Autolycus
Member
Meaning should they be exempt from gun laws like the AWB, needing a permit to carry a firearm, or national reciprocity on their IDs and badges?
Should LEOs have more "rights" than non-LEOs?
- Thread starter Autolycus
- Start date
- Status
Autolycus
Member
It creates a seperate class of people which is inhibitive to freedom, so no they should not.
steveno
Member
absolutely NOT
gc70
Member
Prior to HR218, there was generally no legal basis to recognize LEO credentials from another state for personal CCW purposes, although many LEOs relied on professional courtesy to stay out of trouble when not acting in an official capacity.
HR218 sets LEOs apart and provides a special privilege not available to other citizens. I never thought that being in law enforcement should provide special privileges, other than in the line of duty. YMMV.
HR218 sets LEOs apart and provides a special privilege not available to other citizens. I never thought that being in law enforcement should provide special privileges, other than in the line of duty. YMMV.
pcosmar
member
It only adds to the Us v Them mentality.
351 WINCHESTER
Member
Absolutely not. They should play the game with the same rules. Bad cop - no donut.
Steve in PA
Member
So the police will need a permit AND their badge/ID in order to carry??
These "polls" are getting ridiculous. Nothing more than a way to circumvent "bashing threads".
These "polls" are getting ridiculous. Nothing more than a way to circumvent "bashing threads".
glockman19
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2007
- Messages
- 3,700
No. like other's comments it creates a second class of citizen. We should all be deputized
Green Lantern
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,665
I see no reason for a LEO to be exempt from the AWB (as s/he has .gov issued REAL assault weapons), or to have national reciprocity.
However, I do think an LEO should be allowed to CCW while off duty. And unless they live in Mayberry, I think any LEO that does not carry just because they aren't on duty/in uniform is, to keep it High Road, LIVING DANGEROUSLY.
However, I do think an LEO should be allowed to CCW while off duty. And unless they live in Mayberry, I think any LEO that does not carry just because they aren't on duty/in uniform is, to keep it High Road, LIVING DANGEROUSLY.
Waywatcher
Member
Of course not.
Should doctors have access to better health care?
Should doctors have access to better health care?
GlenJ
Member
They already have more rights then us.
1. When a gun is pulled on one of them they expend an awsome amount of return fire. Imagine you and a couple of friends sitting around your house and it gets broke into. Now you all empty 17 round mags in the person, do you really think you will get away with that????
2. In NY there's talk of bringing the death penalty back for killers of police and prison guards. So there you go, there lives are worth more then ours.
1. When a gun is pulled on one of them they expend an awsome amount of return fire. Imagine you and a couple of friends sitting around your house and it gets broke into. Now you all empty 17 round mags in the person, do you really think you will get away with that????
2. In NY there's talk of bringing the death penalty back for killers of police and prison guards. So there you go, there lives are worth more then ours.
Sindawe
Member
No additional "rights" for LEOs.
Monkeyleg
Member.
I had a discussion along these lines with a guy at work. We were talking about the VT shootings, and he questioned why anyone would need a magazine that can hold eighteen or nineteen rounds.
When I replied that police use them all the time, and that I should have the same capability, he disagreed. He said that police need to have those magazines in order to protect people.
My response was that police don't primarily carry guns to protect people, but to protect themselves. I then asked him to cite an incident where an officer fired his weapon to save a citizen. My co-worker was stumped.
When I replied that police use them all the time, and that I should have the same capability, he disagreed. He said that police need to have those magazines in order to protect people.
My response was that police don't primarily carry guns to protect people, but to protect themselves. I then asked him to cite an incident where an officer fired his weapon to save a citizen. My co-worker was stumped.
PotatoJudge
Member
By definition they can't. The government can (and does) choose to recognize more of their rights than non-LEOs. Now if only politicians would uphold the constitution like they swore to, it wouldn't be an issue.
Short answer, no more, no less.
TCB in TN
Member
NO! They should have only the rights afforded to any other citizen. However I would like to hear the "rationale" of those who voted yes though.
Rattlesnake
Member
I should take the High Road, but...
<i>If</i> AWB goes through, I can't own such defined firearm, UNLESS my employer issued/bought one for me. Is the AR15 in the lock on my cage full auto? No it's not. It by definition is a Clintonian assault weapon.
I do have to carry my commission card and badge if I'm carrying a department issued/approved weapon and wiht my department, everything that I carry offduty must be approved.
Second, it took about 12 years to get the HR 218 passed. Everybody wants something now. Unfortunately, things especially with the legislature work slowly. How many of you have written letters to your representatives encouraging their support of a national reciprocity law?
<i>If</i> AWB goes through, I can't own such defined firearm, UNLESS my employer issued/bought one for me. Is the AR15 in the lock on my cage full auto? No it's not. It by definition is a Clintonian assault weapon.
