User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 8:33:21 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Some of y'alls cycles have synchronized like motherfuckers. I LOL'd too. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 9:12:22 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is LEOSA HR218 Nationwide CCW a Right or a Power? Looks like a Right to Me......  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. If I quit before I retire does that "right" still apply to me? If I get terminated does that "right" still apply to me? Do I have to qualify (and carry proof that I have qualified) every 12 months for this "right"? (Oh look I cans type big too!) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 9:18:47 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If I quit before I retire does that "right" still apply to me? If I get terminated does that "right" still apply to me? Do I have to qualify (and carry proof that I have qualified) every 12 months for this "right"? (Oh look I cans type big too!) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. If I quit before I retire does that "right" still apply to me? If I get terminated does that "right" still apply to me? Do I have to qualify (and carry proof that I have qualified) every 12 months for this "right"? (Oh look I cans type big too!) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 9:21:36 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is LEOSA HR218 Nationwide CCW a Right or a Power? Looks like a Right to Me...... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. Good point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 9:59:11 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: IIRC, after 10 or 15 years, then LEOSA applies, even if you didn't retire.... As for termination, did you lose your right to own a gun with the termination? If not & you have enough years OTJ, then, doesn't LEOSA still apply? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. If I quit before I retire does that "right" still apply to me? If I get terminated does that "right" still apply to me? Do I have to qualify (and carry proof that I have qualified) every 12 months for this "right"? (Oh look I cans type big too!) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 10:39:07 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IIRC, after 10 or 15 years, then LEOSA applies, even if you didn't retire.... As for termination, did you lose your right to own a gun with the termination? If not & you have enough years OTJ, then, doesn't LEOSA still apply?
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. If I quit before I retire does that "right" still apply to me? If I get terminated does that "right" still apply to me? Do I have to qualify (and carry proof that I have qualified) every 12 months for this "right"? (Oh look I cans type big too!)
10 years aggregate is the standard. My department doesn't consider you "retired" unless you have 20 years of sworn service or more, this is what gets you "retired" credentials. So you could be terminated for performance related issues, personnel issues, etc, or you could quit and not get "retired" credentials. If you are medically retired due to duty related injury you will be given "retired" credentials. Along qualify with this you will have to pass your agencies firearm qualification every year to carry (or a qualified agency that will allow you to qualify under their authority, or a qualified instructor that is authorized to administer the qualification course). For a CWP in my state you have to shoot very minimal rounds once and can get your permit for 7 years, or provide proof of military service or prior LE/Corrections certification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 11:22:08 PM EDT
[#7]
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to.
Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 11:30:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? Be ready to cuff them.... And get away with it. Good luck with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2014 11:35:08 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? As some members will tell you it is "Always a bad idea to invite the man into your life" The officer/ deputy may have his lights on high beam becuase he is looking for a suspect. If you "high beam" him, you will most certainly get his attemtion. Do you really want his attention ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 12:57:21 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? Illegal? No. I rarely shone it directly in a person's face. If I do, it's for reason. Why would you do that back? Besides, holding a large metallic object and attempting to blind an officer on a contact seems like an ill advised course of action. ETA: High beam headlights. Yes, there are statutes in some states that require you to dim your lights when approaching another motorist. I dim mine, dick move to blind someone no matter who you are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 2:26:06 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 12:31:37 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? If it's local/county LE you should immediately notify the state police and do your best to perform a citizen arrest. Just make sure you know the force option continuum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 5:39:48 PM EDT
[#13]
36 pages and still not locked...
despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..  they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 5:45:32 PM EDT
[#14]
"Familiarity" breeds [NorCal's] contempt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 6:06:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"If you say cops shouldn’t have access to “military” style equipment, then you might as well just say “lets cancel the Second Amendment.” " OK, then when the 2nd doesn't apply to citizens, is it also fair to apply those same standards to police? Bullet buttons and 7 rounds mags for LE in those respective states, also. This. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 6:42:47 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Illegal? No. I rarely shone it directly in a person's face. If I do, it's for reason. Why would you do that back? Besides, holding a large metallic object and attempting to blind an officer on a contact seems like an ill advised course of action. ETA: High beam headlights. Yes, there are statutes in some states that require you to dim your lights when approaching another motorist. I dim mine, dick move to blind someone no matter who you are. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? Illegal? No. I rarely shone it directly in a person's face. If I do, it's for reason. Why would you do that back? Besides, holding a large metallic object and attempting to blind an officer on a contact seems like an ill advised course of action. ETA: High beam headlights. Yes, there are statutes in some states that require you to dim your lights when approaching another motorist. I dim mine, dick move to blind someone no matter who you are. I was referencing using a flashlight the same way an officer would - to blind the person. I was just thinking about a scene in a movie where Liev Shreiber blinded some Russian guards to get the drop on them. Always curious if this was criminal to shine a light in an LEOs face, while refusing to stop. LEO like to turn on those bright lights during traffic stops which can be annoying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 6:58:54 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was referencing using a flashlight the same way an officer would - to blind the person. I was just thinking about a scene in a movie where Liev Shreiber blinded some Russian guards to get the drop on them. Always curious if this was criminal to shine a light in an LEOs face, while refusing to stop. LEO like to turn on those bright lights during traffic stops which can be annoying. I use a flashlight in the line of duty every day..numerous times per shift..and I've never intentionally shined it in someone's face. Would I do it in an attempt to avoid a violent attack..hell yes. Would I do it just because I can..nope. In a coincidence..we just got new d cell LED maglights here.they have a dim, bright and strobe setting.. give me something new and shiny and I gotta play with it. tried the strobe setting on myself...  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 7:11:48 PM EDT
[#18]
Some of the new lights bars and strobes that they have on police cars nowadays are enough to give someone a seizure.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 7:23:08 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Some of the new lights bars and strobes that they have on police cars nowadays are enough to give someone a seizure. yep..and I've read quite a few comments from cops saying the exact same thing. the lights are so bright they have almost been run over because on coming traffic can't see them.. I smell liabilty insurance behind the trillion candle power lights.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 7:36:45 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some of the new lights bars and strobes that they have on police cars nowadays are enough to give someone a seizure. Passed a wreck on the side of the road driving home a couple days ago and the clear lens four way blinkers the ambulance had were blinding even in daylight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 7:45:44 PM EDT
[#21]
I came around a Cloverleaf to get on the Freeeway about 5 years ago, in my Big Rig Truck.... There was a CHP on the right shoulder all lit up behind another Car.... His lights blinded me as I moveed as far to the other side of the lane as i could...... Didn't see the 4 cylinder engine block laying there... It took out my left Front Tire along with the Shock & Brake Line.... Cost me $1500 or so to fix everything.... Never did find out who was responsible for dropping it there. The Car in front of the CHP Car had hit it, too.......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 8:10:07 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
Should be a sticky. Strong work. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 8:14:30 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Snip  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 8:27:35 PM EDT
[#24]
OST.
