LEO Weapons, Should there be

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - LEO Weapons, Should there be

Posted: 2/13/2001 2:40:37 AM EDT

Do you think LE officer should be able to buy post ban weapons with pre ban features? Are cops above average citizens whenit come to this? If so why? If not why?

Just wondering what you think.

Posted: 2/13/2001 3:31:07 AM EDT

[#1]

Cops, even on duty, should be only allowed to carry weapons that are available over the counter at Walmart with no waiting period or registration. I know this is a little extreme, but it will make the police realize that we are citizens too.

Kharn

Posted: 2/13/2001 3:36:56 AM EDT

[#2]

I think they should. I think the rest of should too. I think you're looking at this backwards.

Posted: 2/13/2001 4:02:13 AM EDT

[#3]

Not just cops, but the rank and file military also, shouldn't have anything an ordinary citizen can't have. Conversely, citizens should be able to buy one hell of a lot more stuff than they currently can.

Posted: 2/13/2001 4:13:40 AM EDT

[#4]

I think if it a departmental weapon any thing they need. Personnel, then just like the rest of us. But, I think the rest of us adult citizens are, of course, getting treated like the Gov. doesn't trust us!? Like I spent 6 years in the airborne Infantry, 11B4P and if they trusted me then, why not now -- not auto, but bayonet lug,give me a big break!!!!

Posted: 2/13/2001 4:25:58 AM EDT

[#5]

If a LEO needs to carry a pistol, I need to be able to carry a pistol. If a LEO needs a 15 round mag in the pistol, I need a 15 round mag. The pre/post ban rifle thing is just silly. Flash hiders and bayonet lugs? Give me a break. Folding stocks? If I'm going to rob a bank do you really think I give a sh*t about gun laws? That is what I think.

Posted: 2/13/2001 5:15:06 AM EDT

[#6]

Law enforcement! That in it's self is a joke. The only laws that they enforce are traffic laws! L.E. doesn't prevent crime , they report crime! When someone commits a crime L.E. isn't right there to stop them. They show up after the fact , after the bodies are already cold, after your valuables have been sold , after your personal privacy has been shattered by someone who ultimately has more rights than you do, after all that they (L.E.) show up and make out a report. Or should I say, maybe fill out a report.You see, thats how they get there crime rates to drop, they simply omit certain reports, and make the incident dissappear. Call the law to report a small crime around your home, and then go down there six months later to get a copy of it. It want be there. The police even tell you , we can't be everyplace at once, well that to me is the strongest argument for private ownership of firearms. All firearms. Not just what the goverment deems politcally correct firearms.You will not see a crimanal buying an assault rifle off the black market with a ten round capicity mag. We the people should have everything the military has, at resonable cost, not taxed to hell and back! Just my 2 cents worth.
[pyro]

Posted: 2/13/2001 5:36:43 AM EDT

[#7]

There`s a cop in my ipsc club who shoots a Glock like mine. He has 8 hi cap mags. I asked him how much he paid for them and he told me they cost a little less than 20 bucks. The same thing for me costs over a hundred bucks each.

Posted: 2/13/2001 5:42:06 AM EDT

[#8]

Reddog6;

Why not full auto?

Does having that 3rd position on your AR selector switch give it telepathic capabilities that will convince you that you are a criminal?

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:40:01 AM EDT

[#9]

I don't think Cops should be allowed to possess weapons.

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:45:26 AM EDT

[#10]

HALFCOCKED,
good question.I guess I just grew up with the NO auto thing, and in a way agree with it. Let me explain. I and millions of others are military trainned, or are responsible citizens (don't walk aganist the light, etc) and we then should be able to poscess auto arms. (In fact if the right to keep and bear arms is to prevent a wrongful gov. then these really are necessary.)

BUT, these days when the thirty thousand gun laws we have are not enforced, and the "Bloods" "Crips" and the Mexican, Russian bad guys would have them (I know some do).

