like any current NY cops are going to arrest their old goombahs for merely breaking the law.

Cool.

A cop bash thread combined with a NY bash thread.

It is like a hate happy meal.

if one man cannot do it, then no man should be able to do it.  the law should be TOTALLY BLIND as to power, rank, job, or whatever.  If it cannot be, then it is not a just law and should be struck down.

Oh  don't  get  your   panties  in  a  wad . .  . . your  turn's  comin' .

So they think they are more worthy or special than us, fuck that shit.

We can't have it they can't have it.

Yes, because retired police are not civilians, they're still police.

I am a 21 year cop and a US Army veteran.  I find it horribly unfortunate to see LEOs bashed here when the vast majority of us support the 2A completely. I think in my agency we have a single officer that agrees on gun bans.  Picking out a couple of retirees or leadership comments and taking out your anger over the NY bans on LE is counter productive to the combined fight we are undertaking. Police are regular people whether on duty or retired.  They make mistakes, maybe they aren't able to outshoot you on the range.  Who gives a shit. The only thing i can tell you is that after 25+ years of incarcerating criminals, they will also target retired officers for personal vendettas. I have seen this firsthand, and it would be a shame to eliminate gun rights from these folks as well. My wife is a carrying CCW holder for this very reason as well, and she is not LE. And I realize that there is a populace here that always dives in to LEO bashing threads, and I am sorry you feel that way. Like any profession, there are always a percentage of dipshits that seem to get a lot of attention for the wrong reasons. Stick together and fight for the 2A, period.

Bullshit.  They're fighting for themselves to be more equal than you and I.

Retired LEO?  Fine, I appreciate your service, but your retired status means jack and shit.  If it's good enough for retired LEO, it's good enough for me.

Police officers should not be declared super citizens and have different freedoms...

I do.

No exceptions...

Yeah, I (think) I know what you're saying. Your wording was perhaps a little too subtle.

"If retired cops think they need  > 7 it is evidence we need the same."

It's just that many (most?) retired cops and their professional associations don't seem to be concerned with the needs of the unwashed masses. Or that's the perception based on what we see in the media.

I say fuck the retired guys...lets see how they vote next time.

“As a law enforcement officer for over 20 years, I understand the importance of instituting a new policy on mandating the limits of bullets that a regular citizen can possess, but as a matter of fact the bad guys are not going to follow this law,” said Norman Seabrook, president of the correction officers union, the city’s second largest.

^This right here^

How about a big Fuck You for that steaming piece of hypocrisy:

1) Bad guys won't follow the law to begin with.
2) Regular citizens subjects must be controlled. LE are more equal than the rest of us.

My "respect" for these assholes has, against all expectations, just dropped further...

They should base it on how many dogs they've shot.  

Add one round of capacity for each dog.

You nailed it yourself. LEO is not military. If NY feels the civilian populace can defend itself with 7 rounds..so can LEO. I thank you for your service in the military and your service as a civilian LEO. There is a difference that I am sure you can appreciate.

Wanna bet?  Wait for it.  It's coming.

hehehe

honestly, i thought 7 rounds was enough?
if seven rounds is enough, then seven rounds is enough.
they went as far as to say you could posses a 10 round capacity mag, but could only load 7 rounds into it.
i mean debate is over right? they moved to forgo the 72 hr review or something? governor signed it?
i think the people have spoken.

But all warranted

 
 

I'm a little reluctant to step into this snake pit, but here goes...
TL:DR:  Retired police Lt. agrees that citizens should be armed as well as retired LEOs.  Period.  Here's why:
I was a patrol watch commander in the murder capital of Florida.  I spent almost all of my career in patrol and have been on the 2-way range the whole time.  I asked to work nights in the bad neighborhoods.  I loved what I did.  What I did was pursue the predators of good folks and lead others in that task.  The police HATE bad guys and the vast majority LOVE the good guys and gals.  Every job has it's exceptions, but I know more cops than most and the jerks are easily less than 10%.   Probably just like your jobs.
Now I'm going to surprise quite a few of the cop haters:  Typically speaking, if the police need it, law abiding citizens need it just as much.  If the police firepower request is to be better armed than the crooks, why handicap the citizen who's there first almost every time?  In fact, the armed citizen made my guys jobs a lot easier by eliminating the evildoer.  If you ever want to see beat cops doing a fist bump, it's at a call where a citizen has punched the bad guys ticket.
As for retired guys, the law abiding citizen should be allowed equal access to defensive firearms and ammunition.  The bad guys are no slower, softer, or less numerous or evil than those we run into.  Limiting magazines for good guys is the last place ammunition or firepower should be rationed.  Give the good guys the edge...citizen and retired cop alike.  The situations they face are IDENTICAL, so should be their capabilities.
Active LEO mission requirements are a completely different animal and not what I'm talking about here.  Unless somebody's answering calls or clearing meth labs daily I think they can appreciate the distinction.  But for the vast majority of unplanned defensive engagements, there is no difference in threat, or potential for mayhem.  Neither should be the ability for good folks to meet it.
Now, guys...don't let the other side win a moral victory by getting the good guys bickering.  The reason the libs exempt the police isn't because they like them so much, they don't like us near as much as the conservatives do in real life.  They do it because the unions are so powerful that the reason they exempt them from unpopular legislation is to avoid having the police take a counter position and swing the public against them.  They remove their dog from the hunt.  Some of the retired guys get used to being exempt and think it's a right or something.  They have lost their perspective.  Sad, because few know the constitution better than cops.  
Most of us are with you 100%.  We all took oaths to defend the constitution and understand very well what's going on.  The 2nd Amendment right to bear arms guarantees all the other rights.  They are rights, not privileges.
 
 
 

This

I thank everyone for the replies, it kind of took a turn i wasn't intending on but were here now, so there it is.

As i stated before, if they were exempted it sets a a double standard and also a precedent that could be taken to the supreme court if needed. Almost as a discrimination case as much as an actual violation of the constitution.

Long story short, i was just wondering if anyone else was thinking that same thought. It was never meant to be a NY/police bashing thread. A wrongful law was passed, i just wanted to see what realistic legal actions could be taken as an average citizen.

They didn't deserve special treatment while they were actively working in LE, as a proxy for the rest of society.