Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-08-2013, 13:18   #781
dosei
Senior Member
 
dosei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
Which is my point they cannot bring the rifles in. And most dealers in surrounding states won't sell an ar15 to anyone with the New York drivers license...
posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Your point???
How about a little memory refresher:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
That is not completely true.
I know of many agencies that do not issue patrol rifles but allow them to be carried, so there are new officers in ban states that won't be able to buy anytime soon.

So to say that they will only be inconvenienced for their home collection would not be true.

I also support the manufacturers doing what they can, I find it completely self serving and two faced by the way, I see no cancellation of federal or military contracts.....
The reason they cannot buy at the moment has NOTHING to do with the recent policies put in place by companies like Wilson and LaRue.

They cannot buy BECAUSE NY LAW SAY'S THEY CANNOT BUY.
__________________
Big Dawg No. 1431
Carolina Glocker No. 1431
"Freedom is a system based on courage" (Charles Peguy)
"Know where the attack against you is likely to come, whether on the street or in court, and have a proven counter already in place" (Mas Ayoob)
dosei is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 13:32   #782
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 45,178
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by dosei View Post
My point is that until the laws are amended, the "Policy" Mayhem put forth cannot exist. The only way for a dept to have such a policy would be AFTER the laws get amended, at which point the LEOs could legally do what I said.

Good grief people...
Mayhem said there are departments that already have the policy that they will not issue patrol rifles, but they do not forbid individual officers buying and carrying their personal weapon. He went on to say, "there are new, post ban officers in ban states that won't be able to buy anytime soon." The policies existed before the ban.

Thanks for amending your proposed illegal activity suggestion with the assumption the law will change.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 13:37   #783
dosei
Senior Member
 
dosei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 4,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Mayhem said there are departments that already have the policy that they will not issue patrol rifles, but they do not forbid individual officers buying and carrying their personal weapon. He went on to say, "there are new, post ban officers in ban states that won't be able to buy anytime soon." The policies existed before the ban.

Thanks for amending your proposed illegal activity suggestion with the assumption the law will change.
As I pointed out...the problem in those departments is that NY Law now makes it illegal for said officers to do such a thing. The policies of certain manufacturers is completely irrelevant in that discussion.
__________________
Big Dawg No. 1431
Carolina Glocker No. 1431
"Freedom is a system based on courage" (Charles Peguy)
"Know where the attack against you is likely to come, whether on the street or in court, and have a proven counter already in place" (Mas Ayoob)

Last edited by dosei; 03-08-2013 at 13:44..
dosei is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 13:43   #784
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,688


Quote:
Originally Posted by dosei View Post
Your point???
How about a little memory refresher:



The reason they cannot buy at the moment has NOTHING to do with the recent policies put in place by companies like Wilson and LaRue.

They cannot buy BECAUSE NY LAW SAY'S THEY CANNOT BUY.
Which is pretty funny. Democrats passing laws real fast over popular opposition so we can find out what's in them. Where have we heard that before?
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 13:47   #785
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,688


Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Mayhem said there are departments that already have the policy that they will not issue patrol rifles, but they do not forbid individual officers buying and carrying their personal weapon. He went on to say, "there are new, post ban officers in ban states that won't be able to buy anytime soon." The policies existed before the ban.

Thanks for amending your proposed illegal activity suggestion with the assumption the law will change.
Couldn't they just buy a 7 round 30-30 then? What about an M1 Garand with a 5 round clip? Cop Talk
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 13:55   #786
mustang6112
Watching
 
mustang6112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Couldn't they just buy a 7 round 30-30 then? What about an M1 Garand with a 5 round clip? Cop Talk
... or a shotgun, I hear they are great for self defense, especially if you are female....
__________________
G22RTF2, G34/36/39, Kimber Custom II, Wather PP


"I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf. The sheep hate the sheepdog. He looks like the wolf and has a capacity for violence.”
mustang6112 is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 14:14   #787
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,688


Quote:
Originally Posted by mustang6112 View Post
... or a shotgun, I hear they are great for self defense, especially if you are female....
Politicians

Under 50 yards, it's hard to compete with the ballistics of a .73 caliber 500 grain slug moving over 1500 fps. Not a bad choice.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 14:37   #788
txleapd
Hook 'Em Up
 
txleapd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 6,267
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoCop View Post
From what I understand, there's no discrimination against cops concerning this matter. Cops are citizens also. Aren't we? We should not be held above the law no more than anyone else. What? someone doesn't like the new draconian firearm laws that our so called "leaders" have proposed. Kick their asses out and get someone in who has balls and is PRO Constitution, PRO 2nd Amendment. Problem solved

As stated before, elections have consequences and we are all taking a bite out of a huge **** sandwich because of our complacency.
Please pay attention to my other posts in this thread. I have clearly said, numerous times, that I respect companies rights to refuse to do business in ban states.

