A reader who wishes to remain anonymous writes . . .
“Bad men need no more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” – John Stuart Mill
Law-abiding American gun owners stand with law enforcement, and American law enforcement must stand with us. Elitist politicians across the country are advancing draconian national, state, and local gun control schemes that will do nothing to deter criminal activity and will only undermine honest Americans’ natural right and responsibility to provide for their own safety and security.
Participating in Second Amendment marches and rallies, calling and emailing legislators, writing letters to the editor, and engaging in social media discussions are all worthy pursuits. But according to some studies only 30-40% of US households have firearms.
Gun owners are a minority in modern America and we need a new strategy if we hope to defeat bad public policy and defend Second Amendment civil liberties. Responsible gun owners are also law enforcement’s strongest support group and we, in turn, need—and deserve—law enforcement’s public support of our interests.
We need law enforcement to stand with us!
Several times the best-known Second Amendment advocacy groups have been approached with a recommendation to draw law enforcement’s unions and associations—their political organizations–into our camp. But those Second Amendment groups have for the most part been non-responsive.
In one case they said trying to get law enforcement into the public policy debate was “too hard,” but sometimes that which is hard is the thing most worth doing, and at this point what do we have to lose? Law enforcement stand with us!
In April, 2018 the Deerfield Illinois Village Board passed a sweeping ban on commonly used sporting arms and standard capacity magazines; what the board called “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines.”
Not everyone in Deerfield was subject to the village’s onerous ordinance, however. Law enforcement officers’ (LEOs) and retired LEOs’ privately owned firearms were exempt. That’s worth repeating: cops’ and retired cops’ personally owned gun collections were exempt from the ban.
The Deerfield ordinance emotionally decries “…assault weapons are dangerous and unusual weapons which are commonly associated with the military..,” yet active and retired military personnel were granted no exemption from the ban. That logic requires some mental gymnastics, or perhaps simply an acknowledgment law enforcement in Deerfield are more politically astute and well connected than military personnel and other law-abiding citizens.
In any case, the exemption bought law enforcement’s silence, the village’s cops were able to keep their personal gun collections, and the ordinance was approved by the village board.
The Deerfield case is not unique, however. The same exemptions for LEOs’ and retired LEOs’ privately owned firearms are seen at the state and local level throughout the country: California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Boulder CO, Highland Park IL, and the list goes on.
All have LEO exemptions for privately-owned firearms collections. Those officers who are exempt from the laws and ordinances they are tasked to enforce will have a difficult time explaining their “above the law” status to the gun-owning taxpayers (and their friends and neighbors) in the communities they serve.
The exemptions must stop. We are all equal citizens and should remain so under the law. No law enforcement gun registration or ban exemptions. Stand with us!
A fairly senior state level Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) member intimated his union is working with the police chiefs association in his state to better educate state law-makers on proposed gun control legislation. He also said their groups’ biggest problem was how the police will enforce the proposed new laws (which include a firearms registration and ban scheme, an elimination of private firearm sales among law-abiding citizens, and other measures) with a shortage of enforcement resources.
Their problem would be solved if they worked in concert with law-abiding gun owners to defeat bad legislation BEFORE it becomes law. Eliminate the LEO exemptions and suddenly cops have tangible skin in the game — their private firearms collections — and additional incentive to actively and publicly oppose flawed legislation.
The FOP representative went on to say a large majority of FOP members support the Second Amendment and don’t want to see law-abiding citizens punished.
When will the national FOP, its state organizations, and the local police union lodges publicly speak out to reflect the majority views of their members? When will they follow the courageous, principled, rational, and public stand taken by many of the nation’s sheriffs? The time is now. Stand with us!
Police chiefs and sheriffs should publicly speak out against bad legislation and defend the free exercise of Second Amendment civil liberties by lawful, gun-owning Americans. The police chiefs and sheriffs must ensure their respective associations reflect those views during the national, state, and local policy making processes, and refuse to be bought off with exemptions.
Perhaps most importantly, it’s time for rank and file and retired LEOs to insist their department leadership, union, and other political representatives reflect the rank and file’s majority views—even if it means giving up their exemptions. The time has passed to look on and do nothing. Stand on principle.
With law enforcement’s thoughtful, articulate and public backing we can avert the years of lengthy and expensive legal battles necessary to overturn bad legislation. We will also ensure all citizens enjoy equal protection under the law without carve outs for the politically clever and well-connected.
