User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 12:12:32 PM EDT
[#1]
Fuck him. It sounds to me like he'd arrest you in a heartbeat for an 11 round magazine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 12:31:52 PM EDT
[#2]
Did he get your name?
Pepper your ANGUS, he'll shoot your dog and burn down your church! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 1:42:25 PM EDT
[#3]
Another koolaid drinker. Never been to knob creek either otherwise he would know that those puny AK Mags aren't "high" capacity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:24:29 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck him. It sounds to me like he'd arrest you in a heartbeat for an 11 round magazine. 
Jumped the gun just a little? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:28:04 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck him. It sounds to me like he'd arrest you in a heartbeat for an 11 round magazine. hmm you forgot to add nice for him to be able to carry in communist city but your not... I hear on the news channels from retire LE and judges well i can carry .. Well your part of the problem then. Whats good for the rest of the serfs is also good for you.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:41:04 PM EDT
[#6]
He seemed to be on our side about 75%...just needed a little nudging and correction of mis-information / ignorance.
I should have said "Well why do the police seem to NEED ARs and AKs then? If it's because they are great tools for self defense, then why can't civilians have them? Are police lives more important?" And "Then why do police NEED normal capacity mags? Oh because they assist in SD situtations by not requiring one to reload under stress as often? Well then why do civilians not get them?" He was a nice enough guy, and seemed to be mostly on our side. I could tell he was not a fan of Cuomo, so that's a plus when his own police force hates him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:49:48 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He seemed to be on our side about 75%...just needed a little nudging and correction of mis-information / ignorance.He was a nice enough guy, and seemed to be mostly on our side. Are you going on something other than his responses that you posted? Because I'm not reading that at all. I'm reading a guy who was being polite and didn't want to argue with you in a museum in front of your families |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:51:30 PM EDT
[#8]
Come on guys, not everyone in Law Enforcement, particularly Trooper are out to get you; there are shit-heads in every profession, but by and large all the ones I've ever encountered were professional and not out to nail otherwise "good guys".
"...not everyone that gets you out of the shit is your friend, and not everyone that shit on you is your enemy." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:51:51 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Jumped the gun just a little? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Fuck him. It sounds to me like he'd arrest you in a heartbeat for an 11 round magazine.
Jumped the gun just a little? No. Read between the lines with what the guy said. Basically "the law is the law and it's on the books, nothing I can do about it but enforce it." And he didn't even seem to disagree with the law to begin with, except for maybe a polite and minor backpeddle of his position when confronted by the OP. I doubt the OP changed this guys mind, but even on the assumption that he did (change his mind) the Trooper was originally fine with "Why do you need assault rifles and hi-capacity magazines anyhow?" I repeat. Fuck him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:54:50 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Come on guys, not everyone in Law Enforcement, particularly Trooper are out to get you; there are shit-heads in every profession, but by and large all the ones I've ever encountered were professional and not out to nail otherwise "good guys". "...not everyone that gets you out of the shit is your friend, and not everyone that shit on you is your enemy." You are too trusting. I have LE friends like anyone does. But I don't trust random cops. Everyone is an enemy until they prove otherwise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:58:07 PM EDT
[#11]
It was just his general attitude and mannerisms...he actually semi-volunteered the info that AKs aren't any more evil than most other guns...and that fast reloading pretty much negates mag restrictions...
It seemed more like he realized he was just parroting a couple bullshit talking points...he just needed to think it through a little more. He did say "But if we let them take away one right, what stops them from taking more..." - so he at least partially gets it. But yeah - maybe I am being too nice and trusting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 3:59:36 PM EDT
[#12]
LEOs are put into a nasty situation with the bullshit act and I'm sure a boat load don't want to be in it.
Then again, when push comes to shove, they will have to make a choice. I just hope they make the right one. Just be smart about stuff in life. I did see him trying to diffuse an argument before it even started but then again if he is pro safe, then what should he care what your argument is anyways, the law is on the books already. WTF am I doing visiting this forum, I'm in Key West right now about to do some bridge fishing!!! ARFcom is crack! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 5:42:33 PM EDT
[#13]
That conversation sure wouldn't have given me a warm, fuzzy feeling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 6:04:03 PM EDT
[#14]
For whatever it's worth, Tompkins used to have a pretty good bunch of senior guys. Over the last couple years before I left (and I assume it's continued since) it turned into the place they sent a lot of fresh-from-academy guys for their first posting. Not sure which one you got, but the senior guys were all low-key and a lot of gun guys.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 6:04:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Had a good 30 min convo with him about NYC and upstate and everything...was a really nice guy...and I am glad I brought up the unSAFE act. Oh and he was also CCing on his left side (no metal detectors at the Nat History Museum)...I'm sure I was the only person in the 3,000 person crowd to notice...his kids were jumping all over him but I could tell they knew better than to grab at his left side. Anyway, cool story bro. I know. So you had a decent 30 minute conversation with him and the usual suspects here will still skewer him Quoted:
For whatever it's worth, Tompkins used to have a pretty good bunch of senior guys. Over the last couple years before I left (and I assume it's continued since) it turned into the place they sent a lot of fresh-from-academy guys for their first posting. Not sure which one you got, but the senior guys were all low-key and a lot of gun guys. Yeah , it's become the training ground for new people. Every 6 months or so a new crop shows up. Quoted:
He seemed to be on our side about 75%...just needed a little nudging and correction of mis-information / ignorance. I should have said "Well why do the police seem to NEED ARs and AKs then? If it's because they are great tools for self defense, then why can't civilians have them? Are police lives more important?" Wasn't the time and place to have a prolonged gun discussion Quoted:
Are you going on something other than his responses that you posted? Because I'm not reading that at all. I'm reading a guy who was being polite and didn't want to argue with you in a museum in front of your families This. he was on freakin' vacation. Some of us don't live and breathe gun issues 24/7 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 6:39:06 PM EDT
[#16]
The cop sounded like a decent guy. I still wouldn't trust him. All those sting operations the state police conducted after the safe act was passed...they certainly had no problem finding troopers willing to ruin someone's life over that stupid law.
The thing to understand about most (if not all) cops is that they are very different people when they encounter you on the job rather than outside of the job. A cop might not bat an eye if someone started snorting coke at a party he was attending, but if that same cop pulls you over later and finds coke, you're going to jail. So don't assume that just because you spoke to a cop and he seems cool that he won't destroy your life in a heartbeat if you meet him 10 minutes later as a consequence of an official encounter. Most (almost all) cops will enforce whatever laws are passed...it's their job. If you enforce whatever laws are passed, then you're only as good as the laws currently on the books. Which makes you just as good as the safe act. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 7:48:36 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have LE friends like anyone does... Doesn't sound like it bruh. Your rage is misdirected. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 10:17:15 PM EDT
[#18]
So, let me get this straight. The OP has a conversation with a young trooper IN NYC, and the trooper is initially less than forthcoming with anti-gun speech (although he does admit the princess must go) IN NYC. The greater part of the conversation is agreeable to GD, er I mean HTF, but suddenly because he didn't wear an Impeach Cuomo shirt and open carry an M-240G he's not on our side? For fucks sake he's a young trooper with his family IN NYC. He doesn't know who the hell is talking to him and if it's a media/IAB/activist set-up. Talk to him outside the enemies lair and see if he opens up a little more.
