So firearms companies are screwing cops..

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by FiremanMike, Feb 18, 2013.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. So what. Many of us on this board have walked both paths too.

    You never did answer the question about what you consider a National Guardsman or a Reservist. Also, what combat are you in in the US? You are a combatant when you are in combat. The Geneva Convention was designed for war, not for peacetime. I challenge you to say that what the Police/Sheriffs encountered with the Dorner shootout was not combat.

    But I digress...

    Everyone here needs to realize, you are on a gun board. The LEOs here are as pro-gun as you can find. Many of our colleagues are the same way. These debates over gun control are occurring in every police department across the country. Though it is not what you are thinking "he he he, we get to go confiscate all the guns now." It's more along the lines of "WTH are these morons thinking? Can you believe this ****? We need to get some people with common sense back in charge."

    When you paint all LEOs with a broad brush saying they are anti-gun, you had better have verifiable facts to back it up. The truth of the matter is that we look at all the facts and make a determination. Do most of these idiotic laws have a chance of passing? No. And the ones that do stand a chance of passing are causing all of us great concern as well because we know they are wrong and will put us at a disadvantage because we WANT the citizenry armed. No one knows better than a LEO that a criminal won't follow the law.

    I'll get off my soap box now.
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
    #241 merlynusn, Feb 20, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2013
  2. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    merlynusn, a Guardsman or Reservist is a civilian until they are on orders. The difference between a civilian and a military member is not just the aspect of being sent off to other nations to fight in war, it is about the contract and the commitment that separates the military from other civilians. Military members surrender many of their rights that civilians enjoy daily such as protection under the 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendments. Civilian police officers do not surrender these rights. Military members cannot quit, are subject to being moved all across the world and deploy at a moments notice. They make sacrifices that no civilian ever has to make or could understand. When the police can get deployed to war, loose their individual rights and share in all of the other sacrifices that the military does, then I will gladly change my tune, but until then, like every other non-military person, they are civilians.
     

  3. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    Oh, and add Double Star and their distributors to the list that will not deal with the Commie states.
     
  4. You're wrong, still, on so many things, and the arrogance that you have......Not for ONE second while I wore the nations uniform did I EVER have the kind of holier-than-thou attitude you're displaying, and ESPECIALLY not in regards to my opinions of law enforcement.

    All your crap about contracts and "can't quit" are just absolutely, 100% flat dead wrong. First of all, it's an employment contract. They're voluntary (in most cases), so don't give me any of that crap about how rough it is. And if you've served more than one term, then you volunteered REPEATEDLY. Any loss of rights you suffered were at your own choosing. It doesn't make you a martyr.

    Yes, military members have some restrictions on things like the First Amendment. You think the police DON'T? How about "I can't discuss that, it's an ongoing investigation"? Or, more appropriate to the topic, how many law enforcement officers do you see going on the news - officers, not brass - and sharing their views on the gun control issues?


    I served my time, regular army, not reserve or Guard, so please don't try to accuse me of "not getting it" or anything else that I've seen tossed out. You are displaying the same kind of attitude that a handful of police across the country have displayed throughout history: "I wear this uniform, and therefore my opinions trump yours, regardless of what anyone says." And just like those few cops, you do NOT represent everyone in the military, but you're making ALL of them look bad.

    I think you've somehow gotten just about the worst case of entitlement belief I've seen in a long time. And it, frankly, pisses me off when you smear the uniform with foolishness.









    To the mods, feel free to edit or remove this if I crossed a line. Just can't stand the "I'm better than you" attitudes like that.
     
  5. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    Warcry, then enlighten me; what makes a police officer not a civilian? Do they not fall under US law? Do they not enjoy equal protection under the Constitution? Are they not subject to the draft? Yes, they are afforded certain priviledges because of their job, but so do people in other professions.

    "All your crap about contracts and "can't quit" are just absolutely, 100% flat dead wrong. First of all, it's an employment contract. They're voluntary (in most cases), so don't give me any of that crap about how rough it is. And if you've served more than one term, then you volunteered REPEATEDLY. Any loss of rights you suffered were at your own choosing. It doesn't make you a martyr."
    And no, the volunteering of service doesn't make one a "martyr", but it does separate the military from the civilian population.

    "Yes, military members have some restrictions on things like the First Amendment. You think the police DON'T? How about "I can't discuss that, it's an ongoing investigation"? Or, more appropriate to the topic, how many law enforcement officers do you see going on the news - officers, not brass - and sharing their views on the gun control issues?"
    The difference is, the police officer may be fired while the military member can be sent to prison.
     