Most importantly, we will compel law-makers to focus their energies on effective public policy rather on emotionally charged, counterproductive, and tired schemes targeted at compliance-oriented and honest Americans. Law enforcement: Stand with us!
Any law enforcement officers ( s ) that will enforce unconstitutional laws are not legitimate officers and should be removed or ignored. Anyone called up to serve on juries and sit in on a case that is based on an unconstitutional law should rule not guilty.
Hear, hear!
Remember back when America had three branches of government? Checks and balance and all that.
While we’re at it, my list of unconstitutional law enforcement transgressions is a long one. Get ready for a perfect interpretation of the constitution that black, white, and of course wrong.
Its kinda hard to ignore them when they swarm you with guns pointed in your face while barking orders.
On that score, note that the 4th Circuit just denied qualified immunity to a cop who shot a suspect in a “no knock” raid:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191108/07260243346/appeals-court-denies-qualified-immunity-to-cop-who-argued-citizens-have-no-right-to-defend-themselves-against-armed-intruders.shtml
It’s a rare case (the standard for denying qualified immunity is quite high), but at least the courts got it right for once. (Best way to clean up the problems with bad cops — eliminate the judge-made doctrine of qualified immunity.)
To be sure, there are good and ethical law enforcement officers out there (and I have worked with some of them). But there are also clowns like this who have zero respect for anyone’s rights but their own, and are more than willing to lie to courts to try and cover up their own malfeasance or incompetence. The fact the the police unions are more interested in protecting these clowns than ridding the forces of such bad apples doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence that they are going to be our allies.
“But there are also clowns like this who have zero respect for anyone’s rights but their own, and are more than willing to lie to courts to try and cover up their own malfeasance or incompetence.”
The referenced article is interesting, to say the least :
“Appeals Court Denies Qualified Immunity To Cop Who Argued Citizens Have No Right To Defend Themselves Against Armed Intruders”
I’m having a real hard time wrapping my head around that argument…
Agreed! Those who break the oath are our enemies.
Guys, I did for nearly 25 years. I would not violate the Constitution. Every time I served an injunction I asked if someone could take possession of any firearms rather than take them myself. All of the deputies I worked with were pro-2nd amendment. Maybe it’s just a Southern thing.
It might be a central America or Southern thing. Coastal and city cops are usually trigger happy military wannabes.
“I asked if someone could take possession of any firearms rather than take them myself”
So you asked if they would voluntarily give up their civil rights, and if they didn’t jump at that then you would violate the constitution anyway. If you think you sound pro-2A … good grief.
I understand the argument of following constitutional law. But keep in mind that law enforcement is there to enforce the law (no matter how draconian and against the constitution) not interpret the law (that’s the judicial branch of govt).
These men and women are just doing their jobs and trying to make a living like the rest of us. Sometimes our bosses tell us to do something stupid, we can either do it or quit. If the law-makers pass a law then the law enforcers have to do it or quit.
“I understand the argument of following constitutional law.”
If you say “Do it or quit.”, then you don’t understand.
If “their bosses” are ordering them to do something unconstitutional then they are obligated by their oath to disobey those orders and arrest said bosses if they insist.
We, as citizens, are not slaves to judical interpretation of our civil liberties but enforcers upon all branches should it become necessary.
This reasoning is why the Nuremberg trials were necessary.
Love it! “I was just following orders.”
Followed by quite a few hangings. Maybe it’ll take a few in Cali or Ny for people to be reminded.
Exactly! (We don’t want to lose our pensions, do we?) Civilians are just peasants, anyway.
Forp,
I imagine that you meant well. Unfortunately, you are mistaken. Law enforcement is among us to preserve our society and our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. Saying it another way, law enforcement is here to uphold our inherent human dignity and remove evil-doers among us who endeavor to violate our inherent human dignity.
Sadly, some of those evil-doers among us who endeavor to violate our inherent human dignity are government politicians or government bureaucrats. Thus, law enforcement personnel are HONOR-BOUND to ignore laws and executive orders which violate our inherent human dignity.
See my comment below where I provide more detail to this concept which focuses on JUSTICE for our society rather than blind law enforcement.
More times than likely, the oath they take is just lip service and this becomes just another job, a means to make a living. Would they risk their lively hood and financial support to their families for some nobody pro gun guy?
I did mean well and thank you for recognizing that. I read your comment below about not following unjust laws and I agree with you.
The problem with someone just saying “we’re not going to follow that because its unjust” is now you get things like sanctuary cities.
Illegal immigrants don’t have the same rights as citizens and it’s clearly laid out in constitutional law. The 2nd amendment is very clear also.
The problem with LEO’s declaring things unjust is where do you draw the line. You could have officers that follow constitutional laws or you could have the opposite (like Ruth Bader Ginsburg).
forp,
The solution to your concern is simple and straight-forward: when in doubt, ALWAYS err on the side of human dignity, life, liberty, and property.
I reject the claim that sanctuary cities are righteous or just. (Illegal aliens have invaded our nation without permission. They are trespassing.) Nevertheless, I would not fault a police officer who refused to arrest a person who “looks Mexican” and does not have a notarized birth certificate from a state in the United States, choosing to err on the side of liberty and human dignity.
There is a foundational principle that is supposed to permeate our criminal justice system: better to let ninety-nine (99) guilty people go free than to imprison one innocent person. That principle draws the line for us. Unless there is clear and compelling evidence that a “suspect” acted with malicious intent or actually harmed someone, law enforcement should NOT arrest such a person. Note that merely having firearms in-and-of-itself is NOT clear and compelling evidence that someone acted with malicious intent or harmed anyone. Thus, police should NEVER arrest someone simply for having firearms. Period. Full stop.
Uncommon Sense, I see what you’re talking about and I agree with your reply. I like your arguments and I’m glad that we could have this discussion.
I feel that discussions like this one usually devolve into name calling and that is no way to get someone to agree with the points you are trying to make.
forp,
I am glad to share what I believe are good, righteous, and just perspectives.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for being willing to listen and learn!
Biggest gang in America, an occupational force comprised of criminals and oath breakers.
– a retired grunt who turned down being a cop because of the rampant corruption.
Right on! And we have a movement that’s been fighting police corruption since the 60s that you can join. It’s time to wake up to the left and embrace us liberals. Vote for the DNC nominee next year and give us control of Congress and we’ll curtail the police for you. Think: No more Border patrol, no more ice, the closing down of most prisons, federal curtailment of police authority. It’s time we had a democrat in office.
Yeah, the group is called ANTIFA, and the plan they have a hard on for is called SOCIALISM.
GAFC moron, spew this garbage elsewhere (Venezuela anyone?).
Oh, and Kapernick is a clueless a’hole, just like you.
James Campbell,
I believe the person posting as “Kapernick is a hero” is a first class satirist. I am 98% confident that his post scores a rock solid 1000% on the sarcasm scale.
The po-leece are not your friend. Most would throw you under the bus if it threatened his/her pension and overtime. I am my own FIRST RESPONDER…
Good luck with that.
Yeah.
We cannot, as citizens, be cowards.
This kind of thing takes planning, both for legal defense and for home defense.
When/IF they come for my firearms unannounced ANY time of the day or night, they will probably get them and me. BUT everybody will not be going home safe and sound that day. I will get some of them. I will NOT permit civil authorities appointed by Anti-American Socialists to violate my Constitutional Rights.
Simply: I would rather die like a lion than live like a cur.
Well Arc, who is YOUR “first responder”?
By the ACTUAL definition of the words, EVERY person and the people around them at the moment of an incident are the “first responders”.
Don’t believe the lefts redefinition of terms, people called to address a situation are HARDLY first to respond in a crisis.
Only sheeple refer to Police/Paramedics/Firemen as “first responders”.
I witnessed the “stand down” situation in Baltimore, who do you think had to “respond first” to the rioters, thugs, firestarters and carjackers?
James Campbell,
I use the label “professional responders” for police, firefighters, and emergency medical services. As you and many others have aptly stated, WE (meaning all of us) are the true first responders.
Many large city police chiefs are elected or appointed by the city administration. In either case they are politicians or report to politicians and their job depends on “doing what they are told”. Those politicians tend to be “progressives” so their policies tend toward a gun control agenda.
Individual LOE are probably majority 2A supporters but they have little to no influence on the Chief. The police union could help but union leaders tend to be progressives. I don’t know how that works in police unions.
I think this idea could work fairly well in small towns and flyover counties across the country, even New York, and California. It should be tried in those places.
“Law enforcement officers’ (LEOs) and retired LEOs’ privately owned firearms were exempt. That’s worth repeating: cops’ and retired cops’ personally owned gun collections were exempt from the ban.”
****
Welcome to the California experience. This has been the state of our own gun control laws for many moons now. LEOs are nearly always exempted, which creates a de facto second class of citizenry (non-sworn citizens), a violation of the 14th Amendment.