That and remember we compromise a very small, but growing, demographic of gun owners. Especially in this shithole. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 10:27:23 PM EDT
[#19]
This may blow some of your minds.... but not all LEOs are into guns. Some aren't into guns on any level at all except knowing what caliber their Glock pistol is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2015 10:54:42 PM EDT
[#20]
It would be great to open up a thread for once without the usual generic trooper bashing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 12:17:36 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This may blow some of your minds.... but not all LEOs are into guns. Some aren't into guns on any level at all except knowing what caliber their Glock pistol is. Many are in the field just the pension. Or... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 5:35:18 AM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 6:35:26 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Doesn't sound like it bruh. Your rage is misdirected Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have LE friends like anyone does... Doesn't sound like it bruh. Your rage is misdirected Don't worry, I have plenty of rage to go around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 1:06:24 PM EDT
[#24]
Well......when people ask me at work what I think of UnSafe I tell them straight out:
"It's an unconstitutional steaming pile of horseshit" When someone asks: "Why do you need an assault rifle with high cap mags?"..........I reply: "you mean a sporter rifle with standard mags?.........why, because the government shouldn't get to decide what is best for me to protect my family with........nor should we have to get permission from the state to own a handgun.......criminals sure as hell don't." That Trooper OP was a pacifist and a fence rider.......he'd arrest you in a split second because he really doesn't care either way......... Know the difference..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2015 4:28:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WTF am I doing visiting this forum, I'm in Key West right now about to do some bridge fishing!!! ARFcom is crack! We used to do two weeks on Marathon every August....I was brown on one side and snow white on the other from being in the water....I sure do miss those days. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 1:19:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We used to do two weeks on Marathon every August....I was brown on one side and snow white on the other from being in the water....I sure do miss those days. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
WTF am I doing visiting this forum, I'm in Key West right now about to do some bridge fishing!!! ARFcom is crack! We used to do two weeks on Marathon every August....I was brown on one side and snow white on the other from being in the water....I sure do miss those days. Dude, it's awesome!! Why pay for a trip out of country when you have it all in the Keys? Well, not all but most. Plus it's in the U.S., contributes to our economy and we speak our langue. Caught 5 barracuda and 1 tarpoon, on shore fishing on the Atlantic side, with ballyhoo bait all within 1 hour. Amazing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 8:23:47 PM EDT
[#27]
He sounds like the kinda guy that would say "well, i dont agree with it, but im just following orders" as he steps on your neck.
I hope you at least opened his eyes a little. We need more oathkeepers in a bad way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 8:37:55 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We need more oathkeepers in a bad way. No, we don't Those guys seem to be a bit whacky in person |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 8:40:38 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, we don't Those guys seem to be a bit whacky in person Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We need more oathkeepers in a bad way. No, we don't Those guys seem to be a bit whacky in person Exactly.......I've taken 3 oaths.......2 enlistments, and 1 for my LE job........I don't need another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 10:04:35 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, we don't Those guys seem to be a bit whacky in person Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We need more oathkeepers in a bad way. No, we don't Those guys seem to be a bit whacky in person Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2015 11:44:00 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2015 1:01:58 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice Come on, that's an unfair question and you know it. "Something deemed to be unconstitutional." By a clearly corrupted and biased judiciary? Yeah, okay, good luck with that. By those standards, we are all aware that the Safe act has not been (and will more than likely never be) "deemed unconstitutional" however you can't clearly tell me, with a straight face, that it is a law compliant with the constitution of the United States. If you do say that, then you're a liar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2015 6:11:41 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Come on, that's an unfair question and you know it. "Something deemed to be unconstitutional." By a clearly corrupted and biased judiciary? Yeah, okay, good luck with that. By those standards, we are all aware that the Safe act has not been (and will more than likely never be) "deemed unconstitutional" however you can't clearly tell me, with a straight face, that it is a law compliant with the constitution of the United States. If you do say that, then you're a liar. bmf wants to call LEOs to task for following unconstitutional laws. That status is deemed so by court rulings Anything else is personal opinion. You can't call LEOs and LEAs to task because their agency policy doesn't follow your personal opinion or interpretation There is a reason that we are a nation of laws. You don't want LEOs going out and making up their own laws and enforcing those. You might as well live in a third world nation. Speaking of which, "corrupt judiciary", you haven't seen such a thing til you've been to a third world nation and see how their courts work.... Do I agree with SAFE? No. Do I realistically think it'll be overturned at the state level? No Like it or not, the Courts are a product of our society and the courts are populated by people from the nation, many of whom do not think on the issues of guns the way many in this site do. That doesn't make them corrupt As I have often said the answer to all of our ills is education If we sway more of the general population to the pro-gun side the judiciary that is drawn from that population will inevitably move along with it |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2015 8:21:49 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
