Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Why should police be exempt from bans, mag limitations?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    Why should police be exempt from bans, mag limitations?

    Gun owners wonder why police should get special treatment

    Police in New York are having fits about suddenly being penalized by a hastily-written gun law, and they have company in Washington State, where a new policy banning firearms carried by off-duty law enforcement officers has been enacted at CenturyLink Field.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-...id=db_articles

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    This may be a good opening to ask Century Link to provide lock boxes for law abiding citizens who wish to carry to and from the game.
    Live Free or Die!

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Workman View Post
    Gun owners wonder why police should get special treatment
    And they should .. police are civilians and expressly prohibited fro defending our country from invaders by our constitution.

    We face the same criminals they do .. and first for the most part.

    If 1 bullet is OK for us -- its OK for them.

    Do I care that cops might be killed because of this viewpoint? No ... they don't care about us ~~ only a small minority of cops on the east coast have said "I will not arrest anyone for these stupid laws!"
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 01-18-2013 at 07:15 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Edge of the woods
    Posts
    112
    I have a friend that was calling an AR15 and 30 round mag "a weapon of war that's only purpose is to kill the most people in a little time" why she thought her police officer husband should be exempt from a ban. Was the police force intending to kill a lot of people in a short time? I'm still waiting a a coherent answer.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Lante's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Kingston, Washington, USA
    Posts
    122
    If these gun and magazine bans are to make everyone safer....
    If lawmakers want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals....
    If we admit that a large number of criminals steal the guns they use in crimes....


    ...then there should be no exceptions to the bans for any group of people...


    ...because we have several examples of police officers having their guns stolen from their cars, homes etc. (many examples here is one http://www.msnewsnow.com/story/13873...tolen-from-car)

    ...because we have examples of secret service members leaving their guns unattended in bathrooms (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...lane-lavatory/)

    ....because there are many recorded incidents of FBI officers loosing or having their service guns stolen (http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/F...Appendix_2.pdf)

    ...because the Department of Homeland Security lost 180 weapons in 2 years, due to failure to safeguard their weapons (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/...uns/index.html)


    I would propose that what is good for the goose is good for the gander and every gun or ammo or magazine ban should include all law enforcement and government agencies. Maybe the pro ban folks who enjoy their protective detail having effective guns with large capacity magazines might think twice if enacting a ban affects them also.

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Watch out Dave the apologist might start calling you a confrontational, extremist, anarchist d-bag. ...



    Whether you wear blue or not, we all have to make a choice to fight for liberty for liberties sake, or not........
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 01-18-2013 at 10:54 PM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by dadada View Post
    I have a friend that was calling an AR15 and 30 round mag "a weapon of war that's only purpose is to kill the most people in a little time" why she thought her police officer husband should be exempt from a ban. Was the police force intending to kill a lot of people in a short time? I'm still waiting a a coherent answer.
    She called me ... her answer was "but but but but but.."

  8. #8
    Regular Member Vitaeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    593
    I usually enjoy reading your work Dave, but since I had a popup and an auto start ad that I couldn't stop, I won't be back to examiner.com

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitaeus View Post
    I usually enjoy reading your work Dave, but since I had a popup and an auto start ad that I couldn't stop, I won't be back to examiner.com
    I did see an autostart too but no popup.


    I also re-read the article and noted that the author thought that the inclusion of all is:

    But now a ban on firearms carried by legally-licensed private citizens has been extended to off-duty police. It is wrong, and wrong-headed,

    The author thinks that police are special citizens obviously....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •