Police in anti-gun states...Same limits as citizens? - Page 15
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Police in anti-gun states...Same limits as citizens?

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-26-2013, 09:58 PM   #141
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 0
Liked 22306 Times on 12476 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
The way i see it is that the police put themselves in dangerous situations to protect the public. Situations that would have most civilians running the other way. So they might need extra equipment that a civilian would not need. Situations like the North Hollywood shootout for example.
yes they may put themselves in dangerous situations, but IIRC, they chose that profession and if they were not aware of the possible dangers, then i really don't know what to say. it's no different than any other dangerous profession, such a race car driver. he fully knows that there is the possibilty of wrecking at a very high speed an he could possibily be hurt or killed in the process. no one forces anyone into a dangerous profession, it's a choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
I think you are in trouble with being as well armed as the American military.
apparently you have no understanding of our Constitution or our 2nd amendment to make such a statement.
Axxe55 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 03-26-2013, 10:07 PM   #142
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
manta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK.
Posts: 2,021
Liked 801 Times on 508 Posts
Likes Given: 241

Default

Quote:
apparently you have no understanding of our Constitution or our 2nd amendment to make such a statement
Just replying to the bellow post. Why do you think that the civilian population is as well armed as the American military.


Quote:
civilian population would be just as well armed as the military or police.
Quote:
yes they may put themselves in dangerous situations, but IIRC, they chose that profession and if they were not aware of the possible dangers, then i really don't know what to say. it's no different than any other dangerous profession, such a race car driver. he fully knows that there is the possibilty of wrecking at a very high speed an he could possibily be hurt or killed in the process. no one forces anyone into a dangerous profession, it's a choice
True and they need the tools to do the job.
manta is offline  
 
Old 03-26-2013, 10:14 PM   #143
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 0
Liked 22306 Times on 12476 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by manta View Post
Just replying to the bellow post. Why do you think that the civilian population is as well armed as the American military.




True and they need the tools to do the job.
rather simple, we are not as well armed as our military or even some of our LE agencies, but we should be, according to our 2nd amendment. our 2nd amendment was written to provide the citizens with the power to limit the government, not the other way around.

the whole subject of this thread is should LE have superior firearms than those they police, and my answer to that is, no, they shouldn't. if the LAC isn't allowed to own it, then neither should the police.
Axxe55 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Old 03-26-2013, 10:28 PM   #144
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TruggieTex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Rural Virginia
Posts: 1,590
Liked 1172 Times on 714 Posts
Likes Given: 515

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axxe55

rather simple, we are not as well armed as our military or even some of our LE agencies, but we should be, according to our 2nd amendment. our 2nd amendment was written to provide the citizens with the power to limit the government, not the other way around.

the whole subject of this thread is should LE have superior firearms than those they police, and my answer to that is, no, they shouldn't. if the LAC isn't allowed to own it, then neither should the police.
+1
Sorry for my non germane and diversionary previous post...

If LE conflict and dangerous exposure occurred away from the populace, a difference in arms could be appropriate. But as even the worst battles are conducted in public domain, I see no reason or argument to differ their available defenses.

People all have it the same- police, lawyers, dentists, and ATM operation officers...
__________________
If It Were Easy, They Would Not Call It Work, And Everyone Would Do It
TruggieTex is offline  
4
People Like This 
Old 03-26-2013, 10:52 PM   #145
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 154
Liked 31 Times on 21 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruggieTex

+1
Sorry for my non germane and diversionary previous post...

If LE conflict and dangerous exposure occurred away from the populace, a difference in arms could be appropriate. But as even the worst battles are conducted in public domain, I see no reason or argument to differ their available defenses.