But, even closer to home
when I go to the range and see the way people handle their weapons in evey unsafe way you could think of -- I'm a little glad they don't have access to full auto.

I persaonnaly think anyone who served in a combat arms for 3 or more yeears should be able to have any light weapon he wants if Uncle Sam trainned and trusted you then, going into civilian life should not change your into a "gun nut" not to be trusted.

After all that I beleive we need more responsible people with a little disipline before we liberlise the issue of auto permits. My ideas only, and I know there are ten million different ones out there.

Posted: 2/13/2001 9:23:39 AM EDT

[#11]

Being an LEO...I don't have a problem with responsible gun-owners having access to hi cap mags and post ban firearms with the "evil, post ban features." As long as they own, possess, and use them in a responsible way then I'm all for it. Lord knows I might be in the crap one day and need some help from my trusty ar15.com members!!!!!!!! As to the question do I think LE's are above citizens? As far as firearms ownership goes...I don't think so but that is the way it has seemed to work out to damn politicians that have to blame something. As to you 556mm...LE is a deterrent to crime. Have you ever been arrested before??? If you haven't I'm willing to bet that you haven't because you have fear of getting in trouble. To have a crime you have to have opportunity and desire. The opportunity is always going to be there but the desire, for most people, is not regardless of whether it's morally wrong or just the fear of getting caught.

Posted: 2/13/2001 9:31:55 AM EDT

[#12]

Damn right! Anybody who were to f*ck with a cop when I was around, would find themselves in the middle of a MAJOR sh*t storm!

Posted: 2/13/2001 9:40:51 AM EDT

[#13]

According to the elitists, equal protection under the law still applies, but LEO, military, govt employees, and other chosen ones are more equal than others. Last time I checked it was illegal to have titles of nobility.

Posted: 2/13/2001 11:10:22 AM EDT

[#14]

As one of the "illegal nobility," I have to agree with Halfcocked's original statement on this, but more vehemently. The original question is backward. It doesn't matter that through wrongheaded and stupid gun laws that police are allowed better weaponry than the average citizen. It matters that these wrongheaded and stupid gun laws even exist. Every citizen with the full protection of the constitution should have access to weaponry equal to anything in use by the military or police. These laws should not stop anyone, who can posses a firearm, from possessing anyfirearm that a LEO or soldier can possess.

The problem I have with the way the question was phrased is that it pits normal citizen against LEOs. It points out a loophole, yeah a real loophole, and goads lawabiding gun owners into trying to close it. It breeds jealousy. It dares one-upmanship. That shouldn't be the case, LEOs are just citizens doing a certain job. This is one of the tactics antis use, "divide and conquor." We should be careful not to fall for it.

The current laws are wrong and should be repealled. But let's not look at them in a way as to to take away more rights from some citizens, who by virtue of the same illegal laws can do something others cannot. Support any constitutional right that is left, even if one group of citizens has already illegally had it taken away...

Sorry for the rant.

Posted: 2/13/2001 3:12:35 PM EDT

[#15]

As an LEO, I am often asked by friends, family members, and even fellow LEO's why I care so much about the 2nd amendment, when in my position, I can carry concealed, PreBan type, and high capacity magazines anyway. My answer to them is that the 2nd amendment is for all law abiding citizens, not just LEO's. Besides, someday I won't be an LEO anymore. Will I want to surrender my LEO only weapons, etc? Hell no! I support the 2nd amendment as if I wasn't an LEO. That's the way it should be. I also support people like MelonPopper be armed and able to assist me if I ever need it. I am prejudiced about one thing, however. Sh*tbags should loose all priveleges offered by the 2nd amendment.

www.GreatPrices.at/sableco.com

Posted: 2/13/2001 3:54:56 PM EDT

[#16]

Well said Yorec. You hit the nail on the head.

I am a LEO. I am the only LEO I know or ever heard of that has deputized citizens to empower them to assist without any civil liability on their parts. Have done it on several occasions and will do it again if necessary.