Added some new server racks. Will update......soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 8:50:13 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And military. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
[ From what I remember, plenty of LE from neighboring states went down there to "uphold" order. And military. What unit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 8:53:43 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well by that mentality so will the military because some of them participated in it as well during Katrina. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You seem a little tense. Check Paul Howes article on his thoughts concerning LEO's and Mil enforcing any type of long term scenerio hat you describe. I'm not describing any scenario, merely responding to the oft quoted assertion that the majority of cops would never go door to door by pointing out that, when they were actually tasked to do so, they did. That being said, I don't think we'll ever see a nation wide occurrence of that. But it is a bit silly to keep vociferously insisting that it's absurd to think cops would do it, when history shows that they will. Well by that mentality so will the military because some of them participated in it as well during Katrina. What units confiscated civilian weapons? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 9:02:07 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What units confiscated civilian weapons? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You seem a little tense. Check Paul Howes article on his thoughts concerning LEO's and Mil enforcing any type of long term scenerio hat you describe. I'm not describing any scenario, merely responding to the oft quoted assertion that the majority of cops would never go door to door by pointing out that, when they were actually tasked to do so, they did. That being said, I don't think we'll ever see a nation wide occurrence of that. But it is a bit silly to keep vociferously insisting that it's absurd to think cops would do it, when history shows that they will. Well by that mentality so will the military because some of them participated in it as well during Katrina. What units confiscated civilian weapons? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:42:11 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was referencing using a flashlight the same way an officer would - to blind the person. I was just thinking about a scene in a movie where Liev Shreiber blinded some Russian guards to get the drop on them. Always curious if this was criminal to shine a light in an LEOs face, while refusing to stop. LEO like to turn on those bright lights during traffic stops which can be annoying. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Since most posting here are LEO, I have a question that I'd love an answer to. Is it illegal to shine a light in an officers face? If LEO starts high beaming you with the intention of blinding you, can you return the favor with your own flashlight? Illegal? No. I rarely shone it directly in a person's face. If I do, it's for reason. Why would you do that back? Besides, holding a large metallic object and attempting to blind an officer on a contact seems like an ill advised course of action. ETA: High beam headlights. Yes, there are statutes in some states that require you to dim your lights when approaching another motorist. I dim mine, dick move to blind someone no matter who you are. I was referencing using a flashlight the same way an officer would - to blind the person. I was just thinking about a scene in a movie where Liev Shreiber blinded some Russian guards to get the drop on them. Always curious if this was criminal to shine a light in an LEOs face, while refusing to stop. LEO like to turn on those bright lights during traffic stops which can be annoying. If you blind a LEO with a flashlight when he/she comes up to you for a traffic stop there is a strong chance that the officer will think you are doing it so you can attack him/her. That action would not be in your best interest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:49:14 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
Amen to that.......and that right there is the truth |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:49:27 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What unit? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[ From what I remember, plenty of LE from neighboring states went down there to "uphold" order. And military. What unit? I believe out of Oklahoma. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:53:04 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuote History
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:55:59 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is LEOSA HR218 Nationwide CCW a Right or a Power? Looks like a Right to Me...... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. #1: LEOSA is bullshit #2: Having to get a "permit".....to own a pistol, or carry a pistol CCW is bullshit having to ask the government for the permission to exercise a right for self preservation is utter Bullshit whether you are a cop or a......dare I say civilian is wrong and illegal. States rights can pound sand when it comes to ANY constitutional guaranteed right. <-------------I believe in Constitutional carry........The government should not be able to decide by what means ANY American Citizen chooses to keep themselves protected under the 2A whether it be a .22 Derringer or a Belt Fed........Our rights......our choice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/29/2014 10:56:25 PM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2014 7:05:39 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm guessing out of my ass here, but most of the 200k LE in the US probably aren't in big cities. Actually, standby, let me research this. have to remember also the huge numbers of union cops in blue states even in rural areas, for example the NYSP, according to wikipedia, have 6k employees, I think they must all, or all but a couple, be in a union. Meanwhile Alabama highway patrol only has 1200 employees I could be wrong though Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I'd agree that most big city departments are unionized. I'm guessing out of my ass here, but most of the 200k LE in the US probably aren't in big cities. Actually, standby, let me research this. have to remember also the huge numbers of union cops in blue states even in rural areas, for example the NYSP, according to wikipedia, have 6k employees, I think they must all, or all but a couple, be in a union. Meanwhile Alabama highway patrol only has 1200 employees I could be wrong though There's an important distinction you have to keep in mind. FOP and PBA are not "unions." They are Fraternal Organizations. The claim is a dodge. They do the exact same things as unions, but they call themselves something else. When you ask how many people are in a "union," you get the Teamsters, UAW, etc. They call themselves unions. Fraternal Organization members may or may not be included in the total. It depends on who's counting and why they're counting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:02:46 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
#1: LEOSA is bullshit #2: Having to get a "permit".....to own a pistol, or carry a pistol CCW is bullshit having to ask the government for the permission to exercise a right for self preservation is utter Bullshit whether you are a cop or a......dare I say civilian is wrong and illegal. States rights can pound sand when it comes to ANY constitutional guaranteed right. <-------------I believe in Constitutional carry........The government should not be able to decide by what means ANY American Citizen chooses to keep themselves protected under the 2A whether it be a .22 Derringer or a Belt Fed........Our rights......our choice. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. #1: LEOSA is bullshit #2: Having to get a "permit".....to own a pistol, or carry a pistol CCW is bullshit having to ask the government for the permission to exercise a right for self preservation is utter Bullshit whether you are a cop or a......dare I say civilian is wrong and illegal. States rights can pound sand when it comes to ANY constitutional guaranteed right. <-------------I believe in Constitutional carry........The government should not be able to decide by what means ANY American Citizen chooses to keep themselves protected under the 2A whether it be a .22 Derringer or a Belt Fed........Our rights......our choice.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:03:30 AM EDT
[#36]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 8:09:51 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
  Quote HistoryWe feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 11:55:53 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl Quote HistoryQuoted:
We feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl That's not a lawful order, nor one I would follow or enforce. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 11:57:09 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl Quote HistoryQuoted:
We feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl Do national guard get dental? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:10:13 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do national guard get dental? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We feel bad about ignoring the constitution. But you know, orders is orders, and I ain't losing my dental. Txl Do national guard get dental? Only on Title 10/AGR |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:13:21 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... There were a couple of folks in the Serpico thread the other day that were pretty incensed with Ol Frank and implied that the cops he turned in didn't deserve it. Were they LEO? I can't tell so maybe someone could chime in and say so, I didn't notice any ARF LEOs that I know telling them to STFU...That seems to imply to me that the dirty cops Serpico ratted on should not have been prosecuted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:17:28 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There were a couple of folks in the Serpico thread the other day that were pretty incensed with Ol Frank and implied that the cops he turned in didn't deserve it. Were they LEO? I can't tell so maybe someone could chime in and say so, I didn't notice any ARF LEOs that I know telling them to STFU...That seems to imply to me that the dirty cops Serpico ratted on should not have been prosecuted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... There were a couple of folks in the Serpico thread the other day that were pretty incensed with Ol Frank and implied that the cops he turned in didn't deserve it. Were they LEO? I can't tell so maybe someone could chime in and say so, I didn't notice any ARF LEOs that I know telling them to STFU...That seems to imply to me that the dirty cops Serpico ratted on should not have been prosecuted. No link?