Remove LEO exemption from firearm laws?

[hotpig]

The thought of unarming the Police will help RKBA is kind of silly to me.

 

[Brian Dale]

Let me get this straight: you'd have the Brady bunch agreeing to take already allowed firearms from law enforcement, and this would help RKBA for private citizens?

Nope. Here it is, straight:

He's suggested using the threat of uniform regulations

as a way to illustrate and emphasize the idiotic nature of laws that disarm regular citizens.

He's suggesting that it would be good for law enforcement officers and regular citizens to acknowledge that we're on the same team.

Clear?

You might regard the poll result as a PQ—a "Pissedoffness Quotient" from the public—about current laws and incumbent politicians, rather than as a specific prescription for action.

You're all invited to use the term PQ in your statistical analyses and scientific publications, if you wish. You're welcome.

 

[Deanimator]

Once again, good THR members: It is NOT the line cops that make laws regulating firearms!

Actually, if you do any reading at all, you'll find that it's the line cops who not so infrequently make up "laws" on the fly, in some instances ORDERING people to BREAK the ACTUAL law, such as telling people in Virginia that they HAVE to have their firearms concealed in a liquor serving establishment when precisely the opposite is the case. Or how about the cop who berated a man for not following CCW law IN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT STATE FROM THE ONE IN WHICH HE LIVED???

Yeah, cops cannot "make" laws, but they seem to have no trouble making UP laws when they see the need.

 

[Optical Serenity]

No, we don't need to restrict even more citizens from guns, how about we focus on getting more rights for citizens who are not LEOs.

All for LEOs being exempt. They risk their necks so others don't have to.

 

[Old Dog]

Gee, Brian, thanks for using the big, bolded type so that I didn't have to put on the reading glasses for your post.

No, it's not clear at all; in fact, I think it's (the OP's) idea is a preposterous notion that doesn't pass the smell test.

as a way to illustrate and emphasize the idiotic nature of laws that disarm regular citizens.

You really think the morons in public office -- your legislators -- and the anti-gun faction would see it like this? May I share what you're smoking?

He's suggesting that it would be good for law enforcement officers and regular citizens to acknowledge that we're on the same team.

It's not the LEOs on this board who fail to acknowledge that we're on the same team. Sorry.

 

[buzz_knox]

I would not say efforts have failed. It took how many years for someone to get the ball rolling with HR218? It took 4-5 years to get HR218 passed and that was 2004. Almost 4 years later there are still states unsure as to how they will apply to "their officers". They pretty much have to accept it for out of state LEOs as it's Federal law.

There are requirements to be met under HR218. Many of these were hashed out over the years it took to get it passed. Any Federal law requiring recognition of a state issued CCP or whatever you want to call it would undoubtedly have requirements.

You can't get it all at once.

Following the passage of HR218, where was the public support of citizen carry reform that so many groups promised if we only got this passed? Has there been any public support from these groups? By contrast, how many times have these groups spoken out "in concern" over civilian carry?

I absolutely agree that we can't get it all at once. But so far, we non-LEOs have seen absolutely nothing come from our support of HR218 except further division between one group of citizens and another. Now that HR218 has passed, the groups calling for citizen support really have no reason to talk to us anymore. They've gotten what they wanted.

 

[buzz_knox]

It's not the LEOs on this board who fail to acknowledge that we're on the same team. Sorry.

Historically, that's not accurate. There have been more than a few LEOs on the board who have perpetuated this problem. We've had LEOs refer to citizens as animals who would bite the hand that feeds them. We've had threads started by LEOs who wanted to bait civilians. We've had LEOs state they will always take a cop's side, regardless of the facts. We've also had LEOs state that civilians shouldn't have opinions on police matters.

The problem comes from both sides, including on this board.

Going back to the main point, the real question is: would any firearm restrictions pass if they applied to LEOs? Would there be the parade of uniforms whenever this legislation is discussed? Would we hear the "got to keep the guns off the street" or "only criminals use these guns" if the officers were discussing the weapons in their own holsters?

 

[Louisiana Carry]

"Going back to the main point, the real question is: would any firearm restrictions pass if they applied to LEOs? Would there be the parade of uniforms whenever this legislation is discussed? Would we hear the "got to keep the guns off the street" or "only criminals use these guns" if the officers were discussing the weapons in their own holsters?"