As far as side arms LEO's do carry the same weapons as are available to all citizens - with the magazine exception. I wanted to carry 2 extra mags for my SIG 226 issue pistol and had to buy one at my own expense - $70.
That's ridiculous and the hi-cap mag ban is ridiculous also. What real purpose has been served?

Let's all thank HISSONER Clinton for that garbage, and the rise in all gun prices.

To set the record some what straight about auto weapons. It is not against the law to possess them. That is a misconception.

It is against the law to possess an UNREGISTERED machine gun (i.e. full auto weapons).

The true issue here is actually the restrictions or condictions one has to meet in order to possess one legally.

Personally I feel they should be relaxed somewhat. They still should exist for obvious screening of persons that should not possess them. Felons, persons with a history of convictions of violent crimes, mental illness, etc.

I personally believe all laws about possession and carry of firearms should be rethought and revamped. There is one concept of law from England I have always liked. There are two categories of crimes:
crimes (committed)
crimes (committed) with firearms
The second has much harsher penalities.
Personal responsibility and accountability in thies victim oriented society is almost none existant.
This, too, needs to change.

my .02 worth.

BTW - Prior to 1934 there were almost no restrictions on full auto weapons. The abuse of that ability by "criminals" against society changed that.

If people would do what it right there would be no need for laws or law enforcement.

Posted: 2/13/2001 4:05:04 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
If people would do what is right there would be no need for laws or law enforcement.

View Quote

That sounds like a liberal thought. My opinion and philosophy is that I think MOST people are good. I trust the average citizen. How liberals view it is: "the average citizen is a dumb redneck who has no firearm safety training and is not smart enought to use a Hi-cap mag."

Or "The average person has evil intentions. And when supplied with an Assault Weapon, this average person will take out their angers on innocent people."

Posted: 2/13/2001 5:17:10 PM EDT

[#18]

As a LEO I train with, carry & use Hi-Cap mags at work everyday. But as Joe-citizen when I'm not at work, I can't own, buy or possess Hi-Cap mags for my personal weapons. Apparently somewhere between work and home I become a borderline psycho. I believe that the Hi-Cap ban is a useless knee-jerk reaction by law makers who don't know sh*t from putty when it comes to firearms. It was something to buy votes and make the tree-huggers feel warm and fuzzy.

Posted: 2/13/2001 5:38:35 PM EDT

[#19]

556, I would like to see you solve a serious crime for yourself. Like to see you interview someone from the ghetto who ripped you off, 556 knocks on the door of a shack in the hood. "I'm the one who your son ripped off, raped my daughter, etc., your under arrest, lets talk!etc." You dont do your own surgery, muffler repair, computer repair, fly your own plane, etc. do you?

"what?, I told you some black/white/hispanic guy did it!, now go get em officer!" 556 to last officer he reported a crime too.

BTW, My Chief won't allow us to purchase LEO mags or weapons. Only advantage I have is if I get lucky an can find LEO mags at gunshows where the seller doesn't need a letterhead, or second hand.

The law says if I do anything personal with the items, I'm a felon!, only duty related. Training with the items is OK, but if I'm showing off for the girl by shooting a can, I'm a felon!

I hope Brady sunsets as well as the rest of you.

My first title is Citizen, second is Soldier, third is cop.

Posted: 2/13/2001 6:00:42 PM EDT

[#20]

I'm a deputy sheriff, I hope W somehow finds the means and cajones to have the crime bill withdrawn. I hope that each and every owner of a PC'd AR is issued a Beta C mag, bayonet and a flash suppressor by the Govt as restitution for having to buy a lesser AR. It isn't going to happen but I can dream.
The only good part about the practice of allowing LEO's to buy LEO only weapons is it leaves more preban weapons / magazines available for Joe shooter and saves us some money when our weapon gets locked up as evidence after a shooting.
[:\]

Posted: 2/13/2001 6:01:54 PM EDT

[#21]

Actually, they are for Law Enforcement, Government Use or Export Only Weapons. And, yes, they should be allowed to buy as many hi-cap mags as they need to do thier jobs. Their departments can allow them to keep the mags after they leave the job, but they must remove the evil features of the AWs. Ah, well.

