I know what you mean I just read the whole thread and feel I lost brain cells doing it. If everybody spent as much time fighting for RKBA as they do ranting back and forth we would be a lot further along. I think we may even be moving backwards at times. If its not okay for me then it shouldn't be for you attitude doesn't help the fight. Unfair yes but instead trying to get somebody else in hot water use that energy getting yourself out of it.
Off duty Police told they can't carry at University
- Thread starter NotPbFree
- Start date
- Status
This attitude of "LEOs get special treatment" and "they shouldn't be allowed to carry off-the-clock" etc is just a disgusting double standard in my opinion.
In my opinion, a firearm is one of the tools required to safely carry out LEO duties. You can't tell an LEO, "you can't have your tools" and at the same time tell them, "you're required to respond to a crime-in-progress."
That's not acceptable.
Disagree all you want. But when you're a cop, you're a cop 24/7. ANY CITIZEN would (and should) EXPECT an officer to respond off-duty or not if the officer witnesses a crime.
The way you all are talking you'd expect an officer, eating lunch, who witnesses an armed robbery, to just sit there and keep eating for the remainder of his break...or worse try to stop an armed gunman with his own gun.
That's just a sad attitude to have.
Though pathetic might be a better word
Rob
Scrat, this is the most senseless statement I've read so far.
So you're saying, if you're getting stabbed, and a police officer is standing 2 feet from you, that officer should take cover, call 911 and be a good witness?
I guess if that works for you, cool. Sorry you'll be dead, but at least that cop didn't do someting unfair like carry a gun where you're not allowed to, right?
Did you actually read your statement before you posted it?
Rob,
You clearly are not familiar with TN law. Cops are not on duty 24/7. Your ASSUMPTION that I expect a cop to be on duty 24/7 is wrong, and nor should they be. People need downtime.
Secondly, if a cop wants to take a lunch break I have never said I want them disarmed for it. You are making assumptions. I want them to follow the same laws I do, meaning they eat at restaurants that do not serve alcohol/beer.
Work on those reading skills, and don't add in what you think.
Silent, does it bother you that I have both critical thinking skills, a zealous passion to be treated as an equal, and the guts to question your sacred cows? If so, good. Continue being bothered.
You clearly are not familiar with TN law. Cops are not on duty 24/7. Your ASSUMPTION that I expect a cop to be on duty 24/7 is wrong, and nor should they be. People need downtime.
Secondly, if a cop wants to take a lunch break I have never said I want them disarmed for it. You are making assumptions. I want them to follow the same laws I do, meaning they eat at restaurants that do not serve alcohol/beer.
Work on those reading skills, and don't add in what you think.
Silent, does it bother you that I have both critical thinking skills, a zealous passion to be treated as an equal, and the guts to question your sacred cows? If so, good. Continue being bothered.
SilentArmy
Member
Mommmm! Bobby's got food in the living room!
Somebody call the cops, the cops are carrying guns!
I have to agree that the condition of your thinking is certainly "Critical"!
Somebody call the cops, the cops are carrying guns!
I have to agree that the condition of your thinking is certainly "Critical"!
SilentArmy
Member
I believe we as gun owners and carriers should support all others who would carry even in defiance of a silly rule made by "educated " people. I do not understand the issue that several posters have with authority. This entire "I am gonna take pictures or video or make some quick pencil sketches of the cops breaking the laws. If you do not have the stones to protect yourself wherever you should go, then be grateful for those who would be so equipped.
sometimes I read things here that put me at a loss for words so I just have to stir the Sh%^!
I am glad to live in Utah where the courts have ruled that the attempt by Universities to restrict carry on campus was unconstitutional and thus illegal. You cant be upset at the wolves for eating the sheep if you serve them up with garnish! Unfortunately, too many liberal clowns have learned nothing from tragedy such as columbine and VA Tech.
sometimes I read things here that put me at a loss for words so I just have to stir the Sh%^!