Word.

 

[Soybomb]

Going back to the main point, the real question is: would any firearm restrictions pass if they applied to LEOs? Would there be the parade of uniforms whenever this legislation is discussed? Would we hear the "got to keep the guns off the street" or "only criminals use these guns" if the officers were discussing the weapons in their own holsters?

I don't see why its unthinkable. Look at how riled up the public gets over taser usage. Look at other countries where your average officer doesn't carry a gun at all. At best I think the idea is a waste of time. At worst you guys might get exactly what you want and wind up facing the entirely new problem of "if the police don't need 30 round magazines, neither do you." Keep your eye on the prize. LEO exemptions may be unfair and an ideologically bad idea, but that doesn't mean fighting them is going to help restore our rights. Our real battle is with the public and involves battling misinformation from the brady bunch and breaking stereotypes of gun owners, we get nothing going after leos.

If you want to make a difference take some new shooters to the range. Show them the ar15 that is probably in police cars in their area. Explain to them why its a good defensive tool for the police and themselves. Let them shoot it, go over some facts about how often "assault rifles" are actually used in homicides. Write some letters to your representatives and get them to do the same.

 

[Harve Curry]

Yes 266 81.85%
No 59 18.15%

The monopolization of arms creates an elite armed class, superior in power and susceptible to abuse of that power. Even Aristotle knew that. Our Founders knew it.
Laws like this breed inequality and discontent, just look at the poll.
To those LEO's who voted YES on this issue please except my thanks,. You truly understand.
To any LEO or retired LEO that thinks they are more deserving of an inalienable right then a fellow citizen I say "The end cannot justify the means". You of all citizens should be more diligent to protect RIGHTS then to except offers giving you special privileges and making you elite citizens.

 

[R127]

Once again, good THR members: It is NOT the line cops that make laws regulating firearms! Do we all need some civics lessons here? It's your freakin' state legislators and city councilpersons that foist the BS laws and ordinances on you all ...

Fascinating. The legislators are foisting BS laws and ordinances on us all. To be clear we can say that a great many of these BS laws and ordinances violate the supreme law of the land which makes these legislators criminals guilty of breaking our highest law. The great majority of the remainder can be summed up as excessive, heavy handed... oppressive in general. But line cops don't make those laws, how true. Line cops volunteer to serve as enforcers for the criminals. Do the words "collaborator" and "congitive dissonance" mean anything to you?

This is why people need to actually care about who they work for and who they choose to lend their strength to.

 

[Brian Dale]

Gee, Brian, thanks for using the big, bolded type so that I didn't have to put on the reading glasses for your post.

My apologies if you didn't like it; I was Typing While Grouchy.

You really think the morons in public office -- your legislators -- and the anti-gun faction would see it like this?

In fact, I don't. Does that mean that the OP is wrong to post the idea for discussion in this thread? It's useful to the rest of the members to show why it's preposterous; then we act more effectively. What I really think is that we've had a lot of posts attacking things that the OP didn't write.

May I share what you're smoking?

Sure; Winston 100s. Stop by and we can smoke while we go blast some targets; we can even spit and cuss if we want to.

Next guy to launch into a diatribe about "you civvies" goes on my Ignore List, not that anyone should care about that.

 

[Old Dog]

I don't see it ever happening ... but, I submit that if an educated, pro-gun electorate put some folks, with common sense regarding firearms issues, in office, that you might see more rank and file law enforcement personnel getting in line accordingly. Your basic street cops, especially the more junior ones, tend to reflect the company attitude, which, regrettably, usually comes from the top. Wondering about Chicago PD or LAPD street cops' attitudes about citizens' gun rights? Look to their leadership, starting with mayors and city council members, who choose the chiefs and commissioners, who dictate the policies, oversee the training, and tell their subordinates how to think.

Brian Dale asked

Does that mean that the OP is wrong to post the idea for discussion in this thread?