People all have it the same- police, lawyers, dentists, and ATM operation officers...
I see your point my only argument would be I'm arming myself against criminals, cartels, and god forbid terrorist. I don't view the law abiding citizen as the reason for my training and weaponry. I serve a purpose to the community. When LEOs get out gunned there is always a public out cry. I don't live in a state with restrictive gun laws I just think in someway it is wrong to disarm these men who serve there communities. But if you feel it serves some purpose I guess to each his own. I will gladly provide any LEO with whatever equipment the need regardless of where they live. If they want the equipment they can get it regardless.
j4454 is offline  
 
Old 03-26-2013, 11:05 PM   #146
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 0
Liked 22306 Times on 12476 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

well i will add this into the discussion. Ronnie Barrett CEO of Barrett Manufactering took a stand against the state of California when they restricted the ownership of a 50 BMG rifle by a resident of that state. he refused to sell or service any LE agencies within the state of California for their 50 BMG rifles. google it for the full story and facts.

i think he took the stance that many of us are saying. if we are to be restricted in what we may own, then why should LE be exempt? if they can own and use FA firearms and silencers, then we should be as well. if we the citizens are limited to 10 round mags and certain features on our firearms, then so should LE. fair is fair.
Axxe55 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Old 03-26-2013, 11:22 PM   #147
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 6,165
Liked 5012 Times on 2430 Posts
Likes Given: 1601

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axxe55 View Post
well i will add this into the discussion. Ronnie Barrett CEO of Barrett Manufactering took a stand against the state of California when they restricted the ownership of a 50 BMG rifle by a resident of that state. he refused to sell or service any LE agencies within the state of California for their 50 BMG rifles. google it for the full story and facts.

i think he took the stance that many of us are saying. if we are to be restricted in what we may own, then why should LE be exempt? if they can own and use FA firearms and silencers, then we should be as well. if we the citizens are limited to 10 round mags and certain features on our firearms, then so should LE. fair is fair.
Bingo!

It's not that any of us want to see Cops outgunned but we are also not comfortable totting 7 shots when LEO's and Criminals and walking about with full mags.

Maintaining liberty means maintaining equality of force and keeping the honest civilian as well armed as anyone else.

Tack
Tackleberry1 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 03-26-2013, 11:27 PM   #148
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,154
Liked 5738 Times on 3362 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

After that ricochet-filled shooting in NYC, I have wondered if SOME police agencies should be using those Glaser rounds or .380 hollow points or rubber bullets or something. The police here? I don't expect them to miss often; they can gear on up.
__________________
Dead Bears, the only good kind.
orangello is offline  
2
People Like This 
Old 03-27-2013, 12:01 AM   #149
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 154
Liked 31 Times on 21 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello
After that ricochet-filled shooting in NYC, I have wondered if SOME police agencies should be using those Glaser rounds or .380 hollow points or rubber bullets or something. The police here? I don't expect them to miss often; they can gear on up.
NYPD uses 10 pound glock trigger springs are are undertrained in firearms I've been told by vets. So it's unfortunate they miss so much
j4454 is offline  
 
Old 03-27-2013, 12:08 AM   #150
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 154
Liked 31 Times on 21 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axxe55
well i will add this into the discussion. Ronnie Barrett CEO of Barrett Manufactering took a stand against the state of California when they restricted the ownership of a 50 BMG rifle by a resident of that state. he refused to sell or service any LE agencies within the state of California for their 50 BMG rifles. google it for the full story and facts.

i think he took the stance that many of us are saying. if we are to be restricted in what we may own, then why should LE be exempt? if they can own and use FA firearms and silencers, then we should be as well. if we the citizens are limited to 10 round mags and certain features on our firearms, then so should LE. fair is fair.
All ill say is when have you gone toe to toe with a criminal? Maybe once or twice if your lucky? Some LEOs do on a daily basis. Doesn't seem like a fair comparison. There is a logical reason for LEO exceptions. I'm not for gun restrictions but again the last people who should be restricted are the ones who actually confront the evil daily. I agree with your right to own them but the logic behind if I can't the people who protect me can't is just silly and illogical. If your disarmed and I'm disarmed the only person armed is the criminal. You should be more worried about your legislator than LEOs.
j4454 is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Citizens from 21 states have filed petitions to secede Seven Politics, Religion and Controversy 25 11-13-2012 10:52 AM
Anti-Islam Movie Maker Wants Police Protection alsaqr Politics, Religion and Controversy 77 09-22-2012 02:30 PM
Off limits NGIB Politics, Religion and Controversy 27 06-22-2010 01:29 PM
most pro-gun to anti-gun states taseal The Club House 2 08-23-2008 05:47 PM
U.N. anti gun/anti freedom movement opaww Legal and Activism 3 05-08-2007 09:31 PM



Newest Threads