Gun control is coming

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
If you’re speaking about me you haven’t read all my posts in this thread.

I specifically stated that all the talk of confiscation is just that. All discussion of confiscation does is drum up the base, and sell more firearms.
that's part of what you said...the rest of what you said was that many communities would refuse to comply with the law, that your own sheriff would turn against the government, against the law that he is sworn to uphold, and side with people committing a criminal act...
i was simply trying to point out that you may be surprised about law enforcements attitude about enforcing the law, and that openly breaking that law sets people up for the exact kind of horror story that has people dying, and their guns being pried from their cold dead fingers.
I didn't once suggest that that was inevitable, or even likely, i was just trying to point out how juvenile and ridiculous your response was.
 

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
Most cops support the 2nd amendment. Haven't you Democrats pissed off the cops enough already?
I would suggest that most police officers also support reasonable gun control measures as well.

Most cops also support shooting and beating innocent people. Let’s not use a cop’s judgment
I would suggest that most police officers do NOT support shooting and beating innocent people.


Police should have the same input on gun control measures as any other citizen has; police are not there to create laws, they are to enforce them as written rather than all William Nilliam.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I would suggest that most police officers also support reasonable gun control measures as well.


I would suggest that most police officers do NOT support shooting and beating innocent people.


Police should have the same input on gun control measures as any other citizen has; police are not there to create laws, they are to enforce them as written rather than all William Nilliam.
The police chiefs would rather the rest of the civilians not be armed at all. This is a prime reason I believe that gun restrictions applied to civilians should apply to all civilians, perhaps especially the ones with uniforms and pseudomilitary ranks.

California has some pretty strict gun laws. Law enforcement is exempt from many of them. I find that corrupt.

On the other thing, most is not good enough as long as the policy of loyalty ahead of integrity is effectively, though unofficially, enforced. As organizations, they are doing it wrong, and a bit of across-the-board consequence is past due.

Why there is not a Federal mandate to be cammed up every second they are on duty
suggests to me that the police unions are exercising too much power in this instance.

The police have some squandered public trust to earn back. I hope they are induced to take that fact seriously.
 
I'm the staunchest supporter of the 2nd ammendment you'll ever come across.

There is no reason on this earth for the average American to have access to military grade assault weapons.

There never was, there isn't and there never will be.
I’m leaning towards legalizing rpg’s , bare minimum!
I mean, theirs no need for het fighters, tanks, submarines etc!!!…. Except-
You need them to defend big areas from attacking butt holes!!!
So-……
I need an assault rifle to defend myself, for the same reason as the big guy! I can’t tell you how many are in the frontal assault or flanking positions.. when I’m attacked by any GANG. Could be M13…
Could be the FBI! Oh- that’s right… the FBI hired whiteybulger to kill people for them., under the stupidest cover story ever-“ to take down the Italian mob”lol!!!

crime… it’s the reason for war, power,and betrayal!
 

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
The police chiefs would rather the rest of the civilians not be armed at all. This is a prime reason I believe that gun restrictions applied to civilians should apply to all civilians, perhaps especially the ones with uniforms and pseudomilitary ranks.

California has some pretty strict gun laws. Law enforcement is exempt from many of them. I find that corrupt.

On the other thing, most is not good enough as long as the policy of loyalty ahead of integrity is effectively, though unofficially, enforced. As organizations, they are doing it wrong, and a bit of across-the-board consequence is past due.

Why there is not a Federal mandate to be cammed up every second they are on duty
suggests to me that the police unions are exercising too much power in this instance.

The police have some squandered public trust to earn back. I hope they are induced to take that fact seriously.
If people would just obey the officers commands most police brutality shit would never happen. 99% of the time people are resisting when shit turns ugly. They have a dangerous job. I think most cops are good, but if they have to deal with a lot of assholes all the time they're bound to become less nice. You can see it happen in cities as they get drastically bigger and people get ruder. Well the cops do to. There are power hungry assholes though too, but I think most join to help people. They see the bad side of people too often and this negative attitude towards cops is just making everything worse.
 

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
If people would just obey the officers commands most police brutality shit would never happen. 99% of the time people are resisting when shit turns ugly. They have a dangerous job. I think most cops are good, but if they have to deal with a lot of assholes all the time they're bound to become less nice. You can see it happen in cities as they get drastically bigger and people get ruder. Well the cops do to. There are power hungry assholes though too, but I think most join to help people. They see the bad side of people too often and this negative attitude towards cops is just making everything worse.
To the bolded, just NO. Terrible take, especially with all that has been in the news over the past couple of years.
 

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
I'm the staunchest supporter of the 2nd ammendment you'll ever come across.

There is no reason on this earth for the average American to have access to military grade assault weapons.

There never was, there isn't and there never will be.
What military grade assault weapons do the Average Americans have, :wall:?
 

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member
I’m leaning towards legalizing rpg’s , bare minimum!
I mean, theirs no need for het fighters, tanks, submarines etc!!!…. Except-
You need them to defend big areas from attacking butt holes!!!
So-……
I need an assault rifle to defend myself, for the same reason as the big guy! I can’t tell you how many are in the frontal assault or flanking positions.. when I’m attacked by any GANG. Could be M13…
Could be the FBI! Oh- that’s right… the FBI hired whiteybulger to kill people for them., under the stupidest cover story ever-“ to take down the Italian mob”lol!!!

crime… it’s the reason for war, power,and betrayal!
It's crazy, but you can already legally own one with proper registration, depending on state and local laws.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
At its heart gun control is bad because it perpetuates a government monopoly on violence. In any society the stronger or more armed group will always oppress the more vulnerable class.

There also needs to be an in the moment legal defense for violence to be used against police violating the law. Ie if you were there watching police choke someone to death, you should be allowed to protect that person.
to the bolded: sorry, no. That is something libertarians say.

To the underlined, yes.
 

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
ARs, AKs etc. They aren’t military-configuration (no full-auto) but they are military-grade. Devil’s in the details.

Then there are the pistols.
They're NOT military grade. The military version has a whole different receiver. I know how you guys like to twist the meaning of things though. You even got some of your Government controlled media to change the definition in some cases.
 
Top