No, not at all ... upon further reflection, I'd say the concept's validity is worth consideration. However, given present day political realities and liberal America's basic misunderstanding of gun issues, I believe that such an idea would lead to a severe set-back in the RKBA movement for all were anyone able to get the idea on the table. Finally, we inevitably move on to the militarization of law enforcement agencies, which, good or bad (and most here undoubtedly believe bad), had its genesis in the WoD, but came fully evolved out of the terrorism hysteria post-9/11. We're just not ever gonna get rid of all the high-tech, high-firepower and high-priced weaponry, either on the side of the LE agencies or the bad guys. It's there, it's not going away, so to me, the idea of trying to take LE organizations back to the early 20th century is simplistic, unworkable, unachievable, and would be the death-knell in the RKBA movement for all citizens, because, you see, there will always be those in power who will want their law enforcement to be better armed than the citizenry. Does this fall at all into line with what we know of our Founding Fathers' intent? No, of course not. But ignoring reality and trying to restrict arms for any segment of the populace will not lead to the rest of the people having the restrictions on them loosened ...

Do the words "collaborator" and "congitive dissonance" mean anything to you?

Ah, the inevitable comparison of those in law enforcement to the traitors who collaborated with their Nazi occupiers. And I believe the phrase is "cognitive dissonance," which is something I doubt most folks in law enforcement don't feel, as most act in accordance with their own beliefs (which, by the way, don't stem from being a

volunteer to serve as enforcers for the criminals

R127, great analogies, first the military, now law enforcement. Life must be tough for you, living in Occupied America.

 

[buzz_knox]

I don't see it ever happening ... but, I submit that if an educated, pro-gun electorate put some folks, with common sense regarding firearms issues, in office, that you might see more rank and file law enforcement personnel getting in line accordingly. Your basic street cops, especially the more junior ones, tend to reflect the company attitude, which, regrettably, usually comes from the top. Wondering about Chicago PD or LAPD street cops' attitudes about citizens' gun rights? Look at their leadership, starting with mayors and city council members, who choose the chiefs and commissioners, who dicate policies and tell their subordinates how to think.

This a disappointing post, but only because it's an honest appraisal of the true situation.

The usual statement is that the line officers are with us, while the higher ups are against us. The reality is probably far closer to what you've posted: the line officers will adopt the attitude the leadership dictates. That's consistent with every other organization, so why do we keep expecting things to be different with LE organizations?

 

[Officers'Wife]

Hi Old Dog,

It's not the LEOs on this board who fail to acknowledge that we're on the same team. Sorry.

Really? So far I've seen 'cop attitude' in three separate posts just on this thread. You can have it one way or you can have it the other but us 'civvies' haven't learned the art of doublethink. In fact, most of the civvies I know, a great number of them in a different uniform have a technical term for doublethink. So Orficer Dog, according to your superiors, certain types of firearms are dangerous to society. LEO's as representatives of society by possessing such weapons intesify that threat.

Selena

 

[buzz_knox]

So Orficer Dog, according to your superiors, certain types of firearms are dangerous to society.

Can we please focus on the subject, and not violate the rules by misusing someone's "name"? You've raised a valid point that is in real danger of getting lost due to the delivery method.

 

[Old Dog]

I'm not sure I understand what Officer's Wife is attempting to communicate to me ...

LEO's as representatives of society by possessing such weapons intesify that threat.

?

At any rate, when I said

It's not the LEOs on this board who fail to acknowledge that we're on the same team. Sorry.

I actually meant (forgive me, it was late ... or early), "It's not ONLY the LEOs on this board who fail to acknowledge that we're on the same team."

Near as I can tell, most of the guys on this forum that I know to be LEOs come here precisely because they're "on the same team" -- RKBA supporters for all.

 

[R127]

Ah, the inevitable comparison of those in law enforcement to the traitors who collaborated with their Nazi occupiers.

Nazis? Not at all. That's thrown around too lightly. Haven't you ever heard of anyone "collaborating" on a project? Perhaps you prefer the word "accomplice?"

And I believe the phrase is "cognitive dissonance,"

Thanks for doing my proofreading for me. I am sure neither my spelling nor my grammar are flawless and typos do get through despite my efforts.

which is something I doubt most folks in law enforcement don't feel, as most act in accordance with their own beliefs

I agree. Most of them think they are doing some kind of patriotic duty because most of them really do want to be goodguys. Except you can't be a goodguy working for the badguys. Hence the cognitive dissonance of which they are unaware.

R127, great analogies, first the military, now law enforcement. Life must be tough for you, living in Occupied America.