I do have to carry my commission card and badge if I'm carrying a department issued/approved weapon and wiht my department, everything that I carry offduty must be approved.
Second, it took about 12 years to get the HR 218 passed. Everybody wants something now. Unfortunately, things especially with the legislature work slowly. How many of you have written letters to your representatives encouraging their support of a national reciprocity law?
media cop bashing, and threads like this (on a site that I rather like) that encourage cop bashing adds to the Me v. them mentality, and as far as I'm concerned rightly so.pcosmar said:
Flyboy
Member
Outside of their jurisdiction, where they have no legal authority, and are just private citizens? Yup, same as I have to have a permit.
gc70
Member
How does a discussion of whether or not LEOs should have MORE privileges than ordinary citizens constitute "cop bashing?"
Autolycus
Member
Rattlesnake: And when an officer retires do they collect his magazines, the ones that hold more than 10 rounds if he owns any?
I understand you have to carry whats approved by your department. However if you have to use your weapon off duty will your department back you up and help provide legal protection?
If you have a CCW permit I would say carry whatever you like. If your department does not approve of it then you should just lose the legal protection they give you.
And I understand that you have to carry all those credentials with you. However you are allowed to carry in places some of us are not allowed to. Like Illinois or Wisconsin. And you dont need to worry about getting a permit in places where it is impossible to get a carry permit like Los Angeles, New Jersey, San Francisco, New York City, and certain counties of NY and certain areas of Massachusetts.
We are American citizens and we cant even carry there? But you can because of your profession.
Many of us have written to our represenatives about National CCW. I also seem to keep reading about how many of us non-LEOs wrote in support of LEOSA. Now there is a deafening silence on behalf for us.
Instead I see many LEO organizations supporting gun control. They are always being put in front of the camera saying that they fear for their lives when there is a bill for shall issue CCW.
Steve in PA: Flyboy gave an excellent response. I would say they should have their permit to carry outside of their state. I could see there being a lot of jursidictional overlap and they meet the same standards. But why not go back to the way it was?
And why allow retired officers to carry? You no longer are a cop. Sorry but you lose the benefits.
WayWatcher: I would argue that doctors employed in private hospitals and that can afford it should get better healthcare. Healthcare is not a guaranteed right. IF their coworkers want to give them better treatment or a discount that is fine because it does not hurt anyone.
It does not create a seperate class of citizen. Since healthcare is not a guaranteed right it is fine. And as long as the government does not mandate it. Private business doing it is fine.
I understand you have to carry whats approved by your department. However if you have to use your weapon off duty will your department back you up and help provide legal protection?
If you have a CCW permit I would say carry whatever you like. If your department does not approve of it then you should just lose the legal protection they give you.
And I understand that you have to carry all those credentials with you. However you are allowed to carry in places some of us are not allowed to. Like Illinois or Wisconsin. And you dont need to worry about getting a permit in places where it is impossible to get a carry permit like Los Angeles, New Jersey, San Francisco, New York City, and certain counties of NY and certain areas of Massachusetts.
We are American citizens and we cant even carry there? But you can because of your profession.
Many of us have written to our represenatives about National CCW. I also seem to keep reading about how many of us non-LEOs wrote in support of LEOSA. Now there is a deafening silence on behalf for us.
Instead I see many LEO organizations supporting gun control. They are always being put in front of the camera saying that they fear for their lives when there is a bill for shall issue CCW.
Steve in PA: Flyboy gave an excellent response. I would say they should have their permit to carry outside of their state. I could see there being a lot of jursidictional overlap and they meet the same standards. But why not go back to the way it was?
And why allow retired officers to carry? You no longer are a cop. Sorry but you lose the benefits.
WayWatcher: I would argue that doctors employed in private hospitals and that can afford it should get better healthcare. Healthcare is not a guaranteed right. IF their coworkers want to give them better treatment or a discount that is fine because it does not hurt anyone.
It does not create a seperate class of citizen. Since healthcare is not a guaranteed right it is fine. And as long as the government does not mandate it. Private business doing it is fine.
pacodelahoya
Member
Does government of the people, by the people and for the people even mean anything anymore? Where do cops derive thier power from? Not rights, the government only has powers, powers delegated to them by the people. If a citizen can't do it, how can a cop?
Cuz they have special training and ninja skills right?
Cuz they have special training and ninja skills right?
Autolycus
Member
Rattlesnake: One more thing about the Clintononian Assault Weapon...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=273601
Apparetly its constitutionally vague for you to own a machinegun.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=273601
Apparetly its constitutionally vague for you to own a machinegun.
Sistema1927
Member
Not no, but H-E-[double hockey sticks] NO!
- Status
