Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LE groups against our rights

Discussion in 'Activism' started by LAR-15, Jan 27, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LAR-15

    LAR-15 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,385
    They joined the Brady Camp in opposing the Heller Decision:

    The groups joining the Brady Center brief include the International Association of Chiefs of Police; the Major Cities Chiefs; the International Brotherhood of Police Officers; the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives; the Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association; the National Latino Peace Officers Association; the National Black Police Association; the School Safety Advocacy Council; and the Police Executive Research Forum.
     
  2. dave_pro2a

    dave_pro2a Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    447
    Yes, police as a whole are rabidly anti gun: their Associations, Unions, etc.

    Hardly matter if a few rank and file support it, if the vast majority of the mouth pieces oppose it.

    Swear and oath to defend Constitution and BoR, and then try to rip it apart as a part of your job.
     
  3. tinygnat219

    tinygnat219 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,939
    Location:
    The Land of Northern Hospitality and Southern Effi
    Yeesh, where's the Disabled, or Deaf police association?
     
  4. Javelin

    Javelin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    DFW
    What the heck is this honestly some kind of joke? And they all joined the Brady campaign? This is a made-for-tv-movie right here.

    :)
     
  5. GuyWithQuestions

    GuyWithQuestions Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    451
    Well, maybe if there was a law saying that the governement and law enforcement could be sued for failing to protect individuals they'd make some sense. But since they have no obligation to protect individual citizens, all these law enforcement agencies supporting DC make me want to puke! :barf: Just imagine if you call 911 and they're like "Sorry, we're on donut break! We don't want to help you at this time. We'll arrest the murderer after it's done, because that's our legal duty. By the way, it should be illegal for anyone but us to have guns and to protect themselves." :banghead: I wish someone would make a cartoon like that to put in the newspapers, although a lot of police officers I know don't like donut jokes and may become offended.

    People always say that if the law was changed so that law enforcement could be held accountable for not protecting individual citizens in situations where they reasonable could, it would be violating our rights and privacy. In all the cases brought up in the book "Dial 911 and Die", I don't understand how the police responding to any of these 911 calls would have been violating citizen rights! If someone calls 911 and says, "Please help me, this guy with a crowbar is breaking my windows and is coming in," is she really going to be upset and think her rights are violated if the police come over and help? I guess they just need more revenue from writing speeding tickets, even though statistics say that the majority of habits that actually lead up to car accidents are rarely ticketed! :banghead: The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/speed/speed.htm says that 30% of fatal car accidents and 12% of all crashes are speed related, but that the majority of these crashes were "driving too fast for the conditions" rather than "going over the posted speed limit" by itself (also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit#Speed_and_crash_factors). How often do police pull people over for tailgating or not staying in the slower lanes except to pass, which defensive driving classes say are more often causes of car accidents. I guess revenue is a big part of it.
     
  6. GRB

    GRB member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,774
    Dave Pro2A,

    Oh please, TICSMYD!

    Such an, in my opinion, amount to little more that blabbering. What, first of all, makes you think that these groups represent police officers as a whole.

    Maybe you should read the names of the groups before making what I find to be such offensively assinine statements as your quoted above.aybe there is some clue in their names as to whom they represent:

    - Hmm, how many chiefs of police are thre as compared to polic eofficers. Do you think your boss has your interests in mind when he makmes decisions about his company?


    Chiefs of what? It does not even say, but if means police this one is even more restrictive that the first as it covers only police chiefs in MAJOR cities

    Again only exceutives or chiefs, and this time limited to blacks (what racists).

    Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association (what the heck is this? Have you heard of it before. How many police members do they have who agree with their policy oin firearms?

    Another group of which I have never heard. Amazing, they must have a huge membership, and again I ask, does the membership agree with their policies on guns? If so show me the data that proves it.

    Same goes for the others.

    Know what AARP support gun control too. Do you think even 75% of their membership is aware of that?

    You are casting aspersions that do not necessarily hold water.

    Call the major pro-gun groups NRA, Gun Owners of America, and the JPFO and ask them how many law enforcement members they have.

    The truth is that POLICE AS A WHOLE ARE NOT RABIDLY ANTI GUN, but you are quite possibly anti-police, or simply off the mark, in making such a statement about them.

    Regards,
    Glenn B
     
  7. Frightener 88

    Frightener 88 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    195
    Guy with questions, i was once ticketed for "fallowing too closely" which is tailgating. Just sayin. And im none too happy with LEO unions and organizations taking a political stance about anything. Im not paying them to have a political stance.
     