It is certainly much trickier for the ordinary citizens who actually build civilizations and make them great than it is for the specially priviledged politicians who tear them down and the enforcers that help them. I do pretty well though because I am not servile by nature so instead of living lies I find ways through and around the speedbumps set before us. I'm truly sorry if you dedicated your life to serving people who betrayed both of us and are now having to look back on that as the years ahead grow fewer than the years behind and wonder what it was really for. I wouldn't want to have to face that either. I'm not happy about where my taxes go and that's just money.

Either way we're not enemies unless your willful intention was to help tear apart our country. Like I said I know most people who choose to be government enforcers want to do good they just were duped into supporting the wrong people. We all get duped one way or another. I still haven't figured out how to not have to pay taxes. The point is as it always was... you cannot save the constitution or America by carrying out the will of its greatest enemies. You cannot serve justice by carrying out the will of criminals. Be realistic about that and put your energy elsewhere. This is exactly the same thing that happens every election when people are duped into "voting for the lesser of two evils." All you do that way is make the country a little worse off than it was before. Put your energy elsewhere and do some real good instead.

 

[buzz_knox]

R127

The fact that every unconstitutional action in this country that has been enforced, has been so enforced by a gov't actor (often via LEOs) is absolutely true. The fact that future unconstitional actions will be similarly enforced is equally true.

However, we are again approaching the level where the signal is drowned out by the noise due to loaded terms.

I'm no moderator, but they have been noticeably absent from this thread and I don't think it's because they don't know it's here. Let's not give them reason to make themselves known in a rather . . . final manner, shall we?

 

[APIT50]

I think that I follow what the original intent of this thread was. The fact that the LEO's need the superior firepower in order to combat and at least be equal to the criminal elements they may encounter. I agree with them having access to those weapons but not the laws regarding the restrictions on the non-LEO population. If you are a law abiding citizen, why would there be more restrictions on access to firearms and accessories? The criminals are going to get there hands on the so called restricted items regardless of the law. This is why they are criminals. The LEO exemption and restriction on the law abiding citizens is merely a camoflaged form of gun control.

 

[R127]

R127

The fact that every unconstitutional action in this country that has been enforced, has been so enforced by a gov't actor (often via LEOs) is absolutely true. The fact that future unconstitional actions will be similarly enforced is equally true.

However, we are again approaching the level where the signal is drowned out by the noise due to loaded terms.

I'm no moderator, but they have been noticeably absent from this thread and I don't think it's because they don't know it's here. Let's not give them reason to make themselves known in a rather . . . final manner, shall we?

Point well taken. I'm not trying to be hostile or a jerk. I have this insane utopian vision that we can fix what's wrong with our system before anybody gets hurt if everybody or at least most people wake up one day and say "hey! if we stop supporting the bad people who through intent or stupidity have been destroying our country they won't be able to do anything!" It's an incredibly simple concept, a child could grasp it... don't lend your strength to bad people. I'm a fool to think it will ever catch on and especially not on a gun board! I guess I'll just give it up and hope maybe an idea took root in one or two other minds.

Geeze, it sure sucks that we have to go down the same stupid path that every other country does when all we have to do is understand one easy concept that can be summed up in one short sentence.

 

[Old Dog]

I was telling myself I wouldn't let myself get dragged into this, really I was, but these comments, in response to my posts, rather rankle:

It is certainly much trickier for the ordinary citizens who actually build civilizations and make them great than it is for the specially priviledged politicians who tear them down and the enforcers that help them. I do pretty well though because I am not servile by nature so instead of living lies I find ways through and around the speedbumps set before us. I'm truly sorry if you dedicated your life to serving people who betrayed both of us and are now having to look back on that as the years ahead grow fewer than the years behind and wonder what it was really for.

Like I said I know most people who choose to be government enforcers want to do good they just were duped into supporting the wrong people.

You cannot serve justice by carrying out the will of criminals.

R127, no need to tap-dance around what you were implying. Let's be clear on one thing: while I do work in law enforcement, I don't carry out the will of criminals, nor did I in the course of a long military career. I fight crime 8-and-a-half hours a day, minimum, often 16 hours per day, at least five or six days a week and in this job and others, have seen more horrors and done more to protect the people of my community and my country than you'll ever know. Let's agree -- I won't pretend to know how you feel about whatever it is you've done/you do for a living, and you can stop equating this nation's military and law enforcement personnel as collaborators with an enemy of its citizens.