I am glad to live in Utah where the courts have ruled that the attempt by Universities to restrict carry on campus was unconstitutional and thus illegal. You cant be upset at the wolves for eating the sheep if you serve them up with garnish! Unfortunately, too many liberal clowns have learned nothing from tragedy such as columbine and VA Tech.
OK, I see you did not read some important facts when you supposedly read the thread.
It is already illegal per TN law for police to be doing what they are doing, and the campus administrator (the "educated" people) who said cops cannot carry is actually doing them a favor by stopping them from committing felonies without having them arrested for it
Powderman
Member
And once again, I am amazed at the absolute hatred some people have for anyone who DARES wear a uniform and a badge.
SomeKid, before you tweak yourself completely out of shape, do us a favor and look up the definition of the word "misfeasance", as well as "nonfeasance". Why?
Because almost without exception, ANY sworn officer who, upon witnessing a criminal act fails to respond--whether IN uniform, or OUT of uniform, CAN BE CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED.
Ya know, I was going to post a bit more, but I guess I'm a bit nauseous right now. I am glad that folks like you are in the minority, otherwise I would probably have turned in my badge a long time ago. So, y'all go ahead, eat your sour grapes and thump your chests behind the safety of your computer, like a REAL hairy chested mountain man. Go right ahead. Me, I'll just continue doing what I always do.
With no respect at all,
Powderman
Your not so friendly neighborhood jack-booted thug
SomeKid, before you tweak yourself completely out of shape, do us a favor and look up the definition of the word "misfeasance", as well as "nonfeasance". Why?
Because almost without exception, ANY sworn officer who, upon witnessing a criminal act fails to respond--whether IN uniform, or OUT of uniform, CAN BE CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED.
Ya know, I was going to post a bit more, but I guess I'm a bit nauseous right now. I am glad that folks like you are in the minority, otherwise I would probably have turned in my badge a long time ago. So, y'all go ahead, eat your sour grapes and thump your chests behind the safety of your computer, like a REAL hairy chested mountain man. Go right ahead. Me, I'll just continue doing what I always do.
With no respect at all,
Powderman
Your not so friendly neighborhood jack-booted thug
divemedic
Member
1 There is no HATE for LEOs. I think it is funny that when we expect LEOs to be subject to the same laws as everyone else, it somehow means we hate them. Does that mean LEOs hate me every time they expect me to follow the law?
2 Nearly every one of you on this thread who claim to be LEOs don't understand LEOSA, and aren't even trying to.
3 You are muddying the issue with the "on duty 24/7" thing. What the law says is "in the performance of your official duties." Tell me that you are performing your official duties while attending a typing class or shopping for groceries.
Now with that in mind, it seems as though LEOs are subject to the same restrictions as all other CCWs when not performing their duty.
ETA:
Misfeasance requires a duty to act. I can find nothing in my state law that REQUIRES a LEO to act when they view a crime. I don't know about your state, or TN (the subject of this thread) but the AG of the state seems to think you are incorrect. Unless someone else can show me the law that requires you to act?
2 Nearly every one of you on this thread who claim to be LEOs don't understand LEOSA, and aren't even trying to.
3 You are muddying the issue with the "on duty 24/7" thing. What the law says is "in the performance of your official duties." Tell me that you are performing your official duties while attending a typing class or shopping for groceries.
Now with that in mind, it seems as though LEOs are subject to the same restrictions as all other CCWs when not performing their duty.
ETA:
Misfeasance requires a duty to act. I can find nothing in my state law that REQUIRES a LEO to act when they view a crime. I don't know about your state, or TN (the subject of this thread) but the AG of the state seems to think you are incorrect. Unless someone else can show me the law that requires you to act?
anygunanywhere
Member
Explain to me how LEO are "on duty" all of the time so they can protect me but that SCOTUS has ruled that they are not required to protect me when they are "on duty"?
Then, explain to me why an LEO who has no "duty" to do his "duty" when "on duty" now wants to be armed when he is "off duty" to allow him to do his "duty" that he is not required to do.