  8. GRB

    GRB member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,774
    You are not paying police unions or organizations made of of police chiefs anything. They are made of of citizens of the USA, why should they not have a ploitical opinion? I do not agree with those above, if in fact they "joined" the Brady campaign. I think that abhorrent, but certainly well within their rights as citizens - don't you agree? If they should not have political opinions, then why should you? Of course, if this is a violation ofthe law, whic it may well be if police are expressing themselves as police officers and then politicking, why not call them on it. Certain political actions are forbidden at least to federal law enforcement officers. If that is not the case though, they have as much right as you or I to state their opinion of political issues.
     
  9. GuyWithQuestions

    GuyWithQuestions Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    451
    Glenn Bartley,

    Don't the police owe their legal duties to the government and are paid by the government, instead of civilians? Weren't police originally made to bring to the government who they needed and also arrest the law breakers? Then eventually they had things like 911 and when you call 911 you're making a request service, but if they refuse to help you and do get in trouble it's not because they refused to help you but because they may have failed in some duty they had to the government instead?
     
  10. Anonymous Coward

    Anonymous Coward Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    199
    Location:
    Illinois, not Chicago
    These sound like insignificant, special-interest groups representing political hires, and not the will of the majority of officers.

    What about the Fraternal Order of Police? You know, the 300,000 member group who opposed repealing the Tiahrt amendment and got called "a fringe group" by NY Mayor Bloomberg.
     
  11. Crimp

    Crimp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    West Virginia
    After reading the original post, I wish I was on some other forum than The High Road so I could really express my feelings. Can y'all please read between the lines? :fire:
     
  12. GRB

    GRB member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,774
    I wonder why you are apparently perturbed. I do not try to read between the lines, I would rather read what someone has written, and beleive that they had enough intelligence to write what they meant instead of in code that required betwixt line reading gurus to figure it out. Most of the posts here seem pretty straightforward, but maybe you can share something with us, that you see hidden between the lines. Why that would be difficult here on this forum as opposed to another is beyond me; I am one of the foulest mouthed people yopu could ever meet, yet I can keep it gentlemanly here and follow the rules. Why not give it a try and tell us, in a nice way, about what is seemingly upsetting you because, I for one, and probably others, have no idea about what you are writing.

    Best regards,
    Glenn B
     
  13. Bad Voodoo

    Bad Voodoo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    CCC-PRK
    Of course police management is anti. Who do you think is going to be required to knock on your door when it's time to confiscate your firearms?

    I'm convinced that the entire government conspiracy to heavily infringe/eliminate 2A rights is designed to mitigate an appropriate response from America's citizens when it's time to hit the reset button. They don't want to be fighting against the same weapons they currently deploy on foreign soil. The last time a fair fight happened it didn't go very well for the establishment, did it?
     
  14. dave_pro2a

    dave_pro2a Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    447
    Quote Glen Bartley
    I have read countless incidents of RANK AND FILE police officers LYING about firearm laws on the open carry forum.

    Yes most cops are anti gun. They fear encounters with armed citizens, and every citizen is viewed as a enemy until proven otherwise (thin blue line bull crap and 1* garbage, etc.).

    But in my post here, since you have a reading comprehension problem, I did draw a small deliniation between rank and file versus those that run the unions/Association (the politically appointed or elected sworn officers).

    It's a small deliniation. Those in appointed positions almost always are anti gun, depending on the political view of the mayor, govenor, et cetera. While those in the rank and file are just 'most likely' anti-gun.

    Of course it goes without saying that the attitude of leo in Montana will be slightly different than the attitude of those on either coast (and major metropolitan areas).

    Oh here's my data: I have had several police officers lie to me about the law, and lie about me under oath. I have also heard some lie about gun laws.

    I know of several other people who have had the exact same experience, people I know and trust explicitly.

    On opencarry.org I have read countless examples of rank and file cops lying about gun laws in order to try and change behavior, acting under color of authority, harrassing people who were peacefully going about their personal business.

    I have read countless examples (as in, I have personally read the email responses) from police higher on the food chain who backed up the ANTI-GUN intimidation tactics of the rank and file... going so far as to seemily cover up lies, instances of false imprisonment, illegal search & seizures, harassment, intimidation, etc.

    So yes, I feel very confident in my opinion that *most police are antigun on some level. As a 'political force' they (for the most part) actively campaigh against the Second Amendment.

    Just ask Ronnie Barret.

    http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html

    "I was very surprised to see an LAPD officer seated front and center with a Barrett 82A1 .50 cal rifle.

    It was the centerpiece of the discussion. As you know, there have been no crimes committed with these rifles, and most importantly, current California law does not allow the sale of the M82AI in the state because of its detachable magazine and features that make it an "assault weapon."