    #245 jay1975, Feb 20, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2013

  6. Actually, we are NOT allowed to disregard traffic laws. We still must obey traffic laws, but sections of the traffic laws DO allow for SOME exceptions for emergency vehicles with lights and siren activated. Here in AZ for example, we are allowed to exceed the posted speed limit by 15mph and NO MORE, and can only "run" red lights and stop signs after slowing and checking to be sure that the other vehicles are "yeilding the right of way" to our emergency vehicles.

    In a nutshell, we DO have follow the traffic laws, we just have a different set of laws that apply for true emergency situations.

    IMHO, LaRue and Olympic have the right idea. The laws are supposed to apply EQUALLY to all. If a certain gun or magazine "belongs on the battlefield and not on the street", then LE should not be allowed any kind of "special privilege" to own it... civilian LE should be limited to the types of weapons that normal civilians can own. Period.
     
  7. Pretty sure this has already been answered, but just in case you missed it:

    The only argument - the ONLY argument - you've made contrary to this is that "I don't like it, so I say it's not true!"


    My son stopped trying to use that argument when he was 4. I guess some folks just mature at different rates.
     
  8. Neero

    Neero Sleep-deprived

    808
    0
    Not true, and not the same argument.

    If laws were being passed that restricted gas tank size, horsepower, and "speed" features like ground effect kits, spoilers, or "performance" tires, then yes... it'd be the same argument and yes, we'd all be up in arms (hah!) over the restrictions and supporting car manufacturers that boycott state agencies in turn.

    As it stands, cops can already use guns in more ways than non-LEO for their job. Everyone understands that, and encourages that. I definitely want a cop to be able to draw down on a fleeing suspect to protect his/her own life while subdoing someone. I also do NOT want non-LEO to be able to legally point a gun at me because I drove away from them in a parking lot.

    You're arguing use of tools, we're arguing features and capabilities of tools.
     
  9. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    Warcry, I did some research of the actual legal meaning of "civilian" and your Webster quote falls short. According to the US Legal dictionary, "Civilian is a person not serving in military or a person who does not belong to a particular group or engage in a particular activity. Any activity pursued by an ordinary citizen can be called a civilian pursuit."
    By this definition, nearly everyone is not a civilian. Police, doctors, unions members, Boy Scouts, etc. since these people belong to particular groups and view those not within their particular group as outsiders or "civilians".

    "The only argument - the ONLY argument - you've made contrary to this is that "I don't like it, so I say it's not true!""
    The argument that I made earlier, that you either missed or ignored, is that under the Law of War (Geneva Conventions), there are only combatants and civilians. This is the definition that I have lived over half of my life with.

    If you would have read (or comprehended) some of my earlier posts, I have said that I admire and respect the police. I know that their job is thankless and stressful, but there is a world of difference between the military and the other citizens of the US. To ignore or belittle that difference is insulting and offensive to many of us in the military. You've worn both uniforms, but that fact seems to have escaped you.
     
  10. RussP

    Moderator

    29,742
    194
    I'll address this first...
    I believe that is correct.
    Interesting you use "separates" instead of, oh, say "differentiates". I'll come back to that.
    And why does that happen?

    What are the reasons behind the difference in 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendment Rights. Explain them one at a time, please.
    No, they do not. Their 1st Amendment Right is, however, restricted by employment policies. The 2nd Amendment Right is still there, as is a member of the military who lives off base/post. 4th Amendment Right is also governed somewhat by employment policy, just like a military member's is living on base/post.

    People will see the differences in your explanation of the necessities behind the military's position.
    Yes, facts well known at enlistment time.

    You've mentioned several times that military members cannot quit. Have you had experience with someone who did want to? What happened?
    That is why so few enter the military. The same applies to LE, though. There are sacrifices, perhaps not as extreme, perhaps the same in a different environment.
    Again, you are using "civilians" as a demeaning description. To you, no one not in the military has the status you have given yourself. You separate yourself from all others, especially law enforcement.

    Sadly, you do not recognize that these cops do hold those serving and who have served in high esteem, very high esteem. Some of them are veterans themselves, as I am.

    Yeah, military life is different. It has varying degrees of risk. Yes, the rules are different for reasons you are going to explain to us.

    In the non-military world where all but a very few live, those in law enforcement are not civilians, by definition and by colloquial understanding.
     
  11. njl

    njl

    6,585
    35
    They're not punishing the cops. It's a mix of political statement and CYA. The new law in NY was rushed through so quickly, they forgot to exempt law enforcement from it. As a manufacturer, would you ship products banned by state law, on the word of the governor saying "this law won't apply to the police"? You'd be setting your company up for future prosecution if the governor "felt like it."