bmf wants to call LEOs to task for following unconstitutional laws. That status is deemed so by court rulings Anything else is personal opinion. You can't call LEOs and LEAs to task because their agency policy doesn't follow your personal opinion or interpretation There is a reason that we are a nation of laws. You don't want LEOs going out and making up their own laws and enforcing those. You might as well live in a third world nation. Speaking of which, "corrupt judiciary", you haven't seen such a thing til you've been to a third world nation and see how their courts work.... Do I agree with SAFE? No. Do I realistically think it'll be overturned at the state level? No Like it or not, the Courts are a product of our society and the courts are populated by people from the nation, many of whom do not think on the issues of guns the way many in this site do. That doesn't make them corrupt As I have often said the answer to all of our ills is education If we sway more of the general population to the pro-gun side the judiciary that is drawn from that population will inevitably move along with it Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Come on, that's an unfair question and you know it. "Something deemed to be unconstitutional." By a clearly corrupted and biased judiciary? Yeah, okay, good luck with that. By those standards, we are all aware that the Safe act has not been (and will more than likely never be) "deemed unconstitutional" however you can't clearly tell me, with a straight face, that it is a law compliant with the constitution of the United States. If you do say that, then you're a liar. bmf wants to call LEOs to task for following unconstitutional laws. That status is deemed so by court rulings Anything else is personal opinion. You can't call LEOs and LEAs to task because their agency policy doesn't follow your personal opinion or interpretation There is a reason that we are a nation of laws. You don't want LEOs going out and making up their own laws and enforcing those. You might as well live in a third world nation. Speaking of which, "corrupt judiciary", you haven't seen such a thing til you've been to a third world nation and see how their courts work.... Do I agree with SAFE? No. Do I realistically think it'll be overturned at the state level? No Like it or not, the Courts are a product of our society and the courts are populated by people from the nation, many of whom do not think on the issues of guns the way many in this site do. That doesn't make them corrupt As I have often said the answer to all of our ills is education If we sway more of the general population to the pro-gun side the judiciary that is drawn from that population will inevitably move along with it Very well said and spot on.. EDU is the key.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/25/2015 7:53:59 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
bmf wants to call LEOs to task for following unconstitutional laws. That status is deemed so by court rulings Anything else is personal opinion. You can't call LEOs and LEAs to task because their agency policy doesn't follow your personal opinion or interpretation There is a reason that we are a nation of laws. You don't want LEOs going out and making up their own laws and enforcing those. You might as well live in a third world nation. Speaking of which, "corrupt judiciary", you haven't seen such a thing til you've been to a third world nation and see how their courts work.... Do I agree with SAFE? No. Do I realistically think it'll be overturned at the state level? No Like it or not, the Courts are a product of our society and the courts are populated by people from the nation, many of whom do not think on the issues of guns the way many in this site do. That doesn't make them corrupt As I have often said the answer to all of our ills is education If we sway more of the general population to the pro-gun side the judiciary that is drawn from that population will inevitably move along with it Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Come on, that's an unfair question and you know it. "Something deemed to be unconstitutional." By a clearly corrupted and biased judiciary? Yeah, okay, good luck with that. By those standards, we are all aware that the Safe act has not been (and will more than likely never be) "deemed unconstitutional" however you can't clearly tell me, with a straight face, that it is a law compliant with the constitution of the United States. If you do say that, then you're a liar. bmf wants to call LEOs to task for following unconstitutional laws. That status is deemed so by court rulings Anything else is personal opinion. You can't call LEOs and LEAs to task because their agency policy doesn't follow your personal opinion or interpretation There is a reason that we are a nation of laws. You don't want LEOs going out and making up their own laws and enforcing those. You might as well live in a third world nation. Speaking of which, "corrupt judiciary", you haven't seen such a thing til you've been to a third world nation and see how their courts work.... Do I agree with SAFE? No. Do I realistically think it'll be overturned at the state level? No Like it or not, the Courts are a product of our society and the courts are populated by people from the nation, many of whom do not think on the issues of guns the way many in this site do. That doesn't make them corrupt As I have often said the answer to all of our ills is education If we sway more of the general population to the pro-gun side the judiciary that is drawn from that population will inevitably move along with it In short, i would like to see more leos pressure their unions to stop pandering to the liberals who view the Constitution as an old, outdated piece of toilet paper. As for how i would expect individual leos to handle honoring their oaths; imagine pulling over a guy for not using a blinker. When you walk up to him you see a range bag, and an ar15 in the back seat. You ask him for his credentials, run him and see he has no outstanding warrants. You either write him or dont, but his rifle shouldnt even be a topic of discussion (unless youre going to offer a compliment). Thats how you deal with a bs, unconstitutional law like the safe act. You make it sound like i expect cops to be moral