I'm not trying to be hostile or a jerk.

Just patronizing, then.

 

[grog18b]

The "cop attitude" is directed exactly where it belongs. It seems to me that most every single thread on this forum turns into a cop bashing party. Perhaps you should read a few.

As far as the civvie comment, perhaps I should have stated "cop hating civvies". How's that? And also, as far as walking a mile in you military folks shoes goes, perhaps you should become familiar with the MOS system. Mine is in my screen name, and you can get me over at SOCNET, or Professional Soldiers. So I've walked MANY miles in those shoes, and wore out many pairs of jungle boots doing it. I just choose not to wear my 201 file on my chest, or on my posts.

I came to this forum, seeking out people with a similar love of the 2nd, and firearms. I am set to retire from this LEO job very soon. BEFORE I came here, I WAS a staunch supporter of the RKBA, and have contacted many people in government to get laws changed. I have to tell you... This forum HAS opened my eyes. Here's a thanks to all those cop haters out there. You made me see a side of society I didn't know much about, and really don't care to associate with.

I feel this will be my last post here, and I will no longer come here, since cops are obviously not welcome here. It's all garbage. People using the 2nd as an excuse to alienate one of the largest pro-gun armed groups of people around. I've never run into a larger group of cop hating people, and I've attended a few motorcycle gang rallies.

I'm sorry some of you don't like cops. Like all jobs, we have our bad apples, but as a group, we are some of the nicest people you will ever meet, willing to go out of our way to help.

Like I said, I WAS a firm supporter of the 2nd. I came here to find brothers, instead I found hatred, based on my job. How does it feel to discriminate against someone based on their job? When is your next klan rally?

Good luck, you created an enemy here. For the government haters out there, stick to your computers, and don't forget your tinfoil hats.

If the owner of this forum wants to further the 2nd RKBA, I very highly recommend getting rid of this forum. It turned me, and I NEVER thought I would see the 2nd any other way. Someone like myself comes in with good intentions, and sees all the cop/government hating propaganda, and it turns the stomach quickly. Instead of talking with friends, and sharing pro firearm experiences, I get hate, hate, and more hate. I guess when confronted with so much, it's a natural defense to try to explain that , no, not all cops are that way. Only to get told, time and again "YES YOU ARE." Oh well.. I guess I am now. Hatred breeds hatred, and as long as it's spewed openly here, it will continue to propagate.

If the cops are always running into you, and you are always being tossed into a wall... PERHAPS IT'S NOT THE COPS... Maybe it's because you're a dirtbag? Just a thought... Enjoy your forum!

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

I'd be all for it.

 

[nicki]

Law Enforcement exemption

In our country we shouldn't be passing any laws in the first place unless there is a compelling public need in the first place and we should modify or outright repeal all laws that don't meet this standard.


In California we have passed numerous laws related to handguns over the last few years.

1. First was a drop test. If any group of people would be dropping guns and having a accidental discharge, it would be police officers. To give them an exemption is to create a public saftey risk.


2. Next was law requiring a loaded magazine indicator and magazine disconnector. The theory was that a child could see a gun is loaded with a mag loaded indicator and if the mag was out, the gun would be safe.

From what I hear through the grapeview, many police officer locker rooms have bullet holes from accidental discharges.

It seems to me that exempting cops from having guns with loaded mag indicators makes no sense.

The magazine safety issue probably deals more with guns in the home. Unless the police have a better record than the general public regarding gun safety in the hom, I see no reason why they shouldn't be subject to the same laws as us.

3. New one, Microstamping. The argument for this one is that it will help in solving shootings and here in Cal the police were given exemptions.

Consdiering how many police shootings are happening, I think the police should be the first ones that should get microstamp guns since they are more likely to be involved in shootings with multiple shooters.


The 9th circuit of Appeals slipped one in for us on the "Silveria decision" a few years back.

The plantiff argued that the Cal state AW ban gaves cops an extra year to register their private assault weapons and that was a violation of equal protection.

The court actually agreed with Gary Gorski LLP on this one point in his case and said cops are subject to the same rules regarding personal assault weapons as the general public.

The US Constitution specifically prohibits the granting of titles of nobility.
Public servants should have no more rights than the general population.

In fact, while they are in their capacity as public servants, they should be exactly that, servants.

Nicki