    Also, it's much simpler to company-wide say "we don't ship to NY anymore" than keep track of which states anyone can order your products and which only certain classes (government agencies, officers personally purchasing with departmental approval, etc.).
     
  12. A US Legal dictionary is not a common-use dictionary. I'm willing to bet there are plenty of terms used in that dictionary that aren't heard outside of written - not even oral - legal briefs. That doesn't make them common.

    But the Geneva Conventions don't apply to ANYONE outside of the military. My Geneva Convention card expired. So, again, you're taking a specific and specialized definition and saying it's the only thing you'll accept because you WANT to.

    You're still stomping your feet and throwing a fit rather than admitting that your OPINION is not the same thing as a FACT.
     
  13. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    "What are the reasons behind the difference in 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendment Rights. Explain them one at a time, please."

    Our 1st Amendment right is limited in order to maintain discipline and not foster insubordination. Speaking out against your leadership can be punished by up to 9 months confinement.

    The 2nd Amendment right doesn't exist if you live in the barracks. All firearms must be registered within 72 hours of being bought, or after moving to post and they must be stored in the unit's arms room. If you live on post housing, you may keep your firearms, but they still must be registered. If you live off post (thanks to that A-hole in FT Hood), your weapons still need to be registered on post and your command may come to your home to inspect them.

    The 4th Amendment right does not exist on post. The Commander can direct searches of your vehicle, barracks or quarters at any time without a warrant, this includes having the dogs go through your living area. The command may conduct a "health and welfare" check of your residence off post as well.
     
  14. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    "You're still stomping your feet and throwing a fit rather than admitting that your OPINION is not the same thing as a FACT." My opinion is based on the laws I fall under. You are stomping your feet and saying that the dictionary is your legal proof, which it is far from. I have cited the legal definition and told you the accepted international law, but you cling to your "common use" excuse. "Ain't" is in common use in many parts of the country and in the dictionary, but that doesn't make it correct.
     
  15. RussP

    Moderator

    29,742
    194
    But you are comfortable belittling them.
    Just as there is a difference between those in law enforcement and those who do not choose the profession.
    Sir, may I point out that no one in this thread has spoken one word that belittles the military. No one has insulted the military. That is all coming from you, your projections.
    I've worn the uniform of our Country, proudly. I have known and do know one hell of a lot of cops. Never, in 40+ years of working with LE, never ever have I heard one demean, belittle, insult, or degrade members of the military.

    You have a myopic viewpoint where everything outside of the military is not anyway as important as you are.
     
  16. Of course I don't!! How would I possibly answer an unasked question?
     
  17. RussP

    Moderator

    29,742
    194
    Thank you. Law Enforcement is a specific group engaged in a very particular activity. Therefore, they are not civilians.

    :thumbsup:
     
  18. Sorry, I missed this until Russ quoted it. You're making assumptions based on no facts that are present.

    First of all, if you think I would ever insult the military as a whole, you're out of your mind. I would never say a bad thing about the military if you put a gun to my head. However, that courtesy doesn't extend individually. While there is nothing but the utmost respect for the military, that's not any defense from individual members being absolute ******s. I've known plenty in my time.

    Secondly, you seem to believe that I'm only making this argument because I am or was a cop. Never have been, and never will be at this point (too old). I'd never be able to calmly deal with domestics, car accidents with kids, arresting a mom in front of a kid....



    ....or dealing daily with people who think they know better than you because they live life by their own definitions rather than in the same reality as everyone else.

    No, I've never been a cop. I'm a civilian.
     
  19. jay1975

    jay1975 Ultra Master

    478
    0
    Agreed. I will accept the US legal definition. I can evolve and I can do so without having to use too many snide remarks.
    Of course, this all started because someone got butt hurt over my use of the term "civi". Hell, I have used it for nearly two decades now. I've never heard anyone get offended by it until yesterday. Too much sand in some people's crack I guess.
     
  20. Travclem

    Travclem Badass Member
    Lifetime Member

    6,775
    0
    I guess some don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.
     

Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
118 and counting: Firearms companies not selling to govts. Political Issues Mar 26, 2013
Interesting new firearms YouTube channel General Firearms Forum Sunday at 12:07 AM
Basic firearms safety for your Glock General Glocking Aug 11, 2015
It was my Birthday and NO new firearms! The Okie Corral Aug 5, 2015
SOLD, Radical Firearms 7.62X39 AR-15 Upper Assembly Gun Parts & Accessories Aug 1, 2015
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Duty Gear at CopsPlus