From the Connecticut State Constitution-
ARTICLE FIRST.
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established,
WE DECLARE:
SEC. 1. All men when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.
Yet Police and Military have carve outs under Connecticut’s Gun Control laws.
What’s the best case scenario for LE? No one has a gun except them, (and their political bosses).
LEO get carve out and exceptions because they work for the douches who want to be our masters. That’s a feature not a bug.
But all the kow tow they muster won’t change the community dynamics and cops have lives outside of their jobs. They have to face the same people they will be disarming.
The left is going to need an army of ED209 robots .
It is time for law enforcement officers to effect JUSTICE.
Laws which violate the United States Constitution are UNJUST.
Laws which violate state constitutions are UNJUST.
Laws which sanction people who have no malicious intentions are UNJUST.
Laws which sanction people who have not harmed anyone are UNJUST.
Laws which sanction people for having effective self-defense arms are UNJUST.
Law enforcement officers should NOT enforce UNJUST laws.
Law enforcement officers who DO enforce UNJUST laws are a destructive force to our society and our lives, are therefore enemies of society, and should be treated accordingly.
U_C,
Inspiring bill of un-justice. Nicely done!
Ask LEO to give up their privileged status and to lower themselves to the plebeian level?
What drugs are you talking?
They no longer consider themselves civilian, OED even changed the definition of civilian to exclude LEOs. They believe that 2A does not apply to civilians and would feel safer seeing everyone but themselves disarmed.
Well, except a few Fudd LEOs like my former father-in-law, who would make hunting rifles ok.
Yup, elitism at its finest. Anyone who supports police is a pro government bootlicker.
Exactly it’s high time we call for a nationwide ban on all police, jails, and prisons.
Actually, Nationwide Full Independent Civilian Review Boards for accountability!
A public “BAN” on ALL Police Unions. (Re: THEY are responsible for helping through innocent citizens under the bus 🚌! Help gun control agendas! Help circumvent the U.S. Constitution…Help Authoritarian politics to secure long term jobs…Etc…)
I’ve always been curious to see how far boot lickers will go. I imagine it’s simply a matter of path of least resistance and in blue places where gun owners are already a disenfranchised minority the doors will be kicked with impunity while in more red areas caution will win the day. In the end what happens to you and I is directly correlated to how much they think they can get away with relatively unscathed. It’s a delicate balance between making that early retirement and not getting ventilated at the doorway while LARPing as a commando.
Don’t forget they have been tooling up with military grade gear for years. APC’s what do they need that for? Oh right, to bulldoze through your front door when you refuse to open up. Law enforcement is no friend of the 2A community, they serve those who issue their paychecks.
Then you should be proud of Obama as he issued an executive order in 2014 that cancelled the issuing of surplus military hardware to the police.
Never fear, Emperor Trump has re-ignited the program, the military industrial complex wants the business.
After all, with the war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan winding down, they need to replace those profits so they can buy more senators and representatives.
Fk the police…. most are badge thugs…. trust me, they AREN’T on your side…. and the majority will NEVER be on the citizens side….
Use you brain and THINK…… DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE SOMEONE WHO GETS PAID TO TAKE AWAY YOUR RIGHTS IS GOING TO JEOPARDIZE THAT POSITION FOR SOME REDNECK WITH A GUN?
C’MON PEOPLE, THINK….. USE YOUR GD HEAD FOR ONCE…
OH YEAH, AND TO WHOEVER MODERATES THIS SITE…… JUST BECAUSE I SAY SOMETHING YOU DON’T LIKE DOESN’T MEAN YOU SHOULD BAN ME FROM POSTING…. IT JUST SHOWS ME WHO’S RUNNING THE “TTAG”…..I GUESS IT’S ONLY THE “TRUTH” YOU APPROVE OR DOESN’T HURT YOUR LITTLE MILLENNIAL FEELINGS….
SHAVE THAT RETARDED FACE BEARD, PULL UP YOUR SKINNY JEANS AND ACT LIKE A MAN…… if that’s possible for such mommies boys…. gimme a break
WHAT!?
Georgie always yells after eating his usual dinner of Lucky-Charms-in-a-bowl. His mom doesn’t let him use the oven in the kitchen for safety reasons.
YELL MOAR!
YESSSS!!!! YELLS GIT UR DONE!!!! NO FACE BEARDS!!!
Face beard, eh?
