners as criminals against the police, then they have chosen the wrong side. They could have stayed neutral. They have not.
They put themselves into this debate. They don't get to play the victim card now.
...but, since they are the first ones front and center at each of these attacks on our rights and propaganda campaigns to paint all gun owners as criminals against the police, then they have chosen the wrong side. They could have stayed neutral. They have not.
They put themselves into this debate. They don't get to play the victim card now.
You're not encouraging anything, but creating a division between LEOs and the people in their communities, as evidenced by the multiple anti-LE comments herein.
Educating young shooters and creating more enthusiasts was part of my activism, as an NRA Instructor, and creates the "pressure" of a new generation of shooters to follow in my footsteps.
However, as the NRA has decided to repeat their failed History of the early 1990s and take a general stance against LEOs and their duty firearms, I have re-considered. In a letter to the NRA I gave them some basic options to consider. No response.
In borrowing the terminology of the antis, by co-opting the term "loophole" with law enforcement officers and their agencies around the nation, the NRA has crossed the line and rung that bell again. It's not my opinion, it's a fact of simply repeating failed history:divided we fall/fail and get legislation like the AWB of '94. Lo and behold, here it comes again almost 20 years later, and the NRA has decided to us the same tactics of divisionalism with LE and their communities served? As a reminder that We The People will not be ruled by a police state, and we have decided to label cops as enemies? That's a lose/lose scenario, as we've seen in the past.
I can appreciate the remote idea that Manufacturer's are helping by refusing to sell to LE agencies in cities/states where new legislation has unfortunately taken root. However, at the end of the day what you have there is an anti win: a gun manufacturer has stopped selling firearms to a certain demographic, and the pro 2A lobby is being divided from within.
I don't see any "pressure" being created anywhere by these tactics, with my fellow LEOs. They are simply disgusted to be put in the middle of these politics (that photo-shopped picture on first page of LE surrounding BHO), because somebody hates cops. When one of your last resorts is to alienate part of your crew, look for new leadership.
Educating young shooters and creating more enthusiasts was part of my activism, as an NRA Instructor, and creates the "pressure" of a new generation of shooters to follow in my footsteps.
However, as the NRA has decided to repeat their failed History of the early 1990s and take a general stance against LEOs and their duty firearms, I have re-considered. In a letter to the NRA I gave them some basic options to consider. No response.
In borrowing the terminology of the antis, by co-opting the term "loophole" with law enforcement officers and their agencies around the nation, the NRA has crossed the line and rung that bell again. It's not my opinion, it's a fact of simply repeating failed history:divided we fall/fail and get legislation like the AWB of '94. Lo and behold, here it comes again almost 20 years later, and the NRA has decided to us the same tactics of divisionalism with LE and their communities served? As a reminder that We The People will not be ruled by a police state, and we have decided to label cops as enemies? That's a lose/lose scenario, as we've seen in the past.
I can appreciate the remote idea that Manufacturer's are helping by refusing to sell to LE agencies in cities/states where new legislation has unfortunately taken root. However, at the end of the day what you have there is an anti win: a gun manufacturer has stopped selling firearms to a certain demographic, and the pro 2A lobby is being divided from within.
I don't see any "pressure" being created anywhere by these tactics, with my fellow LEOs. They are simply disgusted to be put in the middle of these politics (that photo-shopped picture on first page of LE surrounding BHO), because somebody hates cops. When one of your last resorts is to alienate part of your crew, look for new leadership.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Powder, I think I've thought of a compromise effort we can all agree to support. Why don't you spearhead a movement among your fellow officers to VOLUNTARILY hold themselves to the standard the other citizens of their state are held to?
Surely that's not so confrontational. I can't imagine any LEO of good faith refusing to join in such a stand.
What a great way to close that us-vs.-them divide! And you don't have to wait on the disorganized non-sworn citizens to make the first step in healing the rift that seems to divide us. YOU can do this, if you are courageous enough to stand with your neighbors!
So, how about it? What should we call your new "stand together" movement?
Surely that's not so confrontational. I can't imagine any LEO of good faith refusing to join in such a stand.
What a great way to close that us-vs.-them divide! And you don't have to wait on the disorganized non-sworn citizens to make the first step in healing the rift that seems to divide us. YOU can do this, if you are courageous enough to stand with your neighbors!