In the meantime, whine boys, whine.

Posted: 2/13/2001 7:52:21 PM EDT

[#22]

While I dont Believe the high capicity mag ban and the evil feature frame of mind will ever make sense.
I do believe the cops should have anything it takes to do their job. and yes they should be better armed than the criminal because you know they have all the evil stuff and high capicity mags, if you're going to steal it why not steal the best.
I dont agree with the fact that some will abuse the privilege and buy all they can just to have them or to resell them at a later date. I do also think that the LEO thing should be limited to the job. Other wise I should be as well armed as the armed off duty police officer for I am also trained in the proper use of a weapon.

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:16:05 PM EDT

[#23]

It's my understanding that if an LEO buys a rifle with Pre-ban features with his own money, and then leaves the LE business, then he must remove the Pre-Ban features, and since it must be purchased on Police Letter Head, if he leaves one department for another it must be transferred through an FFL to the next dept. even though he paid for it. Now on to hi-cap magazines, if a LEO buys Post-Ban hi-caps on Letter Head, the only way he can keep them is to retire, and the CLEO gives them to him upon retirement. I'm pretty sure that's the way it goes. Not really clear on the rifle disposal though, because the lower will be stamped "LE Only".

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:18:36 PM EDT

[#24]

I am in Law Enforcement and one of the very few advantages I have is the ability to own JBT weapons and mags. I covet my AR with all the evil features, my LE Beta C-Mag and all my other regular capacity LE mags. Also, I do not plan on "giving up" any of them when I retire or whatever. Not because of the law (which allows us to keep them anyway with certain actions) but because "I" paid "MY" own funds for them and for me to use. I doubt that anyone on this board plans to give up their weapons without their desire to do so and neither do I. Fortunately my Department is not anti-gun and I doubt they will ask for them to be turned in but will instead gift them to us when we retire, like the law allows. Regardless, they are mine and I will decide if and when I give them up. I can still think for myself, unlike the socialists in this country, and just because there is some words stamped on the side of the weapon and it has a few different steel parts I do not consider it some inherently dangerous device that will cause me to go on a rampage.

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:37:01 PM EDT

[#25]

While we are at it we should apply this idea to those pesky Doctors and Locksmiths too.
California law says I cant own a slimjim therefore no locksmith should be able to buy one for work either.
Federal law says I cant use Heroin, therefore no doctor should be able to prescribe Morphine for his patients either. Doctors should only be able to do there job with medications for sale over the counter at walmart.

Posted: 2/13/2001 8:46:44 PM EDT

[#26]

As far as the statistics that i have read. gun related accidents have been declining since 1905.

It pains me to see programs such as NRA's eddie eagle get attacked by anti-gunners. this will only breed ignorance of firearm safty rules.

LEO's should be able to keep their "evil" looking weapons especially if they pay for them.

As far as full-auto weapons are concerned i believe they should be handled the same way that other weapons are...with background checks. no special government tax. the semi-auto versions count for less than 1% of the types of weapons used in crime.

The guncontrol act of 1934 came about because of prohibition. gangsta's using tommies and the like. the crime rate dropped when prohibition ended. the guncontrol act of 1934 stayed though.

I hate it when HCI says were all nut cases because the 2nd amendment guartees us a right to nuclear weapons. i cant remember who said it,but this question did arise with our founding fathers. they said a militia's weapon must be current with the times, and carried by a soldier. this would rule out tanks, jetfighters, gunships, naval boats, nuclear weapons, vehicle mounted weapons and so forth. to me the only area of controversy would be shoulder fire rockets or missles. i dont know how to adjucate that but i think the rate of fire of a firearm is a moot point. would i rather be hit by a burst of fire or shot three times in semi-auto mode? at least if somebody shoots at me in full-auto they are more likley to miss. if at close range, than what would the difference be from a shotgun blast. would'nt i be hit by multiple projectile? would'nt i be just as dead?

