Originally Posted by Peace Warrior
STOP CALLING THEM SHOOTERS PLEASE.
For instance, in this latest event, meaning Sandy Hook, this murderer chose a legislated gun-free zone in Massachusetts to further his criminality. He was NOT a shooter, he was a maniacal murderer and idiot!
(Only Police radios or written reports should refer to these murdering cowards as shooters.)
My guess is that most police reports will show a different word for that person such as "suspect," "subject," "deceased person #8," etc. depending on the local report writing techniques. Ohh, and picking the wrong state may not help bolster credibility. In case that train has not already left the station...
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
You can do better than this. One is paid to chase down the bad guy. The other isn't. One seeks out the bad guy, serves warrants, generally goes out of their way 40-80 hours per week, as a condition of the job, to find, deal with, be around, confront, arrest or investigate the bad guys. The other might or might not come into contact with the bad guy at all. One's association with assaultive, armed criminals is all but definite. The other is somewhere between incredibly unlikely and random. That's the truth in the real world. I agree with your desire, but saying it's because cops find them useful is a rather weak attempt to associate two very different groups.
Whether we choose to agree with that or not, one must presume that little technicalities like this will certainly play into what the other side believes. And we probably paint ourselves further into a corner when we try to argue we need the same weapons as the police but do not have to have the same training or qualifications at least from the view from the other side.