Hr 218

[Steve in PA]

Well the people sponsoring HR218, think different.

And even if I did think I am better than you, so what?

A brain surgeon thinks he is better than me, a mailman thinks he is better than me, a politician thinks he is better than me, you think you are better than me. So what?

What about the CCW'er who gets special treatment, they think they are better than someone who doesn't have a CCW.

 

[Reno]

You get special treatment, but you like to act like you are more harshly scrutinized. Are you going to provide evidence of LEOs being punished more harshly than a serf, or are you going to retract your statement? Or are you just going to continue with the high-and-mighty act? If you are, I'm just going to ignore you from now on. However, if you'd like to present arguments with a basis in reality, I'd be glad to participate in a civil debate.

 

[Steve in PA]

I really don't care if you ignore me or not.

Do I have proof or evidence to my statement, no. But I also haven't seen evidence to where they were treated like someone with a CCW either.

Again, if as you say I feel high and mighty, so what. You don't like it, well too bad. A firefighter feels "high and mighty" compared to me, just ask them We go round and round with this at work because the fireman and police share the same building. I wouldn't want to run into a burning building......, just as he doesn't want to deal with the crap I do.

So he feels high and mighty about his job. I feel high and mighty about my job. Does that make me better than him, or he better than I? No. But amongst the fireman, they feel high and mighty, as do lawyers, as does any "group" of people.

Answer the question about the CCW'er getting "special treatent". Why should you get special treatment because you have a CCW? Why do you think you are high and mighty compared to someone who doesn't? Aren't you a "special class of citizen" then? And yes, there tons of proof for this. Just read the boards and you'll see where its happened. Heck, I've done it myself, given someone a break because he came forward with the fact that he was carrying, which he did not have to do according to PA law.

Just because I am for a nationwide LEO carry doesn't mean I'm against a nationwide CCW carry. Debating the topic of this thread is one thing, how I feel and act on the street is another. I copied this from GT, and it says sums up my attitude;

"Originally posted by 7677
emrgnc,
In my law enforcement career, I have found that there are enough real criminals out there that I don't have to create criminals from out of state LEO's and ccw permit holders. We need to remember that these same LEO's or citizens with a ccw may be the one that saves our bacon when we are getting the crap beat out us on the side of the road. "

 

[goalie]

The only "special treatment" a CCW holder will get here in Minneapolis is verbal abuse from the local police thugs who will tell you (actual quote said to me) "I don't think you civilians should even be allowed to own handguns, let alone get permits and carry them."

Some special treatment.

Oh, and FWIW, it takes more of a man to save lives than to take them. I've done both, and I agree with the surgeon: he IS better than you.

 

[Steve in PA]

Thats ok.......doesn't mean you are better than me though

PS. I've never taken a life, but I've saved several. So now what?

 

[Reno]

First off, I said nothing about CCWers getting preferential treatment, only LEOs getting it compared to ordinary citizens. Now, why would you make a statement that not only do you have no evidence of, but is in fact downright false?

Police are treated much more "nicely" when it comes to criminal infractions, period. I would ask that you stop claiming that you face so much more scrutiny than an "ordinary citizen," seeing as how you admit that you have no evidence for this false statement.

 

[Diggler]

Wow.

Let's back away from the delusions of grandeur for a minute, since that is something best addressed by a licensed psychiatrist. Do I think I'm any better than someone else because I have a clean record and had 3 friends that wouldn't say anything bad about me to the sheriff? I don't think so. I also know that being a police officer doesn't make that person any better than me. Yeah, I took the little PSP exam many years ago and considered going that route. No problems with the exam, that's for sure... I had another opportunity come up in the meantime in the computer field while waiting for my group to be called to Harrisburg so I took it and left my LEO aspirations in the past.

I still can't believe that someone would actually say OUT LOUD that they think they're better. Dude, that just proves that, no matter WHAT job you have, YOU'RE NOT.

Anyways, if you could humor this lowly non-LEO, I'd be honored to hear the answer to my previous question...

What part of HR 218 doesn't violate equal protection under the law?