police, but thats not where im at with this. But there are far too many people that let that shield get to their head and they dont bother to use "discretion" for things. Youu dont need the SCROTUS to tell you everything is right or wrong. Our criminal justice system is broken, and even if its not as bad as some other places it doesnt make it less broken. Anyone who uses their power to ban guns (and any other right that is protected by the Constitution) is corrupt because they are smart enough to know what " shall not be infringed means" yet they still do it to buy votes or earn brownie points. Our political system is wrought with corruption, and if you dont see that then stop grazing with the rest of the sheep. I do agree though that the only way we can turn things around is through education. The facist liberals has taken over the schools and the media and they have been brainwashing our children for a long time now. Now those brainwashed people are voting for these same liberals. We have to turn this around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/26/2015 1:16:05 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In short, i would like to see more leos pressure their unions to stop pandering to the liberals who view the Constitution as an old, outdated piece of toilet paper. As for how i would expect individual leos to handle honoring their oaths; imagine pulling over a guy for not using a blinker. When you walk up to him you see a range bag, and an ar15 in the back seat. You ask him for his credentials, run him and see he has no outstanding warrants. You either write him or dont, but his rifle shouldnt even be a topic of discussion (unless youre going to offer a compliment). Thats how you deal with a bs, unconstitutional law like the safe act. . Our union doesn't generally get involved in "pandering with liberals" If you guys don't want to be questioned about something you know is on the politicians hit list I can only suggest that you not keep it in plain view until we can get SAFE dealt with. "His rifle shouldn't be a topic of discussion" isn't feasible as an assured thing until we can get SAFE off the books. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 3:18:27 PM EDT
[#37]
Its not "all the unions" as some have said here. One of the recurring topics at the monthly FOP meetings I attend is the safe act, and whats being done to over turn it and throw the whole mess out. I have yet to work with any cop, fed, state or local who thinks the safe act is a good thing or will have ANY impact on gun crime...
A room with 200 LEO's and not a single one had anything good to say when the topic of the safe act was brought up. A very very small number may support it, but its a very, very small one at that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 3:33:26 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its not "all the unions" as some have said here. One of the recurring topics at the monthly FOP meetings I attend is the safe act, and whats being done to over turn it and throw the whole mess out. I have yet to work with any cop, fed, state or local who thinks the safe act is a good thing or will have ANY impact on gun crime... A room with 200 LEO's and not a single one had anything good to say when the topic of the safe act was brought up. A very very small number may support it, but its a very, very small one at that. Same here...........very small minority's of LEOs support the Safe act, or even the other laws and outrageous permit system |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 7:26:57 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 7:31:22 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? Not in NY.......at least not without a permission slip |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 11:28:49 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? Have the Courts somewhere ruled NYs permit system unconstitutional? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2015 4:50:23 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That conversation sure wouldn't have given me a warm, fuzzy feeling. What do you think a gun hating cop off duty is going to say to some crazy gun nut asking about illegal assault weapons iwhen he's standing in line with his wife and kids? Edit The cops who don't like this crap say "fuck Cuomo" and "I can't believe the courts didn't repeal this" |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2015 8:33:45 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have the Courts somewhere ruled NYs permit system unconstitutional? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ill rephrase that.. We need more people who take oaths to actually honor them when faced with blatantly unconstitutional orders. Ok, show me a situation where the courts have deemed something to be unconstitutional and yet agencies and the officers they employ continue the practice How does Heller and McDonald rulings stack up against this state's pistol permit scheme? Can someone exercise the fundamental right of keeping and bearing a pistol in their home, for the lawful right of self defense, without a pistol permit? Have the Courts somewhere ruled NYs permit system unconstitutional? No. That's the problem, if ethics and logic were the rule, the laws would have been struck down, or mandated to be revised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2015 9:32:30 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. That's the problem, if ethics and logic were the rule, the laws would have been struck down, or mandated to be revised. It hasn't been struck down but you criticize officers and agencies for enforcing standing laws. Imagine what would happen if those officers and agencies just winged it on other laws as you apparently want them to do in this instance |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2015 12:32:13 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It hasn't been struck down but you criticize officers and agencies for enforcing standing laws. Imagine what would happen if those officers and agencies just winged it on other laws as you apparently want them to do in this instance Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No. That's the problem, if ethics and logic were the rule, the laws would have been struck down, or mandated to be revised. It hasn't been struck down but you criticize officers and agencies for enforcing standing laws. Imagine what would happen if those officers and agencies just winged it on other laws as you apparently want them to do in this instance Did I do that in this thread, or is this some sort of grudge?