So, how about it? What should we call your new "stand together" movement?
Last edited:
Well, I have a couple of points in response.
In the nineties there was a push for national CCW reciprocity. Organizations representing law enforcement argued that this was a lot to push for, and that if we (the non-LE types) would support national LE reciprocity, then they'd support ours in turn. We did, then they came out against ours. Some of us have forgotten the details, but we'll never forget the general gist of the process. We still feel betrayed.
The second point is this: in a time when the government at all levels in increasing its power and there are nationwide campaigns to move toward civilian disarmament, we come back 'round to the purpose of the second amendment. The goal is that The People be as well armed as The Government.
Like it or not, as an employee of The Government, and granted the power to kill in the name of The Law, you're a part of that Government. You might be like-minded and believe that civilian disarmament is a bad thing, but you're still one of the guys the founders of this country worried about. Well, mostly -- law enforcement didn't exist then, just armies, but the archetype is there, and like it or not you fit it.
If there's no possible need for me to own an "assault weapon" because it's only designed for producing mass-casualties on battlefields, then I can't see a possible reason why we would issue these mass killing machines to agents of the state. It's ideologically consistent. Why issue cops with tools whose only purpose is to kill Little Innocent Babies?
Beyond that, if we mandate that law enforcement happen with tools readily available to the public at large, then we'll quickly see the end of lines of police chiefs arguing against "high capacity clips" and pushing to outlaw all semi-automatic weapons. If 6 rounds is enough for me, then it should be enough for you. If it's not enough for you, who I'm supposed to call when I'm in dire need, then maybe I need access to the same sorts of tools you have access to in order to keep my family alive until you get here.
Unless of course they want to issue their officers .38 Spl revolvers again, with double-barreled shotguns in the car. Maybe they can limit themselves to wadcutters as well, since hollowpoint ammo is only designed for killing...
What we already call it is the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.
I cannot speak for all Officers. However, I already DO voluntarily hold myself to the same standard as those in our community: starts at the Golden Rule and moves through my legal and policy obligations to serve and protect the People, and uphold the Constitution. Period.
When "movements" like this get fired up, and the blanket anti-LE people come out of the woodwork, it's not my place to reason with every anti-government/LE voice out there. Particularly when their being backed and sponsored by the NRA.
Sidenote: Interesting that this got fired up AFTER the SHOT Show, and orders were taken.
If you don't remember how this ended up, with this same NRA tact back in '94, ask your Local NRA-ILA reps about it and why there are not more cops in the NRA ranks.
I cannot speak for all Officers. However, I already DO voluntarily hold myself to the same standard as those in our community: starts at the Golden Rule and moves through my legal and policy obligations to serve and protect the People, and uphold the Constitution. Period.
When "movements" like this get fired up, and the blanket anti-LE people come out of the woodwork, it's not my place to reason with every anti-government/LE voice out there. Particularly when their being backed and sponsored by the NRA.
Sidenote: Interesting that this got fired up AFTER the SHOT Show, and orders were taken.
If you don't remember how this ended up, with this same NRA tact back in '94, ask your Local NRA-ILA reps about it and why there are not more cops in the NRA ranks.
Wow. That's your interpretation.
"The Law"(s) which I am empowered by to use deadly force, come with a WHOLE lot more of a legal, policy, and constant training package than you have just misrepresented all LEOs to be just killers for The Government.
Where did the high road go...
"The Law"(s) which I am empowered by to use deadly force, come with a WHOLE lot more of a legal, policy, and constant training package than you have just misrepresented all LEOs to be just killers for The Government.
Where did the high road go...
Deanimator
Member
You are encouraging a caste system of cops on top and everyone else beneath.
Clearly you don't mind a "division between LEOs and the people in their communities" so long as it works to YOUR advantage.
One law for everyone or no law for anyone.
Hey, you wanted to understand where the thinking's coming from. That's it, boiled down and distilled. Let's try it from a different angle.
Why should Chicago PD be armed to the teeth (armored personnel carriers, automatic weapons, body armor, and all the rest) while law abiding citizens of Chicago are disarmed? Why should NJ citizens be denied access to hollowpoint ammunition when their police feel they are necessary to perform their duties effectively?
Why are CA citizens required to have "bullet buttons" on their ARs, while the LAPD gets M4 variants, CS grenades, and the rest?
