Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Club House' started by Ghost1958, Jun 3, 2020.
Roger that! This lunacy MUST stop!
You just don't get it do you. When I said 'we' in my post I was under the impression this was a site related to firearms, thus those who posses firearms USUALLY believe in and support the RIGHT of SD. If that don't apply to you I feel sorry for you, but that is your right. By the way AR does not stand for assault rifle, it stands for the manufacture if the rifle, Amalite.
Take care of ourselves. As folks should not have stopped doing with the advent of police depts on the dool to business in the beginning to be union busters.
Its usually the case anyway because as is said and 99.9 percent true, when seconds count, LE is minutes, or hours away.
When we as a people have reached the point where the question needs asked if LE doesnt come what do we do? We are as a free people almost beyond saving. Having become a nation of predominantly sheep.
Edited to add. I would argue we are getting a taste of what happens when the peoples right to be armed and defend themselves and their propery are able to be put under question, and a naive over dependence on the " authorities".
Disband police. Or just get them out of the way. return the citizens RTKABA above question and the right to defend self and property, and riots and looting cease in 2 days.
people organized into...is called the blue brotherhood aka federal/state/county/city law enforcement!
please remember john, as previously mentioned numerous time...the USSC has ruled the blue brotherhood does not have to respond to any citizen's emergency and as you are acutely aware their main purpose is to investigate not to protect.
hummm...your continued incorrect presumed perception the forum membership's "WE" is "USUALLY' here just because they posses firearms and your narrowly focused concept on SD just kinda left out the hunters, those who engage as LG competition, or others who may or may not be interested in SD activities specifically because of the legal ramifications!
lol...chuckling...darn even gave you a heads up..it was a trick question...what is the definition of an assault rifle...not 'AR'
"Assault rifles are short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachinegun and rifle cartridges.
"Assault rifles have mild recoil characteristics and, because of this, are capable of delivering effective full-automatic fire at ranges up to 300 meters."
Army intelligence document FSTC-CW-07-03-70 from November 1970.
as for you expressing your empathy towards me...twas a hollow gesture...wasn't it!
You could not be more wrong if you tried. That ruling you refer to was when several nurses were held against their will and raped in Chitown many years ago and they called 911 several times and their calls were 'lost' in the 'system'. The court ruling pertained more to the civil liability attaching to LEO's. They said that LE was not civilly liable until they arrived on scene and took control of the situation. If you are going to try and make a 'case' for your anti cop stand please do your research and stop the spin! WE IN LE TOOK AN OATH TO RESPOND TO THE CALL FOR HELP FROM THE CITIZENS!
I am glad you goggled it and got it right!
We did.? Exactly where in your oath were those words. Not some other words you think mean that but those exact words.
I thought you were not talking to me anymore????????????? You are a good comedian, but you need to keep your day job! Are you familiar with the 'letter of the law (exact words) verses the spirit (intent) of the law'?????? Our oath requires us to 'help' people when we are called, not 'shirk' from danger. By the way we just lost another good LEO night before last here, shot by two black criminals when he responded to a 911 call. That is 8 in a little over a year here in Bama.
Sorry to hear
about the officers .
I dont recall any words about helping people, not shirking from danger etc etc. In a LEO oath.
Good words. Noble words. But they weren't in your oath or mine.
I wasn't going to engage with you again but please keep things somewhere in the realm of reality.. None of the words you said are in that oath.
Trying to turn the LEO oath into some sort of knight of the round table oath when it ain't just weakens LE credibility more and helps nobody.
So you think cops are not suppose to respond to the citizens calls for help! I pity you and your way of thinking! Our oath requires us to respond and do the best we can to help, and if you did not take the oath you say you took to mean that I am glad you are not a LEO now. We do not need cowards in our profession.
That got me thinking about the oath here, are they different in all states in America.
Careful with the coward crap.
I dare say I looked down more gun barrels than you.
And I never refused to go on a call even when others did.
That said your oath you took didnt legally bind you to answer any call. Cops dodged calls all the time.
As far as cowards in the profession that is mostly what has been passing for LE officers for the past decade at least. The result? Alot of unessacarily dead citizens.
The only reason I'm not a reserve officer now is I refuse to associate with the profession as it is now in any way.
I didnt say I didn't think they should have a duty to protect the individual.
Or answer individual calls.
Fact remains SCOTUS has ruled long ago that police have a duty to protect the public at large but no duty to protect the individual.
You can argue that one with the supremes.
gotta love it jimrau...everyone is wrong but you, really...to be honest your mantra is growing quite olde...especially knowing 100s, dealing w/1000's as well as training mulitudes...
In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, (2005) the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens. In other words, police are well within their rights to pick and choose when to intervene to protect the lives and property of others — even when a threat is apparent.
Dec 2018 cite regarding Cops and schools had no duty to shield students in Parkland shooting, says judge who tossed lawsuit
ya i'll admit i wasn't wrong!
my, my, further exhibition of power & control of discrediting and demeaning egotistical behaviour...truly quite unbelievable
I have family living in that area and family deployed there. I can't say I agree with the practice, but the reasoning is if you can go inside you are at your own house, if you can't go inside you are someone who is not a resident and possibly a looter looking for something to steal or otherwise cause trouble. Hope they get this crap sorted out soon so the NG troops can go home.
How is standing on a porch of one's home equating to "being possibly a looter" who might not be able to enter that home? That's a bad assumption to make, walking down the street with 50-100 of your buddies.
I'd think it's more likely they're not wanting anyone to visibly see, let alone record, what's going on on the streets, knowing how high the tensions are and how much heavy-handedness has gotten recorded in the past week.
But it's hard to see how shooting people off the street until they hide behind their doors is going to be taken well by anyone. And they can still go after the actively-identified arsonists, robbers, looters, without dumping on everyone on the weak assumption everyone they see might be one because they're seen, not because they're seen doing anything unlawful.
A short opinion piece about the essential need for policing in communities.
Assaulted and Vilified, the Cops Save the Cities @ The New American, 6/2/20.
You have looked down more gun barrels than me?? I doubt it!!! Were you a part of LAM SON 719 and/or how many hours did you log flying the friendly skies of RVN???? How many bullet holes have you had in your vehicles over the years? How many people, criminal and or suicidal, have you talked out of their gun? How many times have you had to shoot someone before they shot you or others??? How many times were you wounded in combat??? WAITING for you to reply!!