WI: retired cops won't be able to carry, either

[xd9fan]

..First lets get folks used to all LEOs, current and prior, carrying...then we can move on to all law abiding citizens.

I can not believe a statement like this is on this board
This statement is not compatible with individual liberty. You are putting "the State" on a higher playing field then "we the people". Careful here.

I'm sure this statement was told to the people of Pre war Germany too.

Maybe all LEO's should have all of the Bill of Rights protections before we do....just to make sure they work........just to be safe...and secure.

unbelievable


"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace.
We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand
that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity
forget that ye were our countrymen."
—Samuel Adams


Let me guess....you vote for the GOP and at the same time dont understand why every year gun laws are growing and freedoms are eroded. Come on guys!!!!:banghead:

 

[TheEgg]

Its funny how HR218 is a step towards more gun rights for everyone, and yet all you so-called Pro-2nd Amendment people here are so blind by your hatred for governement and law enforcement, you forget what the end result is

Wow, just Wow!

This may be one of the most disturbing statements from a LEO I have ever seen posted on this board.

I saw no particular hatred for Government or LEO's expressed on this thread -- only the simple comments that some people don't like HR218 and that all citizens, including LEO, should be subject to the same laws vis-a-vis owning and carrying firearms.

If you conclude that this indicates blind hatred of government and Law Enforcement, you have a very strange viewpoint.

Perhaps you could clarify your viewpoint for us "so-called Pro-Second Amendment" people out here?

 

[AF_INT1N0]

Actually, your congressmen did in fact believe that retired officers should have the priviledge to carry. Its funny how HR218 is a step towards more gun rights for everyone, and yet all you so-called Pro-2nd Amendment people here are so blind by your hatred for governement and law enforcement, you forget what the end result is.

Not so. Law enforcement rights, very rarely if ever = Citizen rights.

Notice once 218 passed the Police Unions, Police Chiefs goups, and FOP got pretty quiet on the issue(they had theirs) .. The same groups that we (Government hating gun nuts) supported on 218 have been shooting us down for years. Police advocacy groups are known to stand up for (just to name a few)
the 94 Assualt Weapons Ban and it's renewal
The .50 Ban in California
The 1989 sporting purpose ban.
The 1934 NFA.

Quite frankly, Police have been on the other side of the fence in regards to civilian disarmament since the dawn of time..

The Idea that we thought they would help us, even though we have helped them, is IMO stupid, and blatantly ignores past instances.

So you are saying, "If I can't do it, no one can" ? Thats absurd...First lets get folks used to all LEOs, current and prior, carrying...then we can move on to all law abiding citizens.

Actually yes. And thats the point. If I can't carry than no one should.. Especially not Police.
The have been several places where citizens(subjects) cannot carry arms, but the police can.
Some examples are (but are not limited to) Fuedal Japan---Samurai--Who could and did kill subjects at will

Old England--The Knights (ie. Royals) who could and would do as they pleased to subjects of the crown.

Nazi Germany--The Brown Shirts, SS, who killed with inpunity. 6 Million Jews?

Russia-- 20,000,000 unarmed disidents were killed by the Armed Political elites.

100,000,000 Subjects have been slaughtered by thier own governments in the 20th century alone..

Having no one carry is bad....
Having only the Police carry is with out a doubt worse.

Not that I'm calling you a JBT, Brown Shirt, thug, or Nazi. Please don't take this as an attack..

But history proves time and time again that gun control is always fatal to one group or another.

One should always be leery of another who tries to take away ones means of protecting oneself.

AF_int1n0

 

[Optical Serenity]

And yet you are comparing police officers to the SS nazi thugs. Thats absurd. I totally understand your frame of thought. You just have to understand that while the FOP heads and some chief of police don't like the 2nd amendment, that is NOT how police officers feel. I have yet to meet one LEO who does not like the 2nd amendment. Actually EVERY LEO I know is very pro-2nd amendment, and wants every citizen to carry.