How is society as it exists now consistent with the goals behind the second amendment? I'd argue it's not, and it's getting worse.
There are folks out there who feel that if we the people can't be armed to effectively defend ourselves, then at the very least we can have parity with government agents.
There are others (and I'm in this group) who believe that if the same rules were applied to everyone, LE and citizen alike, then we'd have totally different arguments. If the head of (choose one) NYC law enforcement agency realized that under the new state constitutional amendment he needed to equip his officers with magazines that hold a maximum of seven rounds because he's treated to the same rules the public is, and said offers needed to comply with safe storage laws while off-duty rather than having access to CCW that citizens don't have access to, he'd no longer go out in public arguing for these same laws.
Because those laws are stupid, ineffective, and have horrible consequences for those subject to them. We all know that. But until we can get away from this "It's OK for me but not for thee" attitude that treats law enforcement as a separate class of citizen, this is going to keep getting worse.
But don't be shocked when bug chunks of the population start to sour on law enforcement (mainly because of the attitudes at the top), and that starts to color their perception of the Good Guys on the ground as well.
As an aside, the Sheriff in Tuscaloosa AL was quoted on NPR as supporting the current gun control push as the head of the national sheriff's organization (I've forgotten its name). Tuscaloosa citizens weren't impressed, and at a recent chili cookoff there (note: Alabama folks have terrible taste in chili - no heat) it was rumored he had accepted a position in California...
Skylerbone
Member
Here you go, it also made national news if you care to see truth for what it is: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-04/politics/36737710_1_assault-weapons-gun-buyers-background-checks
Now we recognize that the "LEO vs. Citizens" agenda was created by the anti-gun anti-rights politicians but we ask again powder, who it is in those photos and videos standing with that divide and conquer crowd? Certainly doesn't appear to be the NRA. No, they're the group fighting elitism, 2A violation and yes, those behind it.
Do you stand with us powder, as a United States Citizen preserving a more perfect union or as an agent of government that enforces illegal law? Will you round us up and send us to the ovens if your law declares it so or will you stand with us in refusal?
You can claim your job necessitates certain tools but that should in no way affect my right to those same tools. How angry would you be if screwdrivers were only legal for those who used them professionally? I bet you'd have a real beef with mechanics, gunsmiths, electricians and the like because, after all, those tools, when used improperly, can endanger the lives of professionals when used by amateurs without rigorous training. How golden will your rule be if the government bans all firearms for citizens? Will you put on that uniform and turn in your guns?
A little sample of those rigorous standards held by LEOs, witness my NYPD trade-in as it arrived, full of carbon, rust, dirt and a striker channel packed with grease:
I'd wager I've put more rounds through it since July than the officer who professionally carried it for 7 years. Says a lot about your blanket statements.
Pressure is what is being applied by those opposed to the 2A. If solidarity, equal rights and the "Golden Rule" are what you desire then an armed populace is your best friend and you'll see your way to applying "pressure" to those who represent you to stand with the free citizens of OUR Nation instead of on a stage with those who would "Fundamentally Change" it.
Wow! Do you really believe that? It is LEO who have repeatedly put themselves front and center at each of these events to show their support for every gun grabbing measure for decades. I already posted lists, links and photos, but you simply refuse to believe them? Follow the links. Do your own research but you are showing yourself to be seriously misinformed.
Check my post #45 response to you. I listed 13 police organizations who presented themselves for photo ops for Biden's gun control task force. They put themselves into the political debate. Now you're "disgusted to be put in the middle of these politics"?
Then why did they put themselves in it?
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8781318&postcount=45
Time to open your eyes. They are already using the purchasing power of our tax dollars against us, but you don't like the idea of us doing the same? Too bad. We will.
Minneapolis, Monday Feb 4, 2013
"MINNEAPOLIS (KMSP) -
President Obama was in Minneapolis on Monday to discuss his gun control plan with law enforcement officials and address the nation on the administration's "common sense ideas" to reduce gun violence.
The president delivered his remarks at the Minneapolis Police Department Special Operations Center.
Read more: Obama gun laws: President pushes gun control plan in Minneapolis - KMSP-TV http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/20955969/obama-gun-laws-minneapolis-speech#ixzz2N5vfsidH
...
Obama entered a room packed with applauding officers and deputies, and he began by praising the law enforcement leaders for their efforts to reduce youth gun violence.