 

[goalie]

Steve isn't going to let a little reality rain on his parade. I can point to tons of evidence that the police are held to lower standards than Joe Six-Pack. The most glaring examples are those of Lon Horiuchi, (all the guys at Waco and Ruby Ridge actually) the officers that shot an unarmed man over 20 times in New York City a while ago when he went for his wallet (can you imagine the DA not going after a civilian who did that? I mean, c'mon, they prosecuted the guy who defended his family with an unregistered gun for pete's sake?!?!?!?!) and let's not forget the several instances of no-knock warrants at the wrong address with bad outcomes. Nah, Steve is in fantasy land if he thinks that the police are held to a higher standard than the average, non LEO BB member if something were to happen. He can keep saying it over and over, but my own recent, personal, real-life experience tells me that it is not true.

As for "several" lives saved, I've done that in one shift as the critical care circulator at a big hospital. Heck, I've shocked the same guy out of v-fib four different times in less than an hour. Call me when you hit double, or better yet, triple, digits.

Thats ok.......doesn't mean you are better than me though

I didn't say I was, I said your hypothetical surgeon was though. From what I've read from you, I hit an X.

 

[Publicola]

An LEO is an agent of the government. period. While the job description & duties may be a little different in principle this is the same thing as a bill that would allow all government employees to carry nationwide sans permit.

Now how would you feel if the senate proposes a bill to allow permit-less concealed carry nationwide for all members of congress & their staffers? After all congresspeople are in considerably more individual danger than an LEO since throught he abuse of their discretion they pass laws which would give people incentive to attack them.

As for the LEO trainig requirements making it a different case: I disagree. I've talked with many cops over the years & through either ignorance or malicious disregard they've usually been no more knowledgable about the law in their area than any other person. I'll grant some of this comes from bad info from their department, but the idea that LEO's are more well versed in the law is not always (& perhaps not even generally) true.

& go to any IPSC match: odds are you'll find that the civilians on the whole will have a higher standard of skill when it comes to using firearms than LEO's as a whole. Thios is because there are more civilian gun enthusiasts than there are LEO gun enthusiasts. A lot of cops shoot because they have to: a lot of civilians shoot because they want to.

As for being better...look, you're gonna think whatever you wish & justify it so you'll feel comfy about your conclusion. But there is something fundamentally wrong about an agent of government having a superiority complex. Your job is not that dangerous (more delivery drivers are killed every year than LE's for example) & your skills not that inherent. Sure, it's not a pleasant job but that doesn't entitle you to special benefits.

But as a general rule CCW holders tend to think of themselves as a special class of citizen as well. That's the whole point of CCW: to divide the citizenry into two distinct classes.

So I'll go one further: If LEO's get nationwide carry they won't help get nationwide carry for CCW holders, & if CCW holders get nationwide carry they probably won't help get nationwide permitless carry for those of us who think we are too good to beg & bribe for a permission slip to exercise a Right.

In the end LEO's should be able to carry nationwide sans permit, just as CCW holders should be able to caryy nationwide sans permit, just as non-ccw holders should be able to carry nationwide sans permit.

What y'all seem to be arguing over is that concealed carry is a privilege & some of the details need to be hammered out. It'd be much more defensible to argue that concealed or open carry is a Right & no one has the authority to prohibit you from doing it.

BTW, the papers & the prosecution or defense (whichever would be applicable) would try to harp on the fact that an LEO was involved in an incident. But the LEO's attorney would also use this to his/her advantage in providing an argument that the LEO was trained & somehow more capable of using deadly force than just your average citizen. So I don't think the argument that an LEO will be treated differently is a reason to argue that you're at a disadvantage: I think the reverse would be true.

An off duty cop used a gun to stop a school shooting in Va. a while back. Out of several dozen papers that covered the story only 3 mentioned that a citizen (which is what an off-duty cop is) used a firearm to stop a shooting. They mentioned his off duty leo status but that was it. No shots were fired (by the leo) so no charges were considered.

Bottom line is that if you want to carry nationwide sans permit, then try to push through legislation that demands recognition of everyone's Right to own & carry weapons, not just some piece of tripe that grants even more special immunities to government employees or those who begged permission & paid a bribe to get into a state's :i'mmore law abiding than thou" club. Incrememntalism is a strategy for attack, not defense. We're defending a pre-existing Right, not trying to create one out of thin air. Oppose the cop only carry bill, & oppose any permit only carry bill. Support any bill that treats carrying the way it should be treated: as a Right.

 

[Steve in PA]

So we agree, to disagree.