 

[tellner]

I've met plenty of cops who wanted to get "guns off the street" or thought that only they and a few selected "good" people should have them. If someone who isn't even in the field hears police saying this in regular conversation your assertion is already false. As for the FOP, it's your union. If cops really felt strongly about the issue, strongly enough to take a stand, they would select representatives who would say the same thing. The fact that the FOP has been consistently for gun control for "civilians" for decades makes it impossible to believe what you are saying.

 

[scout26]

OS, may I point you to the following thread:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=180058

In addition, how many times have we seen uniformed Police officers (normally the Big Wigs and Head Honcho's) standing behind, say Governor Blagoevich, as he and Mayor Daley tout their latest gun control scheme ???? Hmmmm?????

I'm tired of hearing about how the rank and file support RKBA, 2A, and CCW, while their leadership fully supports gun control.

As for the FOP, it's your union. If cops really felt strongly about the issue, strongly enough to take a stand, they would select representatives who would say the same thing.

+1000000000000000000000000000000

I fully supported HR 218. But when it has come time for the LEO community to support CCW and other pro-2A, the LE community has been mostly anti or at best silent on the issue. Therefore, I am NOT drinking the "Help us get ours first and then we'll help you get yours" Kool-aid. Everybody or nobody, not even off-duty. Then when off-duty cops feel the same fear that we ordinary mortals feel, maybe it'll change, but until then, suck it up.

 

[tellner]

I finally figured out what was so disturbing about the "help us get ours and we'll help you get yours" line. It's the same one that women have gotten handed by most of the major progressive movements in the last century. "Help us organize the unions, and we'll help you get the vote." "Black women, help us achieve Black liberation first, then Black political groups will help women's liberation." Mirabile dictu, the help didn't arrive. "What is the position of women in the [Black] Revolution? Prone!"

"Bugger you, Jack. I've got mine," is a very common human failing. Why should one profession be immune?

 

[AF_INT1N0]

And yet you are comparing police officers to the SS nazi thugs. Thats absurd. I totally understand your frame of thought. You just have to understand that while the FOP heads and some chief of police don't like the 2nd amendment, that is NOT how police officers feel. I have yet to meet one LEO who does not like the 2nd amendment. Actually EVERY LEO I know is very pro-2nd amendment, and wants every citizen to carry.

One need not be a Nazi to abuse power over others in the name of the law.

The FOP is the voice (and the political face) of the police. So either
1. they speak for you.
2. You need a new voice. These positions are elected right (union heads and FOP, not chiefs) right??
3. You are the vast minority and the rest are thugs.

I'm not trying to bash you. I just don't understand how it is that we are supposed to be supportive of FOP, Police Union etc. when they hose us constantly.

This crap is where us vs. them comes from. It is the systematic approach of asking for more rights while trampling on everyone elses.

If it's not you (And I'm sure it's not or we wouldn't be having this conversation) then what are you doing to stop it. If someone was misrepresenting me I sure as heck would put a stop to it.

.02 FWIW

AF_int1N0

 

[Monkeyleg]

Our CCW bill this year had the backing of the Wisconsin chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, the Wisconsin chapter of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, the Milwaukee Police Association, and other law enforcement groups. Funny how the media ignores them and just concentrates on the chiefs and sheriffs.

While I'd like to see LEO's here in the state get the "privelege" to carry under HR218, politically it makes more sense to keep them fired up about the CCW bill and on our side. Their support won't be as vocal if they get what they want.

 

[Oldtimer]

This may end up being the last time I post or respond to other posts in THR. When I became a member, THR was, without a doubt, the BEST gun forum going, but this particular thread is totally shameful!

For 31 years of my life, I wore a badge, strapped on a firearm and went into the community to keep the peace and enforce the laws. I rarely got thanked for what I did, but I didn't become a police officer to win any popularity contest. I joined because I wanted to do my part in keeping the community safe. It bothered me when, for the most part, I responded to crimes AFTER they had taken place, but the "Thin Blue Line" is exactly that. All I could do was investigate those crimes in an efficient manner, so that the bad guy might eventually be captured.