Before his speech, Obama met one-on-one with both law enforcement leaders and the victims of gun crimes, including Mayes' mother and Sami Rahamim, whose father was killed in the Accent Signage shooting.
"This is huge," Rahamim said. "Gun violence, or gun control, is a very divisive issue in this state."
Rahamim added that he thinks the president's visit -- and his call for people to let their representatives know their stance -- will result in action.
"There won't be perfect solutions, we won't save every life, but we can make a difference," Obama said in his speech.
Starting on Tuesday, Minnesota lawmakers will begin discussing a total of 15 gun safety bills at the Capitol. Six will be introduced in House committee on Tuesday alone.
Some of the bills call for bans on high capacity ammunition magazines, tougher background checks for gun buyers and more restrictions on gun show sales.
"Our law enforcement officers should never be out-gunned on the streets," Obama said, directly addressing high-capacity ammunition.
On a more local level, the city of Minneapolis spent $800,000 on guns and ammunition in the last few years, and Mayor R.T. Rybak says that purchasing power gives the city influence with gun manufacturers who don't meet the city's standards of safety.
"President Obama gave a great speech today, but the most important thing he did was listen -- for nearly an hour -- to people who, day after day, are building peace on our streets. He knows that they, and all Americans, can help everyone in Washington understand that we need common-sense laws that make all of us safer," Rybak said.
Rybak said that collaboration has been key in finding solutions. In fact, the idea to use the city's financial clout in its gun purchases came from a recent summit with Midwest leaders, mayors and law enforcement officers about ways to reduce gun violence.
Read more: Obama gun laws: President pushes gun control plan in Minneapolis - KMSP-TV http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/20955969/obama-gun-laws-minneapolis-speech#ixzz2N5w2L8sP
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/obama-talks-gun-control-in-minneapolis/
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/stor...ident-obama-gun-control-speech-in-minneapolis
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/stor...ident-obama-gun-control-speech-in-minneapolis
r1derbike
Member
Do you know what is absolutely sickening about this? None of us law-abiding citizens have the desire or need to shoot-it-out in the streets with law enforcement. Many of the so-called common sense laws put forth by this administration, will do absolutely nothing to make us safer, from the criminals with 30 round magazines, handguns, full-auto weapons, or any other banned firearms that are on the streets, that criminals will always be able to get.
I see hordes of LE clapping and nodding and all the while I'm thinking, my God, this whole facade is window dressing so that LEOs may feel safer in their jobs, in out of control metropolitan areas, and an incremental disarmament of we, the people, who employ our government servants. Our government servants have forgotten their lot in life, and don't like to be told that. Elitists and representatives with delusions of grandeur in our government need to be brought down a few notches, as well as their minions, and that includes law enforcement officers in some areas.
Doesn't matter that we law-abiding citizens may get shot to death by criminals, as WE will be the ones who are outgunned. Our safety is not even a consideration! Guess what? Law-abiding citizens aren't the enemy!
Some of my best friends are LEOs here. And they cannot believe the atrocities passed-off as LEO or citizen life saving legislation, to make our city streets safer.
The divisiveness we citizens feel at this point, is the same shared by many, many brothers in blue, all across this nation. And it stinks. Absolute effluent.
I see hordes of LE clapping and nodding and all the while I'm thinking, my God, this whole facade is window dressing so that LEOs may feel safer in their jobs, in out of control metropolitan areas, and an incremental disarmament of we, the people, who employ our government servants. Our government servants have forgotten their lot in life, and don't like to be told that. Elitists and representatives with delusions of grandeur in our government need to be brought down a few notches, as well as their minions, and that includes law enforcement officers in some areas.
Doesn't matter that we law-abiding citizens may get shot to death by criminals, as WE will be the ones who are outgunned. Our safety is not even a consideration! Guess what? Law-abiding citizens aren't the enemy!
Some of my best friends are LEOs here. And they cannot believe the atrocities passed-off as LEO or citizen life saving legislation, to make our city streets safer.
The divisiveness we citizens feel at this point, is the same shared by many, many brothers in blue, all across this nation. And it stinks. Absolute effluent.
