why guns?

[JTHunter]

I never said that their weren’t any bad cops out there, but for ever bad one out there there are hundreds of good ones.
In my 19.5 years as a police officer, we have lost 10 officers in the line of duty. I knew all but one of them and a few were close friends. But every time one of our brothers fell, we kept working to keep our city safe.

I agree that there are a lot of good people serving out there. But after getting FOUR bad apples in just ONE department, I'm a little "gun shy".
Sidenote: that "third" officer had a "nervous breakdown" a few months after the encounter I described. His own partner, who was with him on the day of the incident I described, thought he was going to have to shoot him. Some time after that, that partner ended up joining the state police. He was one of two in that department that treated me fairly in the few encounters I had with them. The other, a K9 officer, shared a mutual affection for dogs and was a decent guy. I even came to his assistance one night when he was trying to separate two young men fighting in the street in front of my house. Despite being about 6' 2"-4" and ~250 lbs., he couldn't get these two separated. I pinned the arm of the young man on the bottom to the ground so he couldn't hit the other guy, who was on top, as well as the officer. Getting that arm out of the way allowed the officer to pull the other guy off of the bottom guy.
That officer retired a few years ago.

 

[earlthegoat2]

My formal training is in LE. I personally know a good many officers. I absolutely trust THOSE ones. A family member of mine who is a police officer doesn’t even trust the police of different departments. Kind of comical but not uncommon. Superiority complex of training I suppose between state and local agencies.

@JTHunter I’m pretty sure that department had a disease brought on from the top down. I have seen it before with entire Sheriff's Depts brought on by only a bad Undersheriff and smaller local departments with a chief that interestingly seem to get let go under mysterious circumstances.

When I was a PI, I had borderline negative dealings with what seemed like every officer in the tri-county area where I live. Several Chiefs of security for businesses and HOAs and even a few Fire Department Captains. True, the dynamic is different when police get called to investigate a suspicious vehicle (me) only to find out there is legitimate activity going on. That’s the problem with PI work, normal business seems like illegal activity to average denizen and the police respond accordingly. They were doing their job correctly and professionally I might add even if it left me bitter when they told me to clear off anyway.

We may be being too hard on @taliv. I don’t think we are looking at the statements the correct way or the article that was posted. The article is flawed but it shows us that all the liberals aren’t out to disarm us. I think many people distrust the police to varying degrees.

I have called the police one time in my life and that was non emergency. I generally look to take care of a problem myself before the police are needed. A few times I have told the wife to get the phone ready to call while I peeked out a window. I admit, I have a bit of experience and training in these areas so maybe this is not the best advice for everyone. I have a work acquaintance who told me he calls the police when he sees people just sitting in their cars in the parking lot of his apt complex??? That is a waste of police resources if you ask me.

 

[Waveski]

Will correct.

 

[Walkalong]

The article is flawed but it shows us that all the liberals aren’t out to disarm us. I think many people distrust the police to varying degrees.

I agree on both ends, especially on the first point, which is one of the reasons we don't do "liberal" bashing here at THR. There are millions of left leaning very avid gun owners that we don't need to alienate. Grown people can agree on one subject while disagreeing on another, but still work together for a common cause.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

"... we don't do "liberal" bashing here at THR ..."

A good rule for making an argument other people will listen to is to avoid labelling and argue the issue.

Still ... labeling is done often. Usually by lazy people.

 

[bearcreek]

This thread is pretty typical of what' going on these days ... "Why Guns" turns into a thread about why law enforcement officers aren't on the side of citizens. I'm SO tired of this.

The two subjects are integrally related. If/when unconstitutional laws are enforced, law enforcement officers will be the ones who do the enforcement. Hopefully most of the current ones will refuse to do so, but their record as a whole isn't great. I would venture to guess that most cops out there right now would be fine with arresting someone for possession of an unregistered machine gun or suppressor, for example. Perhaps I'm wrong, I hope so.

Besides that, I don't trust anyone that I don't know, especially if they're in a position to cause me harm. That's just part of being a logical person. I respect people, until they give reason to stop, but I don't trust them. Their vocation doesn't automatically change that, although it may influence it.

 

[Waveski]

I'm pretty sure I've seen it abbreviated that way too. SCROTUS as in Supreme Court Ruling of the United States. I'm pretty sure that's what was meant, either that or a typo, the T is right next to the R. Either that or who cares.....

I have not seen that interpretation of that ugly acronym. I have seen "So-called Ruler of the United States". And the T on the keyboard is not sequential to the bracketing letters in that acronym, so the T next to R explanation makes no sense. As to who cares - I care.

We may be being too hard on @taliv.

My perception is that others have tried to calm the waters stirred up by the OP , after he threw a stink bomb into the room then retreated.
To make the kind of derogatory statements about Law Enforcement Officers as contained in post #8 , then later say "let's not make this a cop bashing thread" is disingenuous.
Then there is the use of the ugly "SCROTUS".

This is The High Road , right?

 

[bdickens]

I'm sorry, but pointing out the undeniable fact that there happen to be real dirtbags running around hiding behind a badge is not "cop bashing." It's truth. And sometimes the truth hurts.