During my 31 years of service, I had two "contracts" on my life, merely for having performed my duties. Neither of those "contracts" were solved, so I don't know how safe I am as a retired police officer. I also had a SERIOUS verbal threat
on my life, from a "certified" criminally insane person, who MAY eventually be released.

I often conducted "Neighborhood Watch" meetings within the community, and often spoke about firearms. Believe it or not, I have ALWAYS been pro-2nd Amendment AND pro-CCW rights for citizens!
I wasn't alone, for most of my "brother" officers felt the same way, that an ARMED community was a SAFER community. One particular incident stuck in my mind through the years, and that was the armed citizen who assisted the police officer in Austin, Texas. Had that armed citizen not been there and volunteered to help, the crazed sniper would have killed even more people!

I didn't become a high-ranking police officer, and I couldn't figure out why the "brass" of so many law enforcement agencies were ANTI-gun. My "street cop" voice was never heard by anyone who mattered, but the "brass" were allowed to speak freely to the press and government officials.

Yes, I am a "citizen"! I put my life on the line, though, as a professional police officer! Had I not chosen that profession, I probably wouldn't need to look over my shoulder as often as I do. Had I not become a professional police officer, how many of YOU would have taken my place?

How many times have I heard, "Oh, I couldn't be a cop!", or, "It's just too dangerous for me!"? How often have I heard, "You cops don't get paid enough for what you do." and, "They couldn't pay me enough to do what you do!"?

How many times have I been called a "Pig", a "Nazi", a "thug with a badge", etc.?

How many more times will I have to defend my "brother" officers by explaining that the MAJORITY of them are decent, hard-working, dedicated and professional? YES, there are rotten police officers, but they do NOT comprise the majority!

So, now that I'm a retired LEO, I'm supposed to return to being a "citizen"? That line that a few of you used irked me greatly! I was a "citizen" when I was an active-duty police officer, and as a retiree I am STILL a "citizen". NO, I don't feel that it is a "privelege" that I have, to still carry a concealed firearm. The day may come when it might be a necessity to defend myself, merely because I wore a uniform and a badge for so many years!

How many of YOU have put in long hours and patrolled dangerous areas during riots or "civil unrest"? How many of you have not been allowed to have your "regular" days off, or have had to cancel vacation time, due to "exigent circumstances"? How many of you have been spat upon, but had to hold your position on a riot control formation?

I could go on and on with what is on my mind, but I'll leave it with this....your local police officers and Sheriff's deputies ARE something "special"! They're performing their duties, going into locations YOU wouldn't go, seeing things that might make you puke, and are EASY targets while in uniform. You folks "CCW" for many reasons, but you're NOT easily recognizable as "targets". As a retired LEO, I still carry, but not just for myself. Hey, if I can save someone elses life, it will be due to the extensive training I have gone through AND directly related to what I believed in and performed for so many, many years!

 

[buzz_knox]

OS, may I point you to the following thread:

I fully supported HR 218. But when it has come time for the LEO community to support CCW and other pro-2A, the LE community has been mostly anti or at best silent on the issue. Therefore, I am NOT drinking the "Help us get ours first and then we'll help you get yours" Kool-aid. Everybody or nobody, not even off-duty.

I actually didn't fall for it. I saw HR 218 as a mechanism to insure the privileges of one group while serving as an eventual wedge between LEOs and those wanting total CCW reform. As predicted by many, it served precisely that purpose. The LEO community got what it wanted, and then went real quiet at the national level, while unions and police chiefs (many who had wanted HR 218) pushed to block CCW reform on the grounds of "officer safety."

 

[buzz_knox]

During my 31 years of service, I had two "contracts" on my life, merely for having performed my duties. Neither of those "contracts" were solved, so I don't know how safe I am as a retired police officer. I also had a SERIOUS verbal threat
on my life, from a "certified" criminally insane person, who MAY eventually be released.

An attorney I worked beside is still under a death threat by a man who murdered one federal employee and stated that as soon as he got out, he'd kill 6 more, including my colleague. And that attorney is prohibited from carrying at work. So, the threat isn't restricted to cops and there are people in just as much danger of retaliation, but who don't have the same ability to protect themselves.