Last edited:
Tom from WNY
Member
To the Law Enforcement posters here who think that it is terrible that we, the people believe that the "police loophole" should be closed, I offer the following:
Law Enforcement is not Military Operations. Period. Remember Posse Comitatus? The concept that there is a distinct division between the function of enforcing the laws enacted by a legislative body duly elected by the people to represent their interests in Governance and a military force authorized by that Government to defend the body of the Governed from external attack? There is a difference. When we have a breach of that division by such persons as Emperor Cuomo and Dictator Bloomberg who refer to "assault weapons" (we call them semi-automatic modern sporting rifles) and handguns with standard capacity magazines as "weapons of warfare" and "deadly killing machines" when possessed by civilians and "lifesaving tools" when possessed by law enforcement, then there is a disconnect, especially when the firearms in question are one and the same. I call it HYPOCRACY and, when I was younger, hypocrites were not looked upon with favor.
Law Enforcement officers are essentially CIVILIANS granted the authority by the Government to investigate and impinge on the Civil Rights guaranteed by citizens under Constitutionally derived laws. Such laws are enacted by such Government authorized legislatures, the members of which are duly elected by the people to represent their interests. In a Constitutional Republic such as the United States of America, the legislative process is designed to protect the rights of the minority as well as represent the majority (unless perverted by the Administration and the Legislature as was done to pass the NY SAFE act). They are not MILITARY personnel who are authorized by the Government to wage an offensive action to destroy the capability of a foreign entity to attack and destroy the Government, the people it represents and the land and economy the Government protects. Again, when the Law Enforcement entities and its personnel demand the same types of equipment the MILITARY uses, then the Civilian Citizens of that Government are subject to the depravations of those authoritarian Law Enforcement personnel.
The authority of Law Enforcement to use force is limited to defense of self and protection of innocent citizens from violence by others. The latter is usually defined as being used to prevent the escape of a felon who may be deemed likely to commit further violent depravation should they escape from the immediate presence of a Law Enforcement officer. Realistically, this may be accomplished with the same firearms that are legally permissible for Citizen Civilians to own. The NEED for fully automatic weapons, percussive munitions (flashbang grenades), chemical or incendiary munitions and heavy armored vehicles (MRAV's) is unnecessary for Civilian Law Enforcement, UNLESS those Law Enforcement personnel wish to gain a tactical advantage on the population. That makes their operations no different from MILITARY MARTIAL LAW as practiced by an Occupying Military Force. That has been banned in the United States by virtue of the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
The notion that the "police loophole" is necessary for "officer safety" is hypocritical; by and large a product of a mindset that the Public and Law Enforcement "are at war with each other". While at one time, I thought that "officer safety" was a good concept, it has led to a mindset by some, not all, and hopefully, not a majority, of law enforcement officers that the use of "overwhelming force" when dealing with the public is necessary for them to come home safe at the end of the shift. This mindset has led to tragic results in some circumstances. It must be addressed by police administrators; the incident where 2 Latina women in the Los Angeles CA area were shot up by 2 police officers for the crime of driving the same make (not color or plate number) of truck as Christopher Dorner is but the most glaring example. One may understand the sensitivity and criticality of the conditions and circumstances, but the outcome was tragically driven by a "at war" mindset. A cousin of mine now is very well aware of this concept of Overwhelming Force used in the name of "officer safety" (fortunately he is alive, but had a physical disability further exacerbated for the "crime" of leaving his house to investigate why there were flashing lights in the street directly in front of his house).
To the need for "lifesaving tools"; I can speak to the situation in my area of residence in New York State. That is that a call for assistance to 911 MAY be answered between 5 to 25 minutes. That is from experience. A civilian undergoing a home invasion or violent felony does not have the luxury of backup by multiple armed assistants as would a Law Enforcement Officer. The need for a firearm that is the same as what a Law Enforcement officer has available to them is just as great and just for the civilian.
The People calling out the "police loophole" and supporting those manufacturers and vendors who refuse to sell "assault rifles" and standard capacity handgun magazines that civilians are prohibited from owning are supporting the rights of others. Keep in mind, that as of today, as I post this, that the NY SAFE act still has not specifically exempted Law Enforcement officers from the onerous provisions of this act. All we are asking manufacturer's and vendors to do is be law-abiding and follow the law.