    This rifle was being deceptively used by your department. The officer portrayed it as a sample of a currently available .50 cal rifle, available for sale to the civilians of Los Angeles.

    Your officer, speaking for the LAPD, endorsed the banning of this rifle and its ammunition. Then he used the rifle for photo ops with the Councilmen each of whom, in handling the firearm, may have been committing a felony. I was amazed."

    So go ahead and call me assinine Glen buddy, but go look in a mirror before you do so you can check the definition of the word.
     
  15. Charles Daly

    Charles Daly Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Harrisburg, PA
    Years ago (maybe 8) my company exhibited at the IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police) show in Philadelphia. We wanted to see if we should be trying to sell some of our tactical pumps to LE.

    There was a constant barrage of anti-gun messages during that show and when the purchasing officers would visit our booth, I couldn't help but ask why they were so against the 2nd Amendment. Time and time again we were told, off the record so to speak, that the public was not to be trusted with firearms.

    Since 100% of our business then was commercial/civilian sales, I had a diffcult time reconciling our attendance at that show. I mean, here we were spending good money, to attend an event that, if the buyers had their way, they would have put us out of business. We have not exhibited at that show since.

    Now that we're in the AR market, and we want to pursue LE sales, I'm going to have to find a way to deal with these opposing viewpoints. We want LE sales, but we don't want to be beholding to buyers that don't trust our citizen consumers. Hell of a balancing act for a gun company...
     
  16. Blackfork

    Blackfork Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    East Texas
    Katrina

    I watched police operations during Katrina. The LEOs came from all over the nation. They are anti-gun, period.
     
  17. Green Lantern

    Green Lantern Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,665
    Mr. Kassnar - good to see you here! By your post, I'm optimistic that we won't one day have to read of Charles Daly going to the "Dark Side" and selling out civilian gun owners to garner favor or extra $$$ from the .gov! :)

    ...as SOME have been known to do...:mad:

    I don't know how many people hold a grudge like I do, but I won't even look at a Ruger until the company "disavows" the late Bill Ruger's disdain for letting us poor serfs have "high-cap" weapons...
     
  18. Samuel Adams

    Samuel Adams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    548
    Location:
    Coastal Georgia
    To go off on a tangent, one misconception a lot of people have with 911 dispatchers is that it is the policeman or the firefighter or the paramedic answering the phone and responding from there. Unless it happens to be a one-horse town, that is incorrect. 911 is simply a phone number to access the system.

    I've worked all of these jobs and am working in a 911 center on a military installation at the time of this writing. We have a union here but they are, in my humble opinion, for people who don't like to work. Lazy ass people who whine about everything management does are the norm and the "leaders" of those unions act like they swore an oath to the Communist Manifesto.

    Having read some of these organization's policies and statements, I'm not surprised.
     
  19. dave_pro2a

    dave_pro2a Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    447
    Great point Blackfork.

    Rank and file officers from around the country, directly going against the 2A.
     
  20. LT1coupe

    LT1coupe Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    AZ
    I know & have known many LEO's & I have yet to meet one that has any issue with people legally owning & carrying guns. I have thankfully spent most of my life in TX & AZ.
     
  21. Reyn

    Reyn Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    AL
    Me neither.
     
  22. Ragnar Danneskjold

    Ragnar Danneskjold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,703
    Location:
    Arlington, Republic of Texas
    Is there a National Caucasian Police Officers Association?
     
  23. Bad Voodoo

    Bad Voodoo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    CCC-PRK
    Nope. There isn't an NAAWP either.
     
  24. P-32

    P-32 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,050
    Location:
    the dry side of Washington St
    As a full time LEO with 6 years until retirement, I can assure you the rank and file is not anti gun. I'm talking about the guys in the trenches. Many of the orgs. listed by the OP is full of politicing boso's who think they speak for everyone. The union I belong to supports the Demo's. My co-workers and I don't as we have a mind of our own.

    Having said that.....if every gun owner in the US was a member of the NRA we would not have to worry about a few Demorats. I'm a Life member, you?
     
  25. ArfinGreebly

    ArfinGreebly Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    11,690
    Location:
    North Idaho
    Regional?

    I'm in Idaho, recently of Nevada.

    In both these states, the LEOs with whom I've had conversations have all -- with a single exception -- been in favor of armed citizens.

    In their eyes, it would make their work easier if more people could protect themselves.

    This is anecdotal, from a statistically insignificant sampling of officers, but I figure that, if I contact dozens of these guys, and only one of them has a problem, I say the numbers are on our side.

    That having been said, and since we are, after all, discussing this in Activism . . .

    I there any suggested ACTION that anyone would like to propose?

    If the thread serves only to gripe and counter-gripe, then I'll have to close it.

    Anyone?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page