They're performing their duties, going into locations YOU wouldn't go, seeing things that might make you puke, and are EASY targets while in uniform.

Actually, I've gone into a lot of those locations delivering food from my church, and I know people who do the same on a very regular basis. On one occasion, the cops patrolling the area spotted us and gave us an escort. But that was one time out of dozens.

I think you need to understand that when cops talk about going places "we" wouldn't go, dealing with people "we" wouldn't deal with, etc., there's a lot of ignorance and even arrogance involved in that. Those places are the places a lot of us live and work. Those people are the ones we deal with every day. We just want the same ability to protect ourselves that ya'll have.

 

[Trip20]

I think you need to understand that when cops talk about going places "we" wouldn't go, dealing with people "we" wouldn't deal with, etc., there's a lot of ignorance and even arrogance involved in that. Those places are the places a lot of us live and work. Those people are the ones we deal with every day. We just want the same ability to protect ourselves that ya'll have.

+1000000000000000000000

Oldtimer: The same scary bad guys you deal with, are the same scumbags who prey on us each and every day (hence the reason you must deal with them whilst performing your job duties).

Lastly, don't stop posting here because of a few morons. Most people know the majority of officers are no different than the rest of us. Good people, who go to work every day, and enjoy firearm related activities.

 

[tellner]

Oldtimer, it would be a shame if you left. Your posts have been interesting, informative and have carried the weight of experience.

If you look a little more closely at the posts on this subject you will see that most of us aren't anti-police. Far from it. But we are tired of watching law enforcement groups push for privileges while coming out against our rights. HR 218 was typical of this. The promise or wishful thinking was that we'd support it and get some support in return. We were left feeling a lot like a soldier's native girlfriend - "Come on honey, if you do it I'll take you back to America after the war."

As for the danger of an officer's life, we all understand it. And we all respect the risks you take every day including the risks of divorce and stress-related disease. But many of us live dangerous lives, too. According to this police work isn't even in the top 10. Women being stalked by vengeful ex-es, prosecutors and cabbies, to name a few, are in at least as much danger of being killed, and the risk doesn't go away at the end of the shift. They are the sort of people whom we wish could have the means to defend themselves since the police can't be everywhere. It is frustrating to see their lives cheapened when the law enforcement groups that pushed for unrestricted carry for their former members come out strongly against even gun ownership for those most in harm's way.

 

[isp2605]

Actually, I've gone into a lot of those locations delivering food from my church, and I know people who do the same on a very regular basis. On one occasion, the cops patrolling the area spotted us and gave us an escort. But that was one time out of dozens.

There ya go oldtimer. All we had to do is bring them food when we rolled on those 2 AM calls. Instead of having to arrest them we could have given them a Twinkie and a cup of Kool-Aid. We wouldn't have had to break out the sticks, mace, OC, handcuffs, guns, and take cover. A sandwich and a coke would have made all the difference.
Anyone who equates delivering food to having to haul someone in during a fight is out of touch with reality.
BTW, I've done the food trips into some pretty nasty areas, done the home repairs in the dangerous neighborhoods. But put the uniform on and make the house call and it's an entirely different world. BTDT on both sides.

 

[buzz_knox]

There ya go oldtimer. All we had to do is bring them food when we rolled on those 2 AM calls. Instead of having to arrest them we could have given them a Twinkie and a cup of Kool-Aid. We wouldn't have had to break out the sticks, mace, OC, handcuffs, guns, and take cover. A sandwich and a coke would have made all the difference.
Anyone who equates delivering food to having to haul someone in during a fight is out of touch with reality.
BTW, I've done the food trips into some pretty nasty areas, done the home repairs in the dangerous neighborhoods. But put the uniform on and make the house call and it's an entirely different world. BTDT on both sides.

I'm quite in touch with reality. Oldtimer says we'd never go into those areas, and I was pointing out that many of us do on a regular basis.

But let's go further. I've gone into those areas in the company of uniformed cops in the performance of their duties, when we weren't delivering food. The only problem was that while they had weapons and armor, I didn't. Does that make me almost professional to have an opinion that when perhaps we civilians do face enough danger to warrant the "privileges" you take for granted?