Law Enforcement is not Military Operations. Period. Remember Posse Comitatus? The concept that there is a distinct division between the function of enforcing the laws enacted by a legislative body duly elected by the people to represent their interests in Governance and a military force authorized by that Government to defend the body of the Governed from external attack? There is a difference. When we have a breach of that division by such persons as Emperor Cuomo and Dictator Bloomberg who refer to "assault weapons" (we call them semi-automatic modern sporting rifles) and handguns with standard capacity magazines as "weapons of warfare" and "deadly killing machines" when possessed by civilians and "lifesaving tools" when possessed by law enforcement, then there is a disconnect, especially when the firearms in question are one and the same. I call it HYPOCRACY and, when I was younger, hypocrites were not looked upon with favor.
Law Enforcement officers are essentially CIVILIANS granted the authority by the Government to investigate and impinge on the Civil Rights guaranteed by citizens under Constitutionally derived laws. Such laws are enacted by such Government authorized legislatures, the members of which are duly elected by the people to represent their interests. In a Constitutional Republic such as the United States of America, the legislative process is designed to protect the rights of the minority as well as represent the majority (unless perverted by the Administration and the Legislature as was done to pass the NY SAFE act). They are not MILITARY personnel who are authorized by the Government to wage an offensive action to destroy the capability of a foreign entity to attack and destroy the Government, the people it represents and the land and economy the Government protects. Again, when the Law Enforcement entities and its personnel demand the same types of equipment the MILITARY uses, then the Civilian Citizens of that Government are subject to the depravations of those authoritarian Law Enforcement personnel.
The authority of Law Enforcement to use force is limited to defense of self and protection of innocent citizens from violence by others. The latter is usually defined as being used to prevent the escape of a felon who may be deemed likely to commit further violent depravation should they escape from the immediate presence of a Law Enforcement officer. Realistically, this may be accomplished with the same firearms that are legally permissible for Citizen Civilians to own. The NEED for fully automatic weapons, percussive munitions (flashbang grenades), chemical or incendiary munitions and heavy armored vehicles (MRAV's) is unnecessary for Civilian Law Enforcement, UNLESS those Law Enforcement personnel wish to gain a tactical advantage on the population. That makes their operations no different from MILITARY MARTIAL LAW as practiced by an Occupying Military Force. That has been banned in the United States by virtue of the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
The notion that the "police loophole" is necessary for "officer safety" is hypocritical; by and large a product of a mindset that the Public and Law Enforcement "are at war with each other". While at one time, I thought that "officer safety" was a good concept, it has led to a mindset by some, not all, and hopefully, not a majority, of law enforcement officers that the use of "overwhelming force" when dealing with the public is necessary for them to come home safe at the end of the shift. This mindset has led to tragic results in some circumstances. It must be addressed by police administrators; the incident where 2 Latina women in the Los Angeles CA area were shot up by 2 police officers for the crime of driving the same make (not color or plate number) of truck as Christopher Dorner is but the most glaring example. One may understand the sensitivity and criticality of the conditions and circumstances, but the outcome was tragically driven by a "at war" mindset. A cousin of mine now is very well aware of this concept of Overwhelming Force used in the name of "officer safety" (fortunately he is alive, but had a physical disability further exacerbated for the "crime" of leaving his house to investigate why there were flashing lights in the street directly in front of his house).
To the need for "lifesaving tools"; I can speak to the situation in my area of residence in New York State. That is that a call for assistance to 911 MAY be answered between 5 to 25 minutes. That is from experience. A civilian undergoing a home invasion or violent felony does not have the luxury of backup by multiple armed assistants as would a Law Enforcement Officer. The need for a firearm that is the same as what a Law Enforcement officer has available to them is just as great and just for the civilian.
The People calling out the "police loophole" and supporting those manufacturers and vendors who refuse to sell "assault rifles" and standard capacity handgun magazines that civilians are prohibited from owning are supporting the rights of others. Keep in mind, that as of today, as I post this, that the NY SAFE act still has not specifically exempted Law Enforcement officers from the onerous provisions of this act. All we are asking manufacturer's and vendors to do is be law-abiding and follow the law.
Last edited:
Claude Clay
Member
Powder....interesting that you repeatedly call the NRA to task, as you speak about them in a manor beyond dislike;
yet I hesitate to call it hatred; it rings closer to contempt.
you revel in your NRA sanctioned teaching regards youth.
I'm gonna go with your a member cause you need the credentials.
rather hypocritical, no?
a question-- Outside any possible police duties, do you teach Non-LEO adults?
