Should the cop on the street have the same gun restrictions that you have?

[cjwils]

Restrictions on magazine capacity and laws affecting your right to own various semi-autos are being adopted or proposed in more and more jurisdictions. Some such laws and proposed laws exempt the police in various ways. Do you think the local police should be except from such requirements? I think not. If the law restricts me to 10 rounds, or prohibits semi-autos entirely, or other restrictions; then I say that the cop who stops me on the road or who knocks on my door should not have a right be more effectively armed than I am.

I do think that a special unit in each police department, or maybe a joint group between several departments, should have the latest and greatest in high-tech weapons in case they need to confront a drug gang that can smuggle in any weapon they want along with smuggling in drugs, or confront a well-armed terrorist or terrorist group. Such a special unit should never appear to confront a political protest or to handle a domestic situation or a suicide attempt, etc.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

Great in theory but reality and theory don’t always mesh.

I don’t claim to have the answers. I will say I’m against limits like those for magazine size, retain guns, etc. ideally I’d be against all restrictions but I don’t think we’ll ever see that. So right now, I personally would like to see people help stop the spread of the insanity as my state of Virginia is in real danger of CA style laws with the one more seat lost in the House of Delegates.

 

[Fleetman]

The police protect the public.....if you don't want a magazine restriction, join the Police.

 

[Fleetman]

And btw, we have three Police officers in our family......they should be equipped with the newest and most advanced weaponry available.

You sir sound more like a wannabe......grow up and live with your ten-round magazines or MOVE! Pa, Ga, etc, etc all have no magazine restrictions.

 

[Demi-human]

Following that line of thought, why should a civilian not be allowed to be

equipped with the newest and most advanced weaponry available.

Is an officer's life more important while he is doing our bidding, and less so in street clothes? (Though they are never really "off duty".)
A puzzling question in deed. Am I entitled to less sophisticated arms based upon my employment? Gender? etc..
I can assure you I have no desire "to be". Though you would be hard pressed to find another human as big a fan of police officers than I and others around here.

 

[George Dickel]

The police don't have anything to do with the laws passed by city/state governments. Your gripe is with the politicians your fellow voters put into office, not a cop that has enough people criticizing them as it is while trying to perform a difficult job.

 

[Riomouse911]

Should the Army/Navy/Marines/ Air Force be limited to the weaponry, skills and numbers of our adversaries?

What’s the difference between your hypothetical and this one?

Should police/sheriffs employees be held responsible for negligent misuse of force, lying or intentional violations of law? Yes. I have no problem with that at all, I have investigated, arrested and prosecuted LEO for these very things.

Does limiting the people you hire and count on access to tools designed to react to threats hinge on some arbitrary and misguided desire by some to somehow make things “ fair” in a life or death gunfight between an armed criminal and law enforcement make any sense at all? No.

Stay safe!

 

[sota]

And btw, we have three Police officers in our family......they should be equipped with the newest and most advanced weaponry available.

You sir sound more like a wannabe......grow up and live with your ten-round magazines or MOVE! Pa, Ga, etc, etc all have no magazine restrictions.

1) that's a pretty crappy reply all around.
2) PA is next to get mag restrictions. watch. You're not safe there.

 

[Tommygunn]

I have a feeling this thread is heading for a lock .....

 

[Pudge]

Police respond to the threat that society already faces. If these restrictions work, and the public need not defend themselves against threats which would require the restricted weapons, then law enforcement doesn't need them either. If law enforcement has reason to need such weapons then so does the public. All of my family is part of society, why should they be restricted in their defense more than law enforcement?

 

[RPZ]

I believe the OP is speaking about principle. For me there is no excuse for non public civil servants being restricted whatsoever.

 

[WrongHanded]

I say Yes.

But I do not mean that police should be as restricted as the private citizen. I mean that the private citizen should have the same legal right to own and carry the defensive tools to which the police have access.

LEOs certainly are more likely to find themselves in a potentially lethal encounter on any given day than the average citizen. But the chances of an encounter aside, a knife will cut a human body just the same, regardless of their occupation. A bludgeon will break bones just the same. A bullet will rip through flesh just the same. Lethal is Lethal.

 

[jmr40]

Let me rephrase the statement. Non-LE persons, who have gone to the trouble to get a carry permit should be allowed to carry anything LE officers can carry. I certainly wouldn't want to restrict LE to 10 rounds even if some place is foolish enough to force that requirement on others. But I can't think of any logical reason to let them carry anything different than I can.

 

[MedWheeler]

Like others above, I would rather the restrictions not be on me than that they be on police, but that's not the thread poll.

I'm not legally permitted to exceed the speed limit when I drive (except at work, sometimes, but that's different.). Under certain circumstances, police officers are. But I'm not sure I'd want speed limits eliminated for the "general public."

The offensive-movement aspect (toward crisis, instead of seeking an escape from it) of the job dictates a different set of logistics for it. I want cops to be well-equipped to do it. If a better-armed responding LEO prevails in a situation in which a LAC came up short, I certainly would not be upset that the cop was better-equipped.

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

This is going nowhere good.

 

[George Dickel]

What will it accomplish by limiting LEOs magazine capacity and duty firearms to what the rest of us must comply with??? Direct your efforts to removing the politicians that pass these laws, you and your fellow voters elected them.