 

[Caplock]

As a construction contractor I don't get my feelers hurt when the bad contractors out there give the rest of us a bad reputation.

I can rely on and feel good about the fact I always do a good job and treat my customers well. I will also call out the bad ones that I know of and tell others what a POS they are.

 

[FlSwampRat]

I believe that everyone should own a gun for protection.
It is true that the police can not be everywhere all the time to protect everyone.
But most fail to realize that when it comes to their own family, they are not even able to protect them all the time. This is where law enforcement comes in. You rely on law enforcement to keep the peace by enforcing the laws.

I agree with what you said there, Gunny, but I highlighted that one sentence for a reason. When I was an MP at Ft Carson we had a class given by someone from Colorado's state police that focused mainly on traffic laws. However, he closed that class with "Remember, you're not cops, you're not law enforcement officers, you're peace officers. Go out and keep the peace."

I believe that most LEOs are good hearted, well intentioned, incredibly brave folks. That said, clearly following the news says that isn't 100% so. Maybe 99%, but who is to say that police officer someone is dealing with by necessity is a 99%er or a 1%er.

I was a LEO, my father was a LEO, but I know that I can't implicitly and blindly trust every LEO I have chance dealings with is perfectly legit. No more so than 100% of any group. I hazard to say that in any group of humans there's going to be some percentage that are dicey. Roll three 20 sided dies and every once in a rare while you'll come up with 000. Not often, but it does happen.

I never said that their weren’t any bad cops out there, but for ever bad one out there there are hundreds of good ones.

Absolutely true. But if there's just one in a given department, there's that chance to roll 000.

 

[Old Dog]

i could go on for pages listing reasons reasonable "innocent" people should not trust the police,

My bold. How is this not saying that all citizens should not trust all police?

I could go on for pages listing reasons that homeowners should not trust contractors ...
… that car owners should not trust auto repairs shops ...
… that my wife should not trust her investment counselor …
… that I should not trust my orthopedic surgeon …

You get my drift? At some point, for a society to function effectively, there has to be the presumption that those that provide services to the society possess the necessary ethics and integrity to do so … unless someone demonstrates otherwise, in which case that one is held accountable as an individual, without everyone losing trust in the entire institution.

 

[DustyGmt]

I have respect for police and I think most lawful people do. I can see both sides, if I was a police officer and had the daily stresses associated with that vocation I might get my gruff up about a post like #8. Most police officers dedicate their life to public service and live respectable, disciplined lives, many have sacrificed their lives in service to their community.

OTOH, I also share peoples skepticism about trusting police. I have had experiences that made it that way. Some people suck, some of those sucky people become police officers. I've had good experiences with them and they were courteous and decent but I've also had a couple not so good experiences. When I was 16 me and my friend rode our bicycles into the skate park and were asked to leave by the Rec lady and my friend stupidly told her to "**** off" and we went off riding. Apparently police were called because 5 minutes later I was thrown off my bicycle and had a .40 pointed at my face while being screamed at. I was glad I wasnt shot. That stuck with me.

I dont think police are generally to be feared, but I do fear them. I wish I didnt, but I do. There is something really scary about a guy with serious issues walking around with a badge, I've met a couple. Not a fan of the ratio so far tbh. I certainly dont want to rely on them for my own safety.

 

[George P]

Most people that mistrust law enforcement are criminals or people that don’t really know someone in law enforcement.

BS, my dad was a cop; LEOS today are NOT the cops of yesteryear when they knew everyone on their beat because they walked the streets; years ago, they were proactive; today they are all reactive

 

[rust collector]

Is there something to be accomplished by continuing to pick at this difference of opinion/perception? If I recall correctly, the OP was a story about the right to bear arms. Some agree with the author, some take issue, but why must it come to banging on someone's career/vocation/station in life?

We gun owners don't like to be painted with the same brush as psychopaths who shoot up schools or churches. Why then are we so quick to evaluate a career based upon a few bad actors? The plural of anecdote is not data, and you know this. If you have numbers on good v crooked cops, find a forum where that is fair game and hammer out there.

 

[boom boom]

Like any other field of endeavor, one bad experience will outweigh ten good ones. People misunderstand each other and when one has authority and the other person doesn't, because I said so is not any more palatable than when your parent told you to do something or be punished. In some ways, we are still children mentally but physically mature.

Police are often in that position as a parent used to be and a lot of folks resent being told what to do and when to do it by someone with authority to punish you if you do not do as they say. And so it goes.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

BS, my dad was a cop; LEOS today are NOT the cops of yesteryear when they knew everyone on their beat because they walked the streets; years ago, they were proactive; today they are all reactive

Today’s street cops don’t have just a city block or two that they have to work, it’s more like a few square miles.
The city I work in has a population of 228,286. We have right at 650 officers on the department. Our Uniform Patrol division has already worked over 20,000 calls this year.
Do you think with those numbers we could walk the streets like years ago?
The city I live in has a population of just over 10,000 and a police force of just under 30 officers.