Derek said "The goal is that The People be as well armed as The Government"
a fine though at a time when it was possible. there were no planes or tanks, sub's or trains or even a phone or satellite to tap.
today citizens own what can best be described as 'small arms'. guns, long & short and a very few full autos. oh, and a smattering of various small cannons. we have
-no tanks; unlike the alphabet group of 3200 IED proof APC's that scurred about the east coast this week. What possible dangers are you preparing for? please tell me why tools for War are on MY strrets.
us--no planes, fighters, predators ( well, were safe from them now, right) though you have No-Knocks, spy on us with cameras & listen with (among others...) laser devices.
and my apologies to any police that respect the Constitution in their interactions with "non-LEO's" (a term commonly heard spoken by LEO's and its seldom said in a positive manor. i know cause I've been 'outsourced' by them over the years.
police are not special. they are Americans who choose a profession for personal reasons knowing full well its conditions. to think that position places you above the law or grants you extra power is wrong thinking.
It is anti-Americian.
-----------------------
Kent State
Katrina
Not Being Our Friends Since 1970
yet I hesitate to call it hatred; it rings closer to contempt.
you revel in your NRA sanctioned teaching regards youth.
I'm gonna go with your a member cause you need the credentials.
rather hypocritical, no?
a question-- Outside any possible police duties, do you teach Non-LEO adults?
Derek said "The goal is that The People be as well armed as The Government"
a fine though at a time when it was possible. there were no planes or tanks, sub's or trains or even a phone or satellite to tap.
today citizens own what can best be described as 'small arms'. guns, long & short and a very few full autos. oh, and a smattering of various small cannons. we have
-no tanks; unlike the alphabet group of 3200 IED proof APC's that scurred about the east coast this week. What possible dangers are you preparing for? please tell me why tools for War are on MY strrets.
us--no planes, fighters, predators ( well, were safe from them now, right) though you have No-Knocks, spy on us with cameras & listen with (among others...) laser devices.
and my apologies to any police that respect the Constitution in their interactions with "non-LEO's" (a term commonly heard spoken by LEO's and its seldom said in a positive manor. i know cause I've been 'outsourced' by them over the years.
police are not special. they are Americans who choose a profession for personal reasons knowing full well its conditions. to think that position places you above the law or grants you extra power is wrong thinking.
It is anti-Americian.
-----------------------
Kent State
Katrina
Not Being Our Friends Since 1970
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
I'm sorry, but I want to make sure I understand, you do hold yourself to follow all gun laws that your fellow citizens must follow? That's fantastic, and brave of you!
Why can you not speak for other officers? You should be encouraging them to uphold your own high standard!
This WILL bring law enforcement and the "average" citizen back together and start to heal the rift caused by heated rhetoric and the increasing militarization of law enforcement in the US!
Good on you!
Absolutely, I am not "above the law", simply because I have discretionary powers. However, and there has to be a however with an analogy, we sworn LE are different than our citizens in that it is part of our job description to carry firearms where/when/how others cannot. School zones for one example. With body armor is another example, etc..
Here are some basic analogies which will probably not fly with this crowd, but: I can drive a school bus, but I do not have the credentials to do so legally. I know how to work on our home's electrical systems but I'm not licensed to do certain tasks as an electrician. To make some money on the side I can "flip" cars and motorcycles for sales, but I would need a dealer's license to do it legally.
It's simply about education, training, and credentials-it's NOT about LEOs feeling they have more rights than, or privileges that we can hold over our communities. As far as local gun laws are concerned, no. IF these restrictions come into our jurisdiction for the community, but our agency does NOT have the same restrictions, our LEOs WILL carry what is agency policy. Not my call to make.
It is my call to make IF we have to abide by magazine restrictions and are going to serve arrest warrants on drug dealers, who are known to have guns and dogs, and sentinel systems of personnel.
No, I don't speak for other Officers in the same vein as I have the freedom to speak out for myself: it is their right to abstain from such a volatile and political scenario.
Yes, I do have a disdain for the NRA on this topic, as it fuels and incites cop killings. Plain and simple. Read the venom here aimed at a complete LE stranger.
Playing the victim card? Absolutely not, just discussing the facts such as the photo-shopped/fake photo of BHO surrounded by LEO on page 1: it's a blatant lie and a misrepresentation.