 

[pax]

Well, the one thing this thread has underlined is that even pro-RKBA LEOs won't really care whether ordinary CCW holders get nationwide reciprocity or not as long as they get theirs.

Once they have theirs, they won't fight for ours. Hell, the majority won't even fight for ours with theirs, if there's any chance it means that they'll have to sink or swim along with us.

And yeah, I know that's plain old human nature -- but some of the posters here are going out of their way to make human nature bloody obvious for the slow learners among us.

Too bad.

pax

Experience teaches only the teachable. -- Aldous Huxley

 

[Steve in PA]

These were my responses throughout this thread:

1) Now before the crazies come out of the closet and jump all over my posting, I think a CCW......your CCW, my CCW, should be recognized by every state, much like drivers licenses are.

2) If you go back and read one of my postings, I also said that CCW's should be treated like driver's licenses.....recognized by different states.

3) Just because I am for a nationwide LEO carry doesn't mean I'm against a nationwide CCW carry. Debating the topic of this thread is one thing, how I feel and act on the street is another. I copied this from GT, and it says sums up my attitude;

"Originally posted by 7677
emrgnc,
In my law enforcement career, I have found that there are enough real criminals out there that I don't have to create criminals from out of state LEO's and ccw permit holders. We need to remember that these same LEO's or citizens with a ccw may be the one that saves our bacon when we are getting the crap beat out us on the side of the road. "

 

[Frohickey]

SteveinPA...

These were my responses throughout this thread:

1) Now before the crazies come out of the closet and jump all over my posting, I think a CCW......your CCW, my CCW, should be recognized by every state, much like drivers licenses are.

2) If you go back and read one of my postings, I also said that CCW's should be treated like driver's licenses.....recognized by different states.

3) Just because I am for a nationwide LEO carry doesn't mean I'm against a nationwide CCW carry.

I agree with most of what you say, except that the correct way of doing so is by having each of the 50 state legislatures decide their own reciprocity rules. Just like each state decides on its own if they will honor another state's drivers license.

Doing it the way HR218 wants to do it, establishes a bad precedent, IMHO.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Steve:

But my question is still valid. A LEO, any LEO, not just me, has to "jump through hoops" to be qualified to carry a weapon, more so than any CCW'er in any state. You can jump up and down, scream and holler, but fact is fact.

In PA, getting a CCW is easier than getting a driver's license. So if a LEO has to go through all the things I listed in another post, why shouldn't it be recognized? Which is the basis for HR218.

Sorry, but I really have to disagree. We are talking about a NATIONAL situation, but you're looking at it purely on PA standards. There are many jurisdictions in the U.S. where LEOs don't have to "jump through hoops" to get certified in fireamrs, and once "qualified" they certainly don't have to jump through any hoops to remain certified. Just ask some department firearms instructors about the problems they have keeping some officers qualified.

On the other hand, while PA's requirements for a CCW may seem inconsequential to you, there are other states that require a class taking 4 or 8 hours and in some states 2 to 3 days to complete, plus having to fire a qualifying target upon completion.

There is no "one size fits all" here. I don't have a problem helping make you legal in other states if you help me be legal in other states. As long as the law is for LEOs only, it's unfair, unreasonable, and unconstitutional.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

An off duty cop used a gun to stop a school shooting in Va. a while back. Out of several dozen papers that covered the story only 3 mentioned that a citizen (which is what an off-duty cop is) used a firearm to stop a shooting. They mentioned his off duty leo status but that was it. No shots were fired (by the leo) so no charges were considered.

Well, I don't know the law in VA, but in my state an LEO is an LEO anywhere in the state, 24/7. Going off duty does NOT render him or her a mere citizen. Other states may be different, but I suspect that most are similar to mine in this regard.

Crossing state lines, however, DOES render an LEO a mere citizen.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

The difference being is that I am held to a higher standard than you.

Baloney.

I think that police officers are held to a lower standard when it comes to shootings than I would be as a citizen, and I am happy to cite examples.

Remember that guy in NYC that several police cornered and shot 15 or so times while he was trying to reach for his wallet? Sorry but I dont remember his name, it was a couple of years ago.

About 4 months ago a cop had pulled over a citizen near Columbus GA, and accidentally shot him while was was laying flat on the ground.

Those are just 2 examples I could think of right off the top of my head where I believe a common citizen would have been charged with murder.