 

[Casefull]

I agree with you ‘old dog’ that at some level we have to trust each other or society cannot function. But of the examples you list, none of them can put you in prison.

that car owners should not trust auto repairs shops ...
… that my wife should not trust her investment counselor …
… that I should not trust my orthopedic surgeon …

Law enforcement can. We have watched it unfold on a national level the last couple of years. It is common knowledge that one has to keep a low profile or you may be may be made an example of. When you can be put in prison for lying to a federal agent we are very close to a police state.

 

[HB]

How many are truly anti-gun? As I have pointed out, there is a difference between being anti-gun and being anti-2A, philosophically and politically.

In my experience, not many people I know are anti-gun by your definition (mine too).

Its like anything else... I wish stupid people wouldn’t drive, buy beer, etc. But they do, and that’s the world.

I know guns are a “divisive” issue but thats only because our system makes it so. Just like healthcare, abortion, etc... most americans arent hardline “conservatives” or “liberals”.

80% of Americans think that guns can be good or bad... It’s our job to convince those with power/vote/are responsible that staying armed is good. The 10% on either side will believe what they believe regardless.

Take your friends and family shooting. Instill safety and responsibility.

After all, our republican president Donald Trump said “take the guns first, due process second”.

Its not a partisan issue. Its a manner of personal responsibility.

-HB

 

[Waveski]

When you can be put in prison for lying to a federal agent we are very close to a police state.

Ok then - lying to federal agent - in the course of that agent acting in accordance with his/her duty , should be a matter of personal preference , with no legal ramifications whatsoever. Now that makes a lot of sense!
What next?

Can a guy get into trouble for bribing a moderator in returning from putting a rotten thread out of it's misery???

 

[Old Dog]

But of the examples you list, none of them can put you in prison.

Yeah, yeah they can. Fraud. Even medical doctors can lose their license and practice if they screw up. There's always a consequence. Plumbers, businessmen, stockbrokers, breaking the law is breaking the law. Yet so many of these folks get a pass while all cops are judged when one does something stupid.

 

[Old Dog]

When you can be put in prison for lying to a federal agent we are very close to a police state.

I've spent a bit of time in "police states." If you are equating this country to a police state, you lack a frame of reference.

 

[FFGColorado]

I agree on both ends, especially on the first point, which is one of the reasons we don't do "liberal" bashing here at THR. There are millions of left leaning very avid gun owners that we don't need to alienate. Grown people can agree on one subject while disagreeing on another, but still work together for a common cause.

Gotta mention the biggest 'block' of voters is the BIG block of 'un-affiliated' voters in the middle of the bell curve. Many who have not made up their mind on a LOT of issues, some gun law related..alienate them and you can guess how they will vote.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Positional labeling is cheap, easy, and turns off the minds of people who might be open to legitimate arguments from "the other side".

Eric Voegelin: "Once an argument has been classed as `positional,' it is regarded as having been demolished, since the `position' attributed to it is always selected with a perjorative intent. The choice of the position selected is an expression of the personal antipathies of the individual critic, and the same arguments can therefore be attributed to any one of a variety of `positions,' according to what comes most readily to the critic's hand. The wealth of variations afforded by such tactics is well exemplified by the variety of classifications to which I have myself been subjected. On my religious `position' I have been classified as a Protestant, a Catholic, an anti-Semite and as a typical Jew; politically, as a Liberal, a Fascist, a [Nazi] and a Conservative; and on my theoretical `position,' as a Platonist, a Neo-Augustinian, a Thomist, a disciple of Hegel, an existentialist, a historical relativist and an empirical skeptick; in recent years the suspicion has frequently been voiced that I am a Christian. All these classifications have been made by university professors and people with academic degrees."
-- in Freedom and Serfdom: An Anthology of Western Thought, edited by Albert Hunold. (D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1961), p. 280.

I copied that quote into a notebook when I was in high school in the 1960s when I was following the arguments about gun control leading up to the 1968 Gun Control Act when the Democrat Party was the champion for gun control and unquestioning support for "gun control" became the litmus test used to separate true liberals from faux liberals.

 

[FlSwampRat]

Positional labeling is cheap, easy, and turns off the minds of people who might be open to legitimate arguments from "the other side".

I copied that quote into a notebook when I was in high school in the 1960s when I was following the arguments about gun control leading up to the 1968 Gun Control Act when the Democrat Party was the champion for gun control and unquestioning support for "gun control" became the litmus test used to separate true liberals from faux liberals.

The problem with sides, as I think your quote was making (sorry, not enough coffee yet) is that some people assume one's position on one issue defines one's position on all by virtue of it being left or right, liberal or conservative. My positions vary in such classification by issue. It's kind of strange to me that a large portion of humanity thinks that if you have position A on issue 162 you'll have position A on all the other issues. Sorry, too much of a free thinker. I have friends with whom I disagree on many issues but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy the things on which we agree. Like a good steak dinner, for example.
I found most of the points in the referenced article to be well thought out and salient.

 

[Casefull]

It’s quite hard to have a rational discussion when people refuse to consider certain realities. Allowing that someone’s argument has validity does not invalidate what I believe. We are too ready to choose sides and close our minds.