As opposed to an Ass beard maybe?
You’re drunk; go to bed.
WOW!!!
The police are the biggest group of criminals in this country. Don’t think so? Then why won’t the State of California release the names of police that have been convicted of crimes and are still working?
The Sacramento Bee just opened a searchable data base with the names and info if these guys. Surprising since the Bee is a notorious left wing rag.
The cops are not your friend. They will goose step to the music to keep their pensions and protected civil status. After all, they can beat their wives and still keep their guns.
Wake up before it’s too late.
Yeah. I’d would be much happier a gang, cartel, or mafia controlling the area I live in as well. I see handing over your wife and kids for their leaders to use at their whim a small price to pay to not have to deal with cops.
You sound just like a socialist.
Cops are just enforcers for the gang in power.
You may as well plead with Democrats and gangbangers to stand with gun owners. Listen, you are your own first responder. You are solely responsible for your own defense and the defense of your family and neighbors. You do not need to rely on the King’s men and army. If you can read this and operate a set of fingers to respond to this comment then congratulations, you have been bestowed by God with reason and the ability to aid yourself and others.
When King Louie the 14th modernized the French army, he had all of the cannons melted down and recast into a finite number of standard sizes. Into each of these new cannons was cast a latin phrase, “Ultima Ratio Regum”. “The Ultimate Argument of Kings”. And it it quite possibly the single most honest and straightforward thing that has ever been said by a politician. “You can pretty it up all you want, you can couch it in polite euphemisms and justifications, but at the end of the day, you will do what they want or they will send their goons to kill you.”
It has been shown in multiple court cases, Warren vs DC, Castle Rock vs Gonzales, et al, that the police have no obligation to provide services to the citizenry under the public duty doctrine, meaning that the sole remaining purpose of the police in the United States is to force the will of the state on the people. And if that includes forcible civilian disarmament, then the police will be the ones to make it so.
There are good people out there who are cops. There are departments out there that do good work. I’m not denying that. Such examples should be embraced and the values and cultures that enable them as such should be fostered wherever doing so is feasible. However, you should not expect and cannot rely on as a primary strategy those exceptions to the rule. The vast majority of them will cover the asses of themselves, their immediate families, and the thin blue line in that order, and they are unlikely, by and large to risk their comfortable existences, their pensions, or their privileged positions as agents of the state for the sake of a group of people (us) they are increasingly incentivized to view as the “other” to their own tribe.
The rank and file police are not against the 2A. In some “Police Only” forums there has been a lot of discussion about choosing to not comply with firearms confiscation orders, that you will simply never be allowed to read. An a priori declaration of non-compliance prematurely jeopardizes their jobs. Hey, they got families to feed too. Most cops work for agencies that specifically prohibit them from engaging in any political activity while identifying themselves as agency employees. But the support is there even if it isn’t vocal.
In addition, As long as forums like this are populated by cop-hating bozo’s, whiner’s, trolls, and basement dwelling keyboard commandos, (like some of those commenting above), it is unlikely that any real progress will be made. Why should cops stick their neck out or put their careers on the line for people who refer to them as “badge thugs” or call them “the biggest group of criminals in the country”. Anyone can be their own “1st responder” and the only difference is how effective it might be. There is nothing special about you at all. Try being someone else’s 1st responder and see how well you do.
TTAG for some reason has always been a hot bed of cop hate.
I’m not a cop hater, but just as you can’t broad generalize cops and say they are thugs, you also can’t say broadly say they are 2A supporters.
For example, my local Utah police officers are pro 2A, the police I grew up around in Brooklyn were definitely not. Each local has a different culture, and it breeds different mindsets, the United States this ain’t.
“Because THEY have families to feed….” I believe that excuse was used at the ” Nuremberg trials (re: Nazis…see world history)
Well, because they are sworn law officials. If they won’t risk their jobs by being an American patriot why expect them to risk their lives to help you when you call 9-1-1?
You are not being honest. Cops think about themselves then their family. They don’t care about you, they don’t even know you exist. It’s survival first, the good life second. Being a freedom fighter only leads to you being labeled a terrorist and executed as such. Very few cops would do the right thing when that thing will get their family harmed. Same applies to these NRA patriots that say they will not comply and rather die.
American police are no different than any other countries’ police. What makes you think Americans are so special and would never act like all the other police forces in the world? American police don’t even know the Bill of Rights nor care to. Test your local cops to find out just how serious they take their oath by asking them to recite an amendment.