Posted: 2/13/2001 9:29:29 PM EDT

[#27]

I began reading this thread with the "uh oh here we go again" attitude, but am pleasantly surprised that this has not gone "cop bashing".

We didn't make the law, and as you can see most think it's trash. I would suggest that most wouldn't even care if you walked up with a pre upper on a post lower. Most of my co-workers are pro-gun, as am I.

The question is backward as stated in previous replies.

556mm traffic enforcement is probably the action most beneficial to you preformed by LE. I write very very few tickets. One has to do something very stupid to get a ticket from me, but I will stop them. I will discuss it with them. Just the presence of the car affects drivers speed, and other habits. Less accidents, less road rage, uninsured motorists, unlicensed drivers, etc. And if I could only count the number of wanted people I have arrested on traffic stops. If I, or another LE, didn't enforce traffic laws you would be surprised at the number of wanted people who never get caught!

Side Note******
It's amazing that most criminals are also bad drivers [:D]

Posted: 2/13/2001 11:12:56 PM EDT

[#28]

ok in oregon any citizen can own what I own the only difference is the class 3 nfa crap I have 4 position 14.5 fluted with vortex and anyone can have the same just put out the money and you also can own one bad ass baby killer!!!!!!!!

Posted: 2/14/2001 1:08:52 AM EDT

[#29]

Equal opportunity.

You G36 me G36

Posted: 2/14/2001 1:46:19 AM EDT

[#30]

Cops, even on duty, should be only allowed to carry weapons that are available over the counter at Walmart with no waiting period or registration.

Quoted:
I think they should. I think the rest of should too. I think you're looking at this backwards.

View Quote

I'm glad someone thought this through before making this just another Cop bashing opportunity. The anger generated from 556mm's post showed that he has had sand kicked in his face and is all too eager to strike out (from the comfort of his keyboard). 556mm...Take a deep breath and relax.

The fact that we can't have them is wrong but to put Cops at a disadvantage by denying them the firepower equal to what they are up against is foolish.

Posted: 2/14/2001 2:42:02 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If people would do what is right there would be no need for laws or law enforcement.

View Quote

That sounds like a liberal thought. My opinion and philosophy is that I think MOST people are good. I trust the average citizen. How liberals view it is: "the average citizen is a dumb redneck who has no firearm safety training and is not smart enought to use a Hi-cap mag."

Or "The average person has evil intentions. And when supplied with an Assault Weapon, this average person will take out their angers on innocent people."

View Quote

Liberal thought...Not at all. Just a dose of reality. I am quite conservative.

Think about it. When you were a little kid your momma didn't smack you until you defied her and did something you were not supposed to. Had you been obedient you would not have been smacked.

Most laws pertaining to conduct come about because some bright soul did something everybody else did not like.

You know - a violation of the basic tenents of thou shalt not steal, shall not murder, etc.
People have devised more cunning ways to break the existing moral code and attempt to get a ways with it - then presto - a new law against it comes in to being.

Credit card fraud is a good example. 35 years ago there were no credit cards and no existing laws pertaining to them.
Look at the books now.
Full of laws about it.

Back to the original thread question - LEO's are required to comply with the law. To my knowledge the only exception is the magazine capacity - which is in all reality a non issue. It was "feel good legislation" passed to make citizens think their legislators were on the job.

I think we need to vote every legislator out of office -- no -- I think it should be a law no one should be allowed to be a legislator more than 4 or 6 years and the pay should be just above minumum wage. Maybe stupid laws would not come about that way.

Posted: 2/14/2001 8:31:58 AM EDT

[#32]

The fact that we can't have them is wrong but to put Cops at a disadvantage by denying them the firepower equal to what they are up against is foolish.

View Quote

And what about the foolish way civilians are put at a disadvantage by denying them firepower equal to what they are up against? Is a civilian's life deemed to be worth less?