Finally, explain to me how it works when an individual takes an oath, sworn before God, "to protect, serve, and uphold the constitution", as their "duty", can claim to not be required to protect me even though they tell me it is their "duty", then claim they are always "on duty" when they are "off duty" and not required to do their "duty" but want to be armed to do their "duty".
Then, explain to me why an LEO who has no "duty" to do his "duty" when "on duty" now wants to be armed when he is "off duty" to allow him to do his "duty" that he is not required to do.
Finally, explain to me how it works when an individual takes an oath, sworn before God, "to protect, serve, and uphold the constitution", as their "duty", can claim to not be required to protect me even though they tell me it is their "duty", then claim they are always "on duty" when they are "off duty" and not required to do their "duty" but want to be armed to do their "duty".
NotPbFree
Member
I would expect any leo to respond to an armed robbery they witness on duty or off. That said, law enforcement response is not guaranteed, either by law or common practice. I had a problem with trespassing. My local enforcement told me to post no trespassing signs. When the problem continued, I was told to take a warrant out of the trespasser. At no time did LE volunteer to confront the man.
My point being, LEO's aren't selected by God. Some LEO's are highly professional, and presumably superbly trained. Some are the 19 year old nephew of the local "big dog" politician who needed a job.
Some will literally go toe to toe with a bad guy.
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080709/COUNTY09/80709036
Some will be part of the problem. Note OFF DUTY Caption
http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?s=8015431
We shouldn't bash folks for being in LE, but we can't pretend they are saints either.
My point being, LEO's aren't selected by God. Some LEO's are highly professional, and presumably superbly trained. Some are the 19 year old nephew of the local "big dog" politician who needed a job.
Some will literally go toe to toe with a bad guy.
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080709/COUNTY09/80709036
Some will be part of the problem. Note OFF DUTY Caption
http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?s=8015431
We shouldn't bash folks for being in LE, but we can't pretend they are saints either.
JBB
Member
AnyGun,
Your post made me dizzy, but I couldn't have said it better. Unfortunately, some police officers let the job go to their heads and consider themselves "above the law". I have a healthy distrust of cops for the most part and yes, they should be required to follow the law when off duty.
Your post made me dizzy, but I couldn't have said it better. Unfortunately, some police officers let the job go to their heads and consider themselves "above the law". I have a healthy distrust of cops for the most part and yes, they should be required to follow the law when off duty.
Zach S
Member
edit
Tribal
Member
I disagree. See the U.S. Supreme Court case Castle Rock v. Gonzalez. I like to think that the police will intervene, but they're under no legal obligation to do so and probably have qualified immunity as state actors from civil litigation.
That said, I think that a public college that forces government employees to violate the terms of their employment in order to take classes is walking a pretty thin line. Private colleges, of course, may be as dense as they like.
doc2rn
Member
Guns n more- that is just it, the only thing they trust is the $$ we have to pay to get the piece of paper. They think GFZ are magical and keep the boogey man at bay. Truth be told the shooting is always over by the time they roll out of the 7-11/Crispy Creme/Place of Il-repute.
SCKimberFan
Member
No! No! No! It's Krispy Kreme!
Titan6
member
I can't believe I just read all of that.
Instead of trying to spin this back into the anti's face under the banner of the ridiculous you want to lock up the police. Maybe the sensible thing to do would work to repeal it for everybody? Nah, cops are a favorite THR punching bag by a certain segment so it is off to the races. Well so be it...
I now return you to your regularly scheduled mud slinging contest.
Instead of trying to spin this back into the anti's face under the banner of the ridiculous you want to lock up the police. Maybe the sensible thing to do would work to repeal it for everybody? Nah, cops are a favorite THR punching bag by a certain segment so it is off to the races. Well so be it...
I now return you to your regularly scheduled mud slinging contest.
Treo
member
Wow, how did we get 95 *posts into a "cop bashing" thread W/ out a single post from me? I might even lose my reputation as an uber-cop hater. On to the bashing;
I agree W/ Titan in the sense that it would be great if the law were repealed across the board. Until it IS however, it should apply equally to everyone
I could go one of two ways W/ this , I could point out that the cop standing there had BETTER take cover in case one of my bullets over penetrates the guy who brought a knife to my gun fight.