My discord with WC is the fact that they have come out and said they won't sell to cops in those states, but are obviously okay with selling to everyone else (including the politicians who made these stupid laws).


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
1911 Club #75
Kahr Club #286
Lone Star Glockers #919


"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity” Sigmund Freud
txleapd is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 14:42   #789
txleapd
Hook 'Em Up
 
txleapd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 6,267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
How are the civilians doing in these states. They are being discriminated against because they aren't current or former cops. Soldiers carry firearms for a living too, they don't get a pass, and they aren't asking for special treatment either.

Can you find a single officer that has not been able to acquire gear FOR ON DUTY USE in any of these states? Maybe you are worried about nothing?
This difference between you and I, is that I expect everyone to be treated equally. I think of cops and private citizens as being equals.

You have an obvious bias, but at least you're honest about it.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
1911 Club #75
Kahr Club #286
Lone Star Glockers #919


"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity” Sigmund Freud
txleapd is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 17:19   #790
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,688


Quote:
Originally Posted by txleapd View Post
Please pay attention to my other posts in this thread. I have clearly said, numerous times, that I respect companies rights to refuse to do business in ban states.

My discord with WC is the fact that they have come out and said they won't sell to cops in those states, but are obviously okay with selling to everyone else (including the politicians who made these stupid laws).


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Can you please point to the part of their policy where they are only refusing to sell to cops? I've read the statement, and it clearly says something quite different from what you are saying it says.

Quote:
Wilson Combat will no longer provide any products or services to any State Government imposing legislation that infringes on the Second Amendment rights of its law-abiding citizens. This includes any Law Enforcement Department, Law Enforcement Officers, or any State Government Entity or Employee of such an entity. This also applies to any local municipality imposing such infringements. States currently included in our No-Sale Policy are:

• California

• Hawaii

• Maryland

• Massachusetts

• New Jersey

• New York

• Washington D.C.

• The City of Chicago, Illinois

Wilson Combat will in NO way support the government of these states or their anti-gun agenda that only limits the rights of law-abiding citizens. Wilson Combat will continue to supply any product and/or service they can legally sell in these states to all non-government affiliated citizens.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/01/wi...#ixzz2MzeSxBDk

So really, why are you misrepresenting their policy? Is there no other source for AR's or 1911's for NY LEO's???? Search a bit before you answer that last question.

Cop Talk

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 03-08-2013 at 17:48..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 03-08-2013, 17:42   #791
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 42,688


Quote:
Originally Posted by txleapd View Post
This difference between you and I, is that I expect everyone to be treated equally. I think of cops and private citizens as being equals.

You have an obvious bias, but at least you're honest about it.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
That's simply not true. I do think everyone should be treated equally, by the government as mandated by the constitution. When these governments abandon restrictive laws that ONLY TARGET LAW ABIDING CITIZENS THAT DON'T HAVE A LAW ENFORCEMENT JOB OR BACKGROUND, I'll be a lot more sympathetic to your gripe. I'll even write letters to the companies to tell them to start selling to all government affiliated personnel in those states. But, as long as they have those laws, I support these companies taking a stand. In fact, I've decided that I will not buy another firearm from a company that does not have a similar policy.

Is there ever going to be a point in time where you stop misrepresenting the impact this will have on the on duty officers? None of them have to turn in or get rid of what they have. There will always be a source for them, even with some companies taking this stand. I really don't have a speck of sympathy if an active duty LEO or RETIRED LEO in these states can't buy anything for personal use that regular civilians can't buy. That is ultimately fair to me. When a LEO is off the job, they should be allowed to carry or own only what any another law abiding civilian can carry or own.

It seems to me that you are advocating for special privileges for current and even former LEO's off the job. Not so long ago, I routinely carried an M4 and M9 on the job. I had access while deployed to grenades, AT4's, M2's, Mark 19's, M240B's, and M249's. I've fired all of them outside the borders of the United States, and for a few of those, not just on ranges. I've also fired the main gun on a M1 Abrams. That was just for fun though. The M4 was capable of 3 round bursts. I was not allowed to take it home or own a similar firearm at my home without jumping through a lot of legal and expensive hoops. I didn't have a problem with that. I think fully auto is for people that can't aim or that have an unlimited ammo budget.

When the uniform comes off, we should all be equal. If the government won't make that happen, I have no problem with some companies trying to even that out a bit.


In the long run, it's just good business. The Civilian gun owners from the other 42 states will likely make up for any sales they might lose not selling to government agencies and employees in those states. I'll spend a couple extra dollars to buy from companies that share my opinions on issues.

Be glad you live in TX, you are unaffected and yet oddly perturbed for reasons that I have yet to understand.
Cavalry Doc is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:57.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 592
126 Members
466 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31