Posted: 2/14/2001 8:46:52 AM EDT

[#33]

Originally Posted By Imbrog|io:
And what about the foolish way civilians are put at a disadvantage by denying them firepower equal to what they are up against? Is a civilian's life deemed to be worth less?

View Quote

I have no great come back line because you are right but do not see that as a good reason to penalize LEO's. I do have a capacity of 10 rounds more than most people in the world though.

Posted: 2/14/2001 9:45:15 AM EDT

[#34]

No one is saying to penalize LEO's. All that is being asked is that the laws to be applied equally to all citizens. There SHOULD NOT be any protected classes exempted from laws, otherwise you end up with more lon horiuchis.

Posted: 2/14/2001 9:48:47 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
While we are at it we should apply this idea to those pesky Doctors and Locksmiths too.
California law says I cant own a slimjim therefore no locksmith should be able to buy one for work either.
Federal law says I cant use Heroin, therefore no doctor should be able to prescribe Morphine for his patients either. Doctors should only be able to do there job with medications for sale over the counter at walmart.

View Quote

This has nothing to do with a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Posted: 2/14/2001 11:58:14 AM EDT

[#36]

I see your point.

Posted: 2/14/2001 12:22:35 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

To set the record some what straight about auto weapons. It is not against the law to possess them. That is a misconception.

It is against the law to possess an UNREGISTERED machine gun (i.e. full auto weapons).

You are flat out wrong on this. In many states it is simply illegal to own or possess a FA weapon of any kind, I live in one of those states (Kansas), hell they can't even decide if they are going to teach evolution in the public schools or not, so I doubt if they are ever going to change this. Although Federal laws allow the ownership of these weapons, many more restictive state laws are still in place.

Posted: 2/14/2001 1:08:51 PM EDT

[#38]

[kill]

Nope. Sorry, when you retire you become a civilian again. I gave uncle back his guns. I kept the extra AR/M9 magazines that I bought (at a MC clothing sales)for my bug out bag.
Technically, I can't have them anymore.
In a SHTF drill, if it was down to that, it would be "an additional charge" as I was drug off to the re-education center.

Posted: 2/14/2001 2:54:23 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:

To set the record some what straight about auto weapons. It is not against the law to possess them. That is a misconception.

It is against the law to possess an UNREGISTERED machine gun (i.e. full auto weapons).

You are flat out wrong on this. In many states it is simply illegal to own or possess a FA weapon of any kind, I live in one of those states (Kansas), hell they can't even decide if they are going to teach evolution in the public schools or not, so I doubt if they are ever going to change this. Although Federal laws allow the ownership of these weapons, many more restictive state laws are still in place.

View Quote

Hmmm. I had not considered the state laws when I wrote that.
You indeed correct.

Back to my other point - we ought to organize and replace every politician that votes for restrictive gun laws, or will not vote to repeal existing restrictive gun laws.

Do not be mistaken - you and I probably have much more in common than we have in difference.

I have watched in dismay the last 8 years of havoc that has been wreaked on this United States that I love and strive to protect on a daily basis. As far as I am concerned we have all been treated as Monica Lewinsky, and the result was we all got stained.
Character does count.

I want a change. I want to see the damage repaired in this country. I want a strong military again.

I want to have pride in this country, and it's leaders, again.

Rant off.

Posted: 2/14/2001 4:33:35 PM EDT

[#40]

I agree, throw the f*ckes out!

Posted: 2/15/2001 11:05:19 PM EDT

[#41]

do any cops need a bayo lug? or flash sup. i can see a need for folders and fa but do they need any thing eles or just want how many cops carrie a ar15 bayo on them? if they used a bayo on someone i could just see the law suit.[chainsawkill]

Posted: 3/18/2001 7:21:35 PM EDT

[#42]

Let the LEO's have their nice equipment. I am not planning to go up against them.
Going up against gang banger, I've got better equipment & training than he has even thought of.
[uzi]

Posted: 3/18/2001 7:42:14 PM EDT

[#43]

I got out of LE about six months ago (getting back in real soon!!!). I had a LEO AR I used on SRT, as well as LE mags for my pistols. I had to turn them in. Removing the features was NOT enough. That meant almost $1K of MY OWN MONEY gone.