I brought up Heller and McDonald....That was my first contribution to this thread. But all the same, SCOTUS has ruled on other BOR issues, creating case law, and laws and policies have had to change as a result. Miranda v. Arizona, for one. If states and local entities are supposed to honor SCOTUS case law and rulings, NYS should have in regards to PL 265. But we all know state government is too corrupt to do that. Following the guidance of SCOTUS, The Constitution, and NATURAL LAW is not "winging it." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2015 7:09:01 PM EDT
[#46]
tc556guy is right. Cops can't just wing it based on personal opinions. Cops are agents of the state and therefore must act in accordance with the laws of the state.
That is why, as our laws become increasingly corrupt and oppressive, the police can start to become an occupying enemy force rather than public servants. Our laws, as bad as they are, are still pretty okay, and our cops are no Nazis, not by a long shot. But when you enforce whatever laws are passed and upheld by courts, then the only difference between you and the Nazis is the laws currently on the books. And those laws are getting worse. At some point you'll have to decide whether a pay check is worth putting on the gray uniform (whatever color it actually is) and loading people onto trains (or whatever form your oppression actually takes). For some, that line has already been crossed. Others are okay depriving their fellow citizens of their rights because the courts say it is okay to do so, even though deep down inside (or not so deep down inside) they know what they are doing is wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2015 10:51:10 PM EDT
[#47]
Actually, some cops swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the constitution of the state of NY. And, officers have discretion when it comes to enforcing laws. The Penal Law states, with exceptions such as domestic related crimes, criminal contempt, etc, that officers MAY arrest when certain circumstances exist.
When laws conflict each other, I like to side with the Constitution, especially the rights enumerated in the amendments, supported by reason, and Natural Law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2015 11:50:48 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did I do that in this thread, or is this some sort of grudge?
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No. That's the problem, if ethics and logic were the rule, the laws would have been struck down, or mandated to be revised. It hasn't been struck down but you criticize officers and agencies for enforcing standing laws. Imagine what would happen if those officers and agencies just winged it on other laws as you apparently want them to do in this instance Did I do that in this thread, or is this some sort of grudge?
Sorry, that was bmf in the quote tree a few posts up that I was referring to, not you |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2015 9:09:28 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, some cops swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the constitution of the state of NY. And, officers have discretion when it comes to enforcing laws. The Penal Law states, with exceptions such as domestic related crimes, criminal contempt, etc, that officers MAY arrest when certain circumstances exist. When laws conflict each other, I like to side with the Constitution, especially the rights enumerated in the amendments, supported by reason, and Natural Law. So if you caught someone with a handgun, not otherwise doing anything wrong, and asked if he had a permit, and if he said, "No, I don't," then you would not arrest him and/or confiscate the gun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2015 12:10:36 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, some cops swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the constitution of the state of NY. And, officers have discretion when it comes to enforcing laws. The Penal Law states, with exceptions such as domestic related crimes, criminal contempt, etc, that officers MAY arrest when certain circumstances exist. When laws conflict each other, I like to side with the Constitution, especially the rights enumerated in the amendments, supported by reason, and Natural Law. This +1000 |
|
|
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.