Let’s not forget how American cops treated people who were not white just a few decades ago. Only white men can act as if the cops have always been awesome charming respectful gentlemen.
Where I am, we know each other, we know our families. Deputies and nearby police alike. Some state patrol also. That pounding on my door in the middle of the night means a bull got out. They all know I’m strapped for business, it’s not a thing, it’s just normal.
As long as these pro-2A police officers only discuss their support for 2A (and equal protection?) in private internet forums, but remaining publicly silent while vociferously reaping the benefit of unconstitutional LEOSA and state/local LEO carveouts, they only compound the problem.
LEOSA is an unconstitutional violation of equal protection on its face, yet precious few LEO are willing to speak out against it.
Why is that?
Why is that?
One, it is a matter of principle, in that lack of LEO speaking out against unequal protection under the law only serves to reinforce the dangerous, growing concept of viewing LEO as something more-than the people they ostensibly serve and protect. (See also: the now-common use of civilian to differentiate between non-LEO and LEO citizens.)
Two, lack of LEO support is one of the primary reasons that pro-2A legislation dies in otherwise Republican/right-wing controlled state legislatures. I can speak from personal experience, working to get constitutional carry passed in Indiana.
Fat Chance in The People’s Republic of M Assachusetts…The (local/city/staties) are becoming the new 21st century STASI…See 84 yr old who’s firearms, LTC license, property, job, etc were taken from him through Heresay . Created by a waitress at diner who was eavesdropping on private political conversation, and town police chief who acted on it by using the “Red Flag Law…”Since of course, it was criticism the Town Police school resource officer at the school….Regarding school shootings in general…So, NO…If the citizenry is lucky….Maybe 40 to 50% might, half-heartedly speak out about our constitutional rights…But politics, Carve outs, and propaganda are interfering with Liberty Justice and freedom….
Wasn’t the crossing guard former police? Guess supporting the LE Brotherhood is selective.
I dont get lumping all police into one group to rally against. I’m my neck of the woods, there’s a difference in 2A support between County Sherrifs and the city PD.
C’mon, man. We have the best police that money can buy.
Hope everyone here plans to vote 2020. NOT like Kentucky voters that helped voted another Demo Authoritarian into power……
Do you really believe 856,578 people came out to vote for a republican treasurer yet only 707,297 of them chose to vote for a republican governor in Kentucky?
The key to getting police support is to reach out to officer associations or unions at local police departments. I can only speak from my experience as a LEO in Texas, but the overwhelming majority of rank-and-file officers are pro 2A. Police chief’s are hired by city councils, and their political views will almost always reflect those of the council. The more “progressive” the city, the more likely the chief will support 2A restrictions. Unfortunately, the higher-ups at many “national” police associations are just as political as chiefs, and often make official statements that do not necessarily reflect the opinions of their members. Local police associations are under less outside pressure and are free to speak their minds. I think many pro 2A groups would find a great deal of support from LEO’s if they stopped asking only big-city chiefs and national police organizations.
A civil society must have police. It’s just a fact. The Left-wing, the Right-wing, and the Libertarians, all fantasize about a world without cops.
Human nature will prevent that from ever happening. We will always have predators.
You are and have always been on your own. A cop, good or bad, is only minutes away when seconds count.
I like the cops where I live. I have called them several times to take care of the “trash” in the neighborhood. And when the police arrive I always greet them openly carrying my holstered pistol. So I know the entire department knows this law abiding citizen has guns and is not afraid to show them.
We shake hands. Talk and they take out the “trash”.
Your post echoes mine above about when we know each other as a community.
Besides getting to know your neighbors everyone needs to get to know their local police.
In the past I have donated to police charities. The cops need help too.
“The Left-wing, the Right-wing, and the Libertarians, all fantasize about a world without cops.”
I fantasize about a world without bad cops and cop unions.
You may say I’m a dreamer . . . .
There is nothing wrong with having a dream.
Cops are people who do a job, not a voting block. An NYPD cop is likely to have different views on gun control (and lots of other things) than an Alaskan trooper. Even in one state, MD, you have cops in Baltimore who probably skew a lot different on politics than that MD sheriff pictured above who is very pro-2nd and was elected in a rural district.
But either way, departments are not democracies. The boss makes the rules. That’s why sometimes you’ll see cops having to line up and greet political figures they are disgusted by and appear in photo-ops (sometimes with fingers crossed). The one making the public statements is the chief or sheriff and both get to where they are by making someone happy- either the voting public or the city council (who are also voted in). Anyone who doesn’t like it can go try and find another job. And they will be replaced by someone else who cares less.