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:17:54 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:26:00 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. I'd say that most of the ARFLeos I've encountered would look the other way. They might advise you not to take it out to play, however. Of course, I cannot answer for everyone. I can say I wouldn't do anything about it, but when I work as a law enforcement officer my authority is limited solely to the Michigan Marine Safety Act. I cannot make any other arrests unless they are for an outstanding warrant or it is for a felony committed in my presence (and then it would be only a citizens' arrest). Or as a reserve deputy, I would have to be directed by my supervising certified deputy to make the arrest. So you're safe with me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:34:48 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. I have never, nor would I, ask for a person's tax stamp if they had a suppressor on a rifle. Not only is it rude, it's uncalled for. Suppressors and SBR's should not be prohibited, and is a waste of resources and a throttling of commerce that is stupid, evil, and useless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 12:48:36 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No link? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... There were a couple of folks in the Serpico thread the other day that were pretty incensed with Ol Frank and implied that the cops he turned in didn't deserve it. Were they LEO? I can't tell so maybe someone could chime in and say so, I didn't notice any ARF LEOs that I know telling them to STFU...That seems to imply to me that the dirty cops Serpico ratted on should not have been prosecuted. No link? http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1681032_Frank_Serpico_says_the_cops_are_out_of_control.html&light=serpico See this post: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1681032_Frank_Serpico_says_the_cops_are_out_of_control.html&page=1#i50119069 Here's one where an individual I'm pretty sure is an LEO calls what was posted facts: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1681032_Frank_Serpico_says_the_cops_are_out_of_control.html&page=2#i50119462 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 1:00:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
#1: LEOSA is bullshit #2: Having to get a "permit".....to own a pistol, or carry a pistol CCW is bullshit having to ask the government for the permission to exercise a right for self preservation is utter Bullshit whether you are a cop or a......dare I say civilian is wrong and illegal. States rights can pound sand when it comes to ANY constitutional guaranteed right. <-------------I believe in Constitutional carry........The government should not be able to decide by what means ANY American Citizen chooses to keep themselves protected under the 2A whether it be a .22 Derringer or a Belt Fed........Our rights......our choice. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just want what the cops get. I want my rights back We don't have rights, we have powers, which you granted us. You, the citizen, have rights. #1: LEOSA is bullshit #2: Having to get a "permit".....to own a pistol, or carry a pistol CCW is bullshit having to ask the government for the permission to exercise a right for self preservation is utter Bullshit whether you are a cop or a......dare I say civilian is wrong and illegal. States rights can pound sand when it comes to ANY constitutional guaranteed right. <-------------I believe in Constitutional carry........The government should not be able to decide by what means ANY American Citizen chooses to keep themselves protected under the 2A whether it be a .22 Derringer or a Belt Fed........Our rights......our choice. Wow. I appreciate the honesty and boldness in that response. I take that as you and I are on the same page with regards to the 2A Right (and others), and how the required .gov NFA poll tax and permission slip are unconstitutional. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 1:02:16 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have never, nor would I, ask for a person's tax stamp if they had a suppressor on a rifle. Not only is it rude, it's uncalled for. Suppressors and SBR's should not be prohibited, and is a waste of resources and a throttling of commerce that is stupid, evil, and useless. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. I have never, nor would I, ask for a person's tax stamp if they had a suppressor on a rifle. Not only is it rude, it's uncalled for. Suppressors and SBR's should not be prohibited, and is a waste of resources and a throttling of commerce that is stupid, evil, and useless. I can appreciate that. And while I agree on the suppressors and SBR's, I'm curious in particular about select fire, machineguns etc., as I posed my original theoretical scenario. What if you came into contact with a citizen (lawfully and through no criminal circumstances), that had an obvious homemade lower with zero visible markings (80%'er) with a happy hole above the selector? To a trained .gov enforcing eye, that's an obvious NFA violation. edit for more clarity |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 1:09:49 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can appreciate that. And while I agree on the suppressors and SBR's, I'm curious in particular about select fire, machineguns etc., as I posed my original theoretical scenario. What if you came into contact with a citizen (lawfully and through no criminal circumstances), that had an obvious homemade lower with zero markings (80%'er) with a happy hole above the selector? To a trained .gov enforcing eye, that's an obvious NFA violation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. I have never, nor would I, ask for a person's tax stamp if they had a suppressor on a rifle. Not only is it rude, it's uncalled for. Suppressors and SBR's should not be prohibited, and is a waste of resources and a throttling of commerce that is stupid, evil, and useless. I can appreciate that. And while I agree on the suppressors and SBR's, I'm curious in particular about select fire, machineguns etc., as I posed my original theoretical scenario. What if you came into contact with a citizen (lawfully and through no criminal circumstances), that had an obvious homemade lower with zero markings (80%'er) with a happy hole above the selector? To a trained .gov enforcing eye, that's an obvious NFA violation. Gee, Federal laws and regulations are so diverse and Byzantine, I wouldn't know what I was looking at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 1:22:20 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Gee, Federal laws and regulations are so diverse and Byzantine, I wouldn't know what I was looking at. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
36 pages and still not locked... despite what many think..this wasn't a trolling thread..even though NorCal added a rather large # to his retread body count (which is proof that some members register for the sole purpose of disrupting the site and trolling). My original intention for posting the article was to get some dioscussion going on what is always a hot and contentious topic on the internet. With the advent of youtube and smart phones we are being exposed to a huge number of interactions between police and citizens. Unfortunately..video's don't tell the whole story..yet police are most often found guilty in the court of public opinion based on video's..or "I know a guy who dated a girl who's ex boy friend was working down the street that night" information. You won't find an LEO here that doesn't think dirty cops should be prosecuted like anyone else... When they defend a cop in a video..it could be for a varity of reasons. Frst hand experience with that incident, an opinion based on their experience, policy and procedure,etc. If you have any training in use of force..then you know it isn't pretty and usually can be very violent. It's that way because the officer invovled needs to gain control of the situation right now..and the longer it drags out..the more risk there is of someone getting seriously hurt or killed. When I took my initial use of force and self defense training I was taught to do what I needed to do to win. I was also taught that when I gained control of the situation..then I reassesed it and lowered the level of force to equal the control needed to maintain my control of the situation. All well and good to learn in a class room setting where the "scenario" is pre planned and controlled. On the street or in jail..there is no scenario..and things change..often in a split second. A split second isn't a long time to realize shit just went sideways, react to it and elevate your use of force to what is needed to gain control again. Another thing I would like to remind every one here is The LEO members here are very pro gun firearms enthusiasts..and obviously pro 2nd Amendment.. They buy gun stuff and try and sneak it past their wife just like the rest of us do..
they are great people to have on our side. We aren't asking anyone to bow down to the LEO's here..we aren't asking you to drink any kool aid or accept any information given just because it was given by a cop here. What we are asking is that you show all members here the level of respect that you want to be shown. Have an opinion about something involving a police officer that you saw in the news, were personally invovled in and want to discuss it... By all means..post a thread and express your opinion. All we ask..is keep your post with in the boundaries of the site CoC. It isn't a huge or impossible request to make... However..as witnessed by NorCal's "you seem familair" posts..some people can't or won't abide by the sites rules..and they end up getting them selves booted...repeatedly. I would like to thank every one that participated in this thread and made thought provoking posts, defended their position with facts and integrity and proved that GD isn't the 3 ring circus it appears to be.
I would hope so and like to believe they all are, but am hesitant to believe that applies to all LEO on this site. (Theory) Would they support me (or Joe Citizen) if we decided to build a select-fire gun or a homemade suppressor without paying .gov's poll tax and permission (under threat of force, prison time, etc.)? I'd use it lawfully for HD/SD, range toy, conversation piece, etc. If LEO were to come into contact with me while I was in possession of such items(ie using it lawfully, NOT commiting murder, robbery, rape, etc.), would they allow me to continue on? Will they confiscate the item (s)? Will they arrest me for not having paid tax to .gov and not getting permission to exercise that right "legally"? ps- I agree with near everything you stated. Great post nonetheless. I have never, nor would I, ask for a person's tax stamp if they had a suppressor on a rifle. Not only is it rude, it's uncalled for. Suppressors and SBR's should not be prohibited, and is a waste of resources and a throttling of commerce that is stupid, evil, and useless. I can appreciate that. And while I agree on the suppressors and SBR's, I'm curious in particular about select fire, machineguns etc., as I posed my original theoretical scenario. What if you came into contact with a citizen (lawfully and through no criminal circumstances), that had an obvious homemade lower with zero markings (80%'er) with a happy hole above the selector? To a trained .gov enforcing eye, that's an obvious NFA violation. Gee, Federal laws and regulations are so diverse and Byzantine, I wouldn't know what I was looking at. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