Just discussing the fact that manufacturers have decided to NOT sell firearms, as a form of protest against people who WANT them to STOP SELLING firearms and trying to use LE agencies as a lever, while alienating said LE agencies? This tactic is a living definition of the word oxymoron. That's not an insult and it's not my opinion, it's just plain truth.
We have to agree to disagree, and remain civil about it.
Here are some basic analogies which will probably not fly with this crowd, but: I can drive a school bus, but I do not have the credentials to do so legally. I know how to work on our home's electrical systems but I'm not licensed to do certain tasks as an electrician. To make some money on the side I can "flip" cars and motorcycles for sales, but I would need a dealer's license to do it legally.
It's simply about education, training, and credentials-it's NOT about LEOs feeling they have more rights than, or privileges that we can hold over our communities. As far as local gun laws are concerned, no. IF these restrictions come into our jurisdiction for the community, but our agency does NOT have the same restrictions, our LEOs WILL carry what is agency policy. Not my call to make.
It is my call to make IF we have to abide by magazine restrictions and are going to serve arrest warrants on drug dealers, who are known to have guns and dogs, and sentinel systems of personnel.
No, I don't speak for other Officers in the same vein as I have the freedom to speak out for myself: it is their right to abstain from such a volatile and political scenario.
Yes, I do have a disdain for the NRA on this topic, as it fuels and incites cop killings. Plain and simple. Read the venom here aimed at a complete LE stranger.
Playing the victim card? Absolutely not, just discussing the facts such as the photo-shopped/fake photo of BHO surrounded by LEO on page 1: it's a blatant lie and a misrepresentation.
Just discussing the fact that manufacturers have decided to NOT sell firearms, as a form of protest against people who WANT them to STOP SELLING firearms and trying to use LE agencies as a lever, while alienating said LE agencies? This tactic is a living definition of the word oxymoron. That's not an insult and it's not my opinion, it's just plain truth.
We have to agree to disagree, and remain civil about it.
Deanimator
Member
Ah, I get it. Failure to blindly support ANYTHING cops do, and to support elevating police as an unaccountable caste above the citizenry "incites" cop killings.
Maybe criticism of the police should be made a criminal offense, you know, "incitement" or something...
Deanimator
Member
...while accusing people of "inciting cop killings".
Yep, that's mighty civil.
Well, actually it's petulant and juvenile.
Ha! That picture on the first page cracked me up.
I can only imagine the event organizer for that one.
"Uhh, we are going to need some police to stand behind the president. Get me a schmattering of brown blue and black uniforms. Get me a couple o' white guys, throw in a few blacks, pepper in some women and Latinos....hmm one more thing, get me an Asian or two to round off my diverse "American Police force".
For my on topic comment, police will always have guns, when Peter won't give it to you, Paul is right there to fill it in.
I can only imagine the event organizer for that one.
"Uhh, we are going to need some police to stand behind the president. Get me a schmattering of brown blue and black uniforms. Get me a couple o' white guys, throw in a few blacks, pepper in some women and Latinos....hmm one more thing, get me an Asian or two to round off my diverse "American Police force".
For my on topic comment, police will always have guns, when Peter won't give it to you, Paul is right there to fill it in.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Powder, school zones aren't prohibited places in many states, and I think the number of states that prohibit a citizen from wearing armor hovers around only one or two.
Regardless, pointing out how LEOs are placed above other citizens does't help remove the distrust you see from non-sworn citizens. Nor does it help support your pledge to not avail yourself of a weapon forbidden to your fellow citizens.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Well that can't be it. I, and many other average joe citizens have far more firearms training, and it seems more legal education as well, than all but a very few law officers. So it all comes down to the credential? I think that might be what we all have a problem with.
Oh. That's a very sad, small-minded cop-out. You should demand better of yourself.
Last edited:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Well then they probably should stop giving the anti- gun president such a shiny backdrop for his disarmament press conferences. And major LEOs really should stop calling for guns to be taken out of the hands of everyone but their men.
You seem to be saying that whatever political stands LEs make, the rest of the citizens should accept those statements from the bully pulpit of their official position and anti-gun grandstanding without taking any offense. Let them use their publicly provided authority to work to disarm their neighbors, and we should, what? Just grin and bear it?
I don't think that will produce the kind of change we want.
Last edited:
- Status