As to unions… they are meant to look out for their members’ interests and spend their limited capital doing that, not fighting national political battles. And their membership is much, much less than the gun owning public. Cops make up something like 0.25% of the US population. Meanwhile, the amount of households that contain a gun in the US is somewhere between 25%-50%.
If you can’t get the people who own guns to band together in voting when they’re almost half the population (and you can’t), don’t expect a profession that makes up less than a percent to somehow ride in on a white horse and make things better. Or at least don’t hold your breath.
^This
So you are saying that cops are such moral degenerates that they follow orders they find disgusting so they can keep their bloated paychecks. Good to know.
The number of commentors here speaking the truth about the Thin Blue Line Gang is heartwarming. You’ve made my day. Thank you.
Now, how do we organize ourselves against the bastards? (And what are we waiting for?) They can’t kill us all (not that they won’t try).
I vote you in as the representative to win all of us current or retired LEO’s (back) over…🙄
Pretty easily brother. All we have to do is vote for the democrat nominee who’s likely to finally a real liberal for change. The left has been taking a stand against the police since the 60s. Glad to see so many of you on board. Once we band together to get Trump out of office and the Democrats a majority in Congress we’ll all see some real change in the police.
You can go straight to hell. The democratic party is the true enemy to freedom and liberty. They are the party that have passed every single last unconstitutional federal gun control bill.
You need to go back and look at the votes. As a percentage of voting members, the Republicans had more votes for the GCA 1968 than the Democrats did. Baby Bush said he would have signed a renewal of the AWB if one had been put on his desk. Republicans and Democrats are both big government progressives, only thing is the Republicans started out that way, the Democrats at least stood for Americans until the regime of Wilson.
“Pretty easily brother”
You have no brothers here on TTAG.
The “cure” you expound is worse then the disease.
Example; decapitation to treat a hangnail.
It seems people on this blog hate the police as much as any gangbanger or liberal would. That should do wonders in advancing the cause of gun rights. As does stupid little articles like this meant to inflame little people. You complain about the police, but don’t spend any effort to turn out the vote of those you think are on your side. Actually, all you do is just complain. Sounds like someone got a speeding ticket from the boogeyman.
“Vote” and “on our side”. That is high comedy. If voting worked we would not be allowed to do it. Your choices are big government progressive on the left side of the coin or big government progressive on the right side of the coin. They are not on the side of the citizens.
Let’s not forget about organizations that do take their oaths seriously, like Oath Keepers for instance:
https://oathkeepers.org
Any man of such degenerate character and deficient morals that he become a LEO in the first place will not stand with right. They will put their power and pensions before what is right and just. They already do it every day of the week, why would they change.
I do not stand with “law enforcement”.
Many of them recognize that gun control laws target the law-abiding in practice, even though they are advertised as a tool against the street thug and the gangbanger.
Sadly, this is not recogniozed by the leadership of the Chicago PD, NOPD, NYPD, and LAPD.
LOL
My paycheck matters Chief Wiggums? Nah- it’s all diversity hire blacks, Wah-myns, and other undesirables.
Ever see a chief of police that was a white Christian? Lol. No.
Funny how the regressive left redefines terms, “reverse racism” became “diversity hire” when they started to hire/promote on things OTHER then qualifications and previous job performance.
I have always wondered what makes a man want to be a LEO. The pay isn’t great, considering the risk. Could it be authority issues? Power trip? Were they bullied as a kid? Vet MPs who are too lazy to change career paths? This would be the first question I would ask a job applicant, knowing full well that the response would most often be just a line of crap about serving the community, etc.
I suspect that the majority of LEOs are in it for the wrong reason(s).
Some people, probably like yourself, are or were content to live out their lives doing the same repetitious inconsequential crap every day for a paycheck. Drive nails, plunge toilets, sell crap people don’t need, whatever it is that floats your boat, just paddle away skippy.
Cops hardly ever have to days in a row that are the same. They like a job where their decisions matter and most look upon law enforcement as a calling rather than a job. They won’t get too upset if you can’t understand that, because THEY get that your values are different. Just like you couldn’t imagine being a cop, they couldn’t imagine anything else. If cops were as bad as some of the idiots here seem to think they are, the idiots wouldn’t even be safe in their mom’s basements.