The LEOs you meet on the street are usually NOT the gun bigots you read about in the magazines. We DO have to enforce laws we may not always agree with. For the kneejerk crowd who spouts off that we shouldn't, remember that we DO like to eat and support our families. Why don't YOU tell your boss to go to heck and be blackballed from your profession?

I'm getting ready to go to work for a Sheriff who IS pro-2nd, and am hoping to get involved with teaching a concealed carry class. There's a LOT of LE out there who DO stick up for the 2nd, in spite of the cop-hater wanna-be heroes.

Posted: 3/19/2001 2:05:40 AM EDT

[#44]

Just a little food for thought.

When Perata introduced SB23 originally, (you all know what that is right?) there was no LEO exemption. I repeat....THERE WAS NO LEO EXEMPTION. This should tell you something about anti-gun politicians. They not only don't trust the average law abiding citizen; they also don't trust the average LEO either. They envision a society where cops walk around with pepper spray and batons and citizens are lucky to have a pocket knife. Only the power of the police lobby in KA. got them an exemption. I hope nobody believes that this was an oversight on the part of Perata and his cronies. They were hoping that they could sneak it by I'm sure. But once the LEO community figured out what was going on and opposed it, (granted they should have opposed the WHOLE thing) the anti-gun politicians knew it would be political suicide to deny them an exemption so they capitulated.

My point is this discussion is probably pointless. While we're arguing the merits of LEO vs. Citizen gun ownership, these salad tossers, Perata et. al., are scheming on how to eliminate ALL firearms.

But than again.......I could be wrong.

MG

Posted: 3/19/2001 2:19:26 AM EDT

[#45]

I just have one thing to say to all the anti-law enforcement people [-!-]

Posted: 3/19/2001 5:04:45 AM EDT

[#46]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the law require a department letterhead for the purchase of any LEO mags, and that they be for a firearm that is carried on duty (or off if the department REQUIRES off duty carry)? How many LEO's and dealers have broken the law by just selling mags with an ID or badge, and buying mags for a weapon not used for work? If my recollection of the law is correct, many many LEO's are facing the same jail time as anyone else would be who had these mags.

HMMMMMMM

Of course, I'm not holding my breath to see the ATF enforce this part of the law.

Posted: 3/19/2001 6:00:06 AM EDT

[#47]

There are several issues I would like to address but, due to limited time right now,
will only mention one thing that has, to this point in the discussion, been over looked.

Civilians, if they are wise.....as I assume most here are.....avoid a confrontation when at all possible. Police officers are paid to and required to place themselves in positions that pose greater risk. In other words; a civilian is seldom sitting behind their desk and asked (and required) to jump up and respond to an armed felon in the commission of a crime.

There are many good points made in this thread and only a couple of idiot comments. But over all I agree with most that has been said. Having said that, when I retired I was still carrying a six shot revolver (Yeah....I'm old) and even though I was allowed to carry new "wonder pistols" with a million rounds of capacity I choice to stay with a wheelgun.

Posted: 3/19/2001 6:49:06 AM EDT

[#48]

Police officers are civilians.Should they be allowed hi-caps ect.Hell yes.They put thereselves in danger and I admiire them for that.I know several people that L.E.that I count as my best friends.These are people I can count on if im in trouble and they know they can count on me.Trust is a two way street.I also know some who shouldn't own a gun.These are the ones who call you a civilian every chance they get.The same ones who look at you with misstrust because you own a gun.Well guess what last time I looked you can quit your job anytime you want to.That makes you a civilian.Now I can see where misstrut comes from when you deal with dirtballs but when you look at someone and label without good cause then its time for a little less important job.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - LEO Weapons, Should there be

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us