Thinking of just another way to perhaps get a law passed to inadvertently protect our 2nd amendment rights.

Cops should be subjected to the same gun restrictions as the citizens the protect.  No high cap magazines for Cops in states that have such restrictions, no full auto or SBR for SWAT teams unless their department pays the necessary taxes per weapon.  Might help slow some of the occupied states slide into unarmed populations.  Thoughts.

That sounds like a good idea, but try get such a law passed.

Works for me!!

I've thought about this myself.  While I like it, you have to remember that the libs have NO concept of reality.  They will simply ban cops from having anything but 9mms.  Just look at the restrictions that some of GFW's are willing to put against cops that carry concealed, or look at England and Australia where the cops often have to check the gun back in after the shift and leave it in the armory.  Gun control derives not from practical considerations, but is part of the hippie crap pacifism that infects the left.

Remember, these nuts wanted a nuclear freeze at the height of the cold war.  

Makes sense to me. If gun control works to end violent crime then cops don't really have any need to be armed.

But we all know that that the ONLY purpose for gun control is CONTROL.

I think ALL gun manufacturers should start refusing to sell to police/govt in states with draconian laws like mine.

Quoted: Remember, these nuts wanted a nuclear freeze at the height of the cold war.

Almost makes ya wish we would have given then Nuclear Winter eh?

Quoted: Quoted: Remember, these nuts wanted a nuclear freeze at the height of the cold war.   Almost makes ya wish we would have given then Nuclear Winter eh?

If there was a way to just nuke Berkeley . . . .

Neat concept but it'll never happen.

Libtards like to elevate police to near-military levels so it would never pass.

It might happen if more companies were owned and operated by Ronnie Barrett.

This is a similar method - read this

A while back some Police agencies jumped on board for a lawsuit against Ford Motor Corp concerning gas tanks on the Crown Vic Police Cars.  

Now, to be clear, I am not taking away from the tragic cause or injuries sustained by the police officers involved.  

A bunch of agencies jumped on the band wagon in the lawsuit.  Ford said enough is enough and when those same agencies tried to order more Crown Vics for their police fleet, Ford refused to sell to them.   Ford's idea was if they don't like them, (Read that you will sue me again), then you can't buy them either.   Since practically no one else makes a standard police car, those agencies had to either give up their suit, or buy Chevrolet Monte Carlo's (Yuk !), or Camaro's (Cool, but not great for everyday city patrol).   Most agencies dropped their suits and left the officers out of it.

Use the same criteria for guns.   If your agency, or your Chief of Police, or your Sheriff, or Mayor or Alderman, or City Council, or the International Association of Chief's of Police (IACP) supports or endorses gun control, they should not be able to buy any more guns.   I'll bet if that happened, their would be a drastic change in their support ideas.  

What do you guys think ?

What if Beretta, Glock, S&W, and Sig refused to sell hi cap mags to those agencies who supported a limit on hi cap mags ?

Assault Weapons ? (All AR-15's of all configuration and make, M1A1's, etc etc.)

Semi Auto's anything ?

.50 Cals  (I think Ronnie Barrett is already doing this in California)

Nevermind if they get a hypocritical waiver in the law, the effected legal firearms company would refuse to sell it to them regardless.

Think that might get their attention ?

Great to split gun owners with law enforcement, just what the gun banners would love.  Bad idea.

I like the idea of gun manufacturers no longer selling or supporting in states with these type laws, however, just like Barrett did with the PRK over the .50 ban.

Richard Lee has a better idea.  Make shooting a popular, common activity.  The more people that pursue an activity, the more that activity becomes protected.

We need new shooters.

Quoted: Great to split gun owners with law enforcement, just what the gun banners would love.  Bad idea. I like the idea of gun manufacturers no longer selling or supporting in states with these type laws, however, just like Barrett did with the PRK over the .50 ban.

Doesn't matter, Most Police Officers will do what their told irregerdless if it is constitutional or not.

Quoted: Great to split gun owners with law enforcement, just what the gun banners would love.  Bad idea. I like the idea of gun manufacturers no longer selling or supporting in states with these type laws, however, just like Barrett did with the PRK over the .50 ban.

Haven't the gun banners already split us?  I mean they can buy guns we can't.  Thought the rank and file is mostly pro-gun, the leadership is anti-gun.  How bout serving the leadership a little 2nd amendment humble pie?

TO ALL POLICE OFFICERS: I'm def pro-police, but don't like double standards.  It's for this reason I oppose affirmative action as well.

Quoted: Richard Lee has a better idea.  Make shooting a popular, common activity.  The more people that pursue an activity, the more that activity becomes protected. We need new shooters.

True, but the NRA already does this.  

Quoted: How bout serving the leadership a little 2nd amendment humble pie? TO ALL POLICE OFFICERS: I'm def pro-police, but don't like double standards.  It's for this reason I oppose affirmative action as well.

I'm game.  

Quoted: Thinking of just another way to perhaps get a law passed to inadvertently protect our 2nd amendment rights.

Laws are the reason why our 2nd Amendment right is being degraded.  Eliminating existing laws will be a lot simpler.