Or they could just be too stupid to do anything else and they like to bully people.
I don’t believe any of the ten most dangerous jobs pay better than LE, so how is the pay not great compared to the risk?
Everything you say can and will be used AGAINST you. Thats all I need to know when talking at a law encroachment officer
So many words, so, much bullshit. Better written laws, how much better can you get than, “shall not be infringed upon.” I kept reading this guy wanting to compromise in every paragraph. We need that like submarines need screen doors. Idiots.
https://www.jbs.org/lecf/
I endorse the “Support Your Local Police Campaign” courtesy of The John Birch Society in Appleton, Wisconsin at http://www.jbs.org and http://www.thenewamerican.com, respectively. We must keep local law enforcement independent and apart from federal intervention, Washington, D.C. political corruption, and federal funding which threatens local control and autonomy.
I have said this for thirty years. “The exemptions must stop. We are all equal citizens and should remain so under the law. No law enforcement gun registration or ban exemptions.”
Every pro-gun organization must start trying to get rid of these exemptions.
ALL local/state/federal/secret service (L/S/F/SS) LE should be required to check their government issued firearm, and other less that lethal self defense equipment, into an armory at the end of their shift just as US military LE do everyday around the world. If we are equal, we are equal, PERIOD.
If L/S/F/SS LE want to own, or carry firearms off duty they should have to go through ALL the hoops that the rest of us pesky citizens have to.
Further more, if the AR 15 is a weapon of war, then no civilian police force should be using it, and police departments should be regulated to use only firearms that the regular citizens can possess and use.
Not one of the democratic presidential candidates has mentioned any thing about stopping militarization of the civilian police force, or doing away with the firearms exemptions they give to civilians police forces.
It is time to end all firearm exemptions for civilian police departments.
Back in 2013 PoliceOne conducted a comprehensive survey of police officers on the topic of gun control. (PoliceOne’s Gun Policy & Law Enforcement survey) every respondent was a verified active or former/retired law enforcement officer. The sample size was enormous, over 15,000 participants. This is pretty large considering that anti-gun studies usually use between 1200 and 2000 participants to reach conclusions about a population of over 300,000,000 people. The total number of active and former/retired law enforcement officers is probably under 2,000,000. So as I said, the sample size is enormous by today’s standards.
Look it up and read it if you want to know how cops feel about the 2A.
Ed could have looked it up for you, like I did.
I found the support of unqualified concealed carry by nonfelons surprising (and support of mandatory training for a license to purchase disappointing):
https://media.cdn.lexipol.com/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf
The same exemptions apply to LEOs in NY – totally exempt from the SAFE Act. Their compliance was purchased by the politicians. They knew what they were doing.
Make no mistake about it – those LEO’s you blindly boot-lick with your Thin Blue Line bumper stickers are the same jack-booted thugs who will confiscate your firearms despite your Don’t Tread On Me bumper stickers.
Well, I think it all depends on which area of the country you’re in. You can just watch a few episodes of Live PD to see distinct differences between the attitudes of LEO’s in the northeast versus pretty much the rest of the country. I generally like the attitudes of the sheriff’s deputies the most, not too surprising since their bosses are elected, rather than appointed. I will say this, the new left that’s taking over the democratic party is no friend of theirs, so they face about as stark of a choice as we do when it’s time to enter the voting booth.
Killed the guy in Maryland for rad flag law bs, Houston murder and coverup of informant named “drug dealers”, shot those people through doors and windows, Philando Castile, and many many many more, some listed here —– https://waronguns.blogspot.com/ ; http://www.captainsjournal.com/ ; https://www.copblock.org/ ; some on this very site ;
huge numbers of videos on youtube,
not to mention the rest of the “civil servants” who rule over us — https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjxWoDc8Hhb_TvDjvnbFGwg ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8oCPtxvSvw
A peace officer who disobeys an unjust or unconstitutional law is not breaking the law, he/she is upholding the law. And the line officer MUST make the decision right there on the street whether the law is Constitutional or not. We can’t wait to chat with the judge. That’s a big order for a cop, but it comes with the territory. If you can’t handle it, try another profession. Here’s a group of law enforcement professionals who stands firmly with the citizen and honors our sacred oath:
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) cspoa.org. Join us, whether you are an LEO or a private citizen or elected official. Go to the website and check out our 2014 Resolution, our Statement of Positions, and our recent Convention in Mesa AZ last month. I’m the Executive VP and Legislative Liaison.
Comments are closed.