 

[isp2605]

I've gone into those areas in the company of uniformed cops in the performance of their duties, when we weren't delivering food. The only problem was that while they had weapons and armor, I didn't. Does that make me almost professional to have an opinion that when perhaps we civilians do face enough danger to warrant the "privileges" you take for granted?

Still you weren't going in as a threat to take away their freedom or haul them off. You were a ride along. You won't know what's it like until you've done it. Just riding along isn't doing it. Try going in without backup and telling someone they're going to jail.
I've been on both sides of that fence. There's a major difference.

 

[buzz_knox]

Still you weren't going in as a threat to take away their freedom or haul them off. You were a ride along. You won't know what's it like until you've done it. Just riding along isn't doing it. Try going in without backup and telling someone they're going to jail.
I've been on both sides of that fence. There's a major difference.

I'm sure they would have taken the time to distinguish between the two people holding flashlights approaching the building. Think the bad guys would have really been that into target identification? I don't.

 

[isp2605]

I'm sure they would have taken the time to distinguish between the two people holding flashlights approaching the building. Think the bad guys would have really been that into target identification? I don't.

Again, it's just your lack of experience in the LE field. You think you might know simply because you rode along. Sorry, but riding along isn't the same.
Stay with delivering your sandwiches. It's much safer.

 

[ArmedBear]

That's too bad. Surely retired cops deserve to exercise the human rights denied the rest of us serfs.

Just like retired real estate brokers should have a special right to private property, retired journalists should have a special right to freedom of the press, retired detectives should have a special protection from having their homes searched without a warrant, and retired attorneys should have a special right to due process; but the rest of us should be denied these rights for our own good and for the good of an orderly society.

 

[buzz_knox]

Again, it's just your lack of experience in the LE field. You think you might know simply because you rode along. Sorry, but riding along isn't the same.
Stay with delivering your sandwiches. It's much safer.

You know, on second thought, I should apologize. I really shouldn't think to tell someone that I actually have an idea of how dangerous the neighborhoods I travel in are, or that I am aware of what goes on there. Hopefully, I'll someday be "professional enough" to have an opinion on such things.

 

[ArmedBear]

For the record, I have no real objection to requiring extensive and effective training for a license to carry a concealed weapon in heavily-populated public places.

If regular citizens would be allowed to take and pass said training program, and be issued a CCW, then I have no problem with giving ex-cops that license by default, because they are already trained.

 

[isp2605]

That's too bad. Surely retired cops deserve to exercise the human rights denied the rest of us serfs.
Just like retired real estate brokers should have a special right to private property, retired journalists should have a special right to freedom of the press, retired detectives should have a special protection from having their homes searched without a warrant, and retired attorneys should have a special right to due process; but the rest of us should be denied these rights for our own good and for the good of an orderly society.

You won't find anyone on this board disagreeing with you. Where the discussion turns to mush is when someone says "I can't so you can't." How about we all work together so we all can? How many on this board really has tried to get laws changed? Other than sit on their behinds in front of a computer and complain. I'm betting the majority can't even name their local senator or representative or even know how to find out who it is.

 

[isp2605]

You know, on second thought, I should apologize. I really shouldn't think to tell someone that I actually have an idea of how dangerous the neighborhoods I travel in are, or that I am aware of what goes on there. Hopefully, I'll someday be "professional enough" to have an opinion on such things.

And you have no idea some of the places I've worked, like places with the highest murder rate in the country. Some of those times were in uniform answering calls, other times working undercover alone. And I wasn't delivering food when I went in those places.

 

[isp2605]

For the record, I have no real objection to requiring extensive and effective training for a license to carry a concealed weapon in heavily-populated public places.

I don't think the training for CCW has to be near as extensive as for LEOs. Those are 2 separate disciplines. For CCW whatever training is decided it should heavily lean on the when to shoot and not the how to shoot. Average Joe Citizen needs to have a good understanding of the when just to keep himself out of legal trouble.