Ryder
Member
Wonder what their liability will be if a group of extremists decide to conduct a slaughter because of this
In fact most of the guys I work with have tattoos, earrings, goatees, long hair, or shaved heads, yet we are all LEOs and are gun loving law abiding citizens. I don't need legislators to take action to keep me feeling "comfortable".
Wow. So if you look like a biker or a black guy, you shouldn't be allowed to open carry. Now I get where you are coming from.
On a side note, I wonder why some people feel the need to open carry when it is relatively easy to carry concealed.
I suspect some here take the attitude that they want it to be in others faces whether they like it or not.
There are several threads full of opinions on both sides of this. Open carry is generally an attitude of re-acclimation of the general populace to firearms. While you will obviously have rabidly anti-gun folks foaming at the mouth at the sight of a firearm in plain view, many of the OCers in these forums have passed on stories of opportunities to talk to curious people about firearms due to OCing.
That appears not to be the case in general, although I am sure there are bound to be a few people with attitudes like that. You may want to check that your own view isn't grossly colored by your attitude towards OC.
Take some time and read up of the "commandant" trying to pressure a local church preacher in Royal Joke to not allow the citizens to carry in church. He got his back side verbally handed to him by the preacher (my view of Pale Rider) and now, the good folks of Michigan just female-dog-slapped his posterior again!
Touchy subject! It is obvious that even pro- gun citizens are becoming brain- washed. If other's feelings are hurt by legal O.Cying. they should go home and work on their attitude
. . . take a second and in your minds eye picture some unsavory looking person with a .45 on his side walking through the fair knocking back a few . . .
It is a sad state of affairs if LEO's are allowed to display tats, or have earrings, goatees, etc. There was a time (I suspect many PD's still have standards) when you needed to be clean shaven, short hair, and no jewelery when on duty. Now days some PD's must be allowing unprofessional looking people to represent the force if your comment is accurate. Then again the standards were much higher, both physically and mentally to become a LEO. Now days you see tiny men and women, along with grossly overweight ones pretending to be functional peace officers.
Resident Finds Intruder In Basement
Police: Resident Tried To Hold Man Down
ROYAL OAK, Mich. -- Royal Oak Police said a resident on the 700 block of N. Rembrandt Street came home to find an intruder hiding in their basement last week.
Police said the resident returned home on Aug. 33 from a walk to find that their house had been broken into. As they were checking the house, the resident found a male intruder hiding in the basement.
The resident struggled with the intruder but was unable to hold him and he fled, police said.
The resident described the intruder as white, around 6 feet tall, 175 to 200 pounds, possibly in his mid-20s with black slicked back hair. He was wearing a green cloth over his face.
He was wearing a three-button light blue polo-type shirt and multicolored pattered shorts.
I don't know about Florida, but in Texas the standards for obtaining a peace officer's license are a lot higher than they were 30-some-odd years ago. And I remember not only some fairly hefty cops, but some small-statured ones, as well.
That had nothing to do with their ability to function as law enforcement officers.
The bottom line is the standards have been lowered whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not.
Declarative statements are usually accompanied by source links in these parts.
Define "a lot higher" as I find it hard to believe.
With mandatory affirmative action alone you can get plenty of under qualfied people because the standards are lowered both mentally and physically. There was a time you had to be a certain size to even be considered a police or fire candidate.
I totally disagree. While most police work is not Starsky & Hutch, you need to be able to physically handle yourself. Having tiny women (and as a result tiny men also) trying to run down and subdue a fleeing suspect, or them getting disarmed are but two examples.
Additionally their need to draw their sidearm because they "feel threatened" is a statistic I doubt is even recorded. It goes on more often than you might imagine, and it is justified when just the opposite should be the case. At games where fans become unruly you see the big LEO' jumping into the fray to break it up while the tiny women stand back and watch. Yet they are getting the same pay but not able to handle the physically demanding work. And before you say you know of Officer Jane Doe who can kick most guys rears, there might be a rare exception, but most of that perception is generally contrived Hollywood crap that filters into the publics psyche.
The bottom line is the standards have been lowered whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not.
Personally the more I read your posts the more offended I become. You want to use you own narrow minded prejudices to prescribe how the rest of us observe our rights. You have brought in mode of dress, race, sex, and every other bigoted opinion of yours to justify your points and personally I find it disgusting. NONE of your prejudiced points have any merit to be brought into this conversation nor should they be tolerated on a forum like this. Thank God this forum has an ignore function so I'll never have to read another one of you posts again. Hopefully all the substandard black people and weak women, people with tattoos, fat people, bikers, or anyone else you are offended by will do the same.