Or I could remind every one how frequently cops are in a position to stop a crime like that.
I agree W/ Titan in the sense that it would be great if the law were repealed across the board. Until it IS however, it should apply equally to everyone
I could go one of two ways W/ this , I could point out that the cop standing there had BETTER take cover in case one of my bullets over penetrates the guy who brought a knife to my gun fight.
Or I could remind every one how frequently cops are in a position to stop a crime like that.
hotshotshoting
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2008
- Messages
- 270
i find the anti leo issue a bit disturbing....
i also find it interesting that people say they don't expect cops to be cops off duty... but if the situation arose where they would NEED a cop im almost positive their attitude would change...
here's another tidbit of information... did you know you could be charged if you witness a uniformed officer in trouble and don't attempt to help in any way? ie call 911 or something... it doesn't mean that you have to put your life in danger... ps this may only apply in a few states...
where did your anti leo sentiment come from SOMEKID? did a police officer find your stash?
i also find it interesting that people say they don't expect cops to be cops off duty... but if the situation arose where they would NEED a cop im almost positive their attitude would change...
here's another tidbit of information... did you know you could be charged if you witness a uniformed officer in trouble and don't attempt to help in any way? ie call 911 or something... it doesn't mean that you have to put your life in danger... ps this may only apply in a few states...
where did your anti leo sentiment come from SOMEKID? did a police officer find your stash?
Most of these ninjas that openly DEFY police to help them when they're in trouble would buy stock in Depends if they ever found out they would have to stop a violent crime on their own.
It's the age-old "hate the soldier in a time of peace" story, which brings me to another phrase my father used to use.
There are no athiests in a foxhole.
Treo
member
What situation might that be? How likely would I be to find myself in such a situation W/ a cop available to respond before it's all over?
shooter_john
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2005
- Messages
- 9
TAB... I meant POST certified LEO's... Not honorary deputies or whatever Nugent may be.
SomeKid... Please point out the part of my post where I say that I do NOT support the right of citizens to carry EVERYWHERE. Especially since this was the first sentence of the meat of my thread:
"I wish everyone could carry at home, work, school and where every else you wanted (except bars and the like of course). Lord knows with the prospects of terrorism etc. the more good guys with guns the better."
I don't frequent bars, but if I did, I certainly wouldn't take a gun in. I call that common sense.
My point is that AT LEAST the off-duty LEO's can carry, that's a lot better than nothing when the poo hits the fan. Would it be better if everyone responsible enough to carry could... ABSOLUTELY.
Divemedic... We are not allowed to drink or surf porn at work, and by policy are prohibited from being "intoxicated" even off duty. We are also encouraged to carry at all times, on duty or not.
After reading all of the post here, I guess I'm pretty proud of my fellow Deputies and our surrounding agencies... We have a good reputation with those we serve, and are generally very well received. I guess I was completely ignorant of the fact that the Gestapo is running the rest of the country. (Or at least the places the posters are coming from.)
SomeKid... Please point out the part of my post where I say that I do NOT support the right of citizens to carry EVERYWHERE. Especially since this was the first sentence of the meat of my thread:
"I wish everyone could carry at home, work, school and where every else you wanted (except bars and the like of course). Lord knows with the prospects of terrorism etc. the more good guys with guns the better."
I don't frequent bars, but if I did, I certainly wouldn't take a gun in. I call that common sense.
My point is that AT LEAST the off-duty LEO's can carry, that's a lot better than nothing when the poo hits the fan. Would it be better if everyone responsible enough to carry could... ABSOLUTELY.
Divemedic... We are not allowed to drink or surf porn at work, and by policy are prohibited from being "intoxicated" even off duty. We are also encouraged to carry at all times, on duty or not.
After reading all of the post here, I guess I'm pretty proud of my fellow Deputies and our surrounding agencies... We have a good reputation with those we serve, and are generally very well received. I guess I was completely ignorant of the fact that the Gestapo is running the rest of the country. (Or at least the places the posters are coming from.)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked