Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Brady and law Enforcement

  1. #1
    Regular Member Brimstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Lehi, UT, ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    So I was on the Brady Campaign website this morning and I read this:

    Q. Does Brady work with Law Enforcement?

    Yes! We have worked closely with law enforcement allies for the past 25 years to reduce gun related injuries and deaths in America. Our Law Enforcement Relations (LER) Department works diligently with local, state and federal lawmakers to strengthen existing laws, close loopholes and pass new laws designed to reduce the number of illegal guns on our streets and keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

    When lethal new weapons come on the market, LER issues officer alerts and provide vital information police can use to educate the public and keep communities safer. LER works closely with law enforcement throughout the country, implementing programs to reduce gun violence in schools and communities.
    This made me think. Why does Brady seek legislation that does not include LEOs? If they ban "assault rifles" then the police shouldn't need them anymore since no one will have them. If they ban handguns then why would LEOs need them? I would think that pepper spray would be enough to subdue an unruly bad guy. I don't understand why they would allow our children to be put at risk by LEOs with firearms when they would no longer be necessary.

    Is it that LEOs are better than the American public? Are they more safety concious than us? As a percentage, you are much more likely to be accidentally shot by a LEO than a neighbor (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoD-P...eature=related ). In Utah we had a LEO leave his M4 on the ground in front of someone's home and it was later found by the homeowner ( http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum52/18718.html ).

    If LEOs need a firearm for protection, then so do I. Why is this so difficult to understand? Unless we are creating a society where one life is worth more than another, this should be obvious.
    Fear causes hesitation; hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true.
    - The Bodasafa

    www.mp-pistol.com

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    Brimstone wrote:
    Why is this so difficult to understand?
    Im just going to say it straight out... the brady fa****s are by far the most retarded group of hippies iv ever come across. I got into a debate once about guns with a brady member, same ol "guns are bad" BS. But what i found funny was when he mentioned how "guns are used to kill our police officers who are there to protect us" which i countered with "armed citizens can help" but the convo pretty much ended after that. Anways, next time i saw him he was bitchin about how he just got out of jail so curiously i ask why, he tells me that "some f***ing pig" arrested him for having 2 MDMA pills on him. Of course when he said that all his friends have to chime in "why dont these pigs actually go catch criminals and stop harrasing teenagers." So it went from "our poor cops" to "those f-ing pigs" in a matter of weeks. Damn hippies will bitch about what ever is in the moment and not think twice about why they are doing it because thats what someone else is doing, so they must follow those they can relate too. Its kinda sad to think about how many people there are in this world that cant think for themselves and are going no where in life because thats what "everyone else is doing"

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Brimstone wrote:
    SNIP This made me think. Why does Brady seek legislation that does not include LEOs? If they ban "assault rifles" then the police shouldn't need them anymore since no one will have them. If they ban handguns then why would LEOs need them? I would think that pepper spray would be enough to subdue an unruly bad guy. I don't understand why they would allow our children to be put at risk by LEOs with firearms when they would no longer be necessary.
    You've found an exploitable hole in Brady's lies.

    I'm sure others have noticed it already, but I can't seem to recall seeing it used before. Certainly, I've never thought of it.

    Basically, its an almost open admission that gun control doesn't work. If you still wantto arm the cops, it automatically says the bad guys are not giving up their guns.

    You could almost make a press release out of it:

    BRADY CAMPAIGN ADMITS GUN CONTROL DOESN'T WORK

    The Brady Campaign recently confessed to working closely with police on safety issues, admitting that police should be armed with so-called assault rifles and so-called high-capacity handguns. All in a clear concession that criminals will not be turning in their firearms or foregoing the use of guns, even if Brady's legislative plans are achieved.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Brimstone wrote:
    So I was on the Brady Campaign website this morning and I read this:

    Q. Does Brady work with Law Enforcement?

    Yes! We have worked closely with law enforcement allies for the past 25 years to reduce gun related injuries and deaths in America. Our Law Enforcement Relations (LER) Department works diligently with local, state and federal lawmakers to strengthen existing laws, close loopholes and pass new laws designed to reduce the number of illegal guns on our streets and keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

    When lethal new weapons come on the market, LER issues officer alerts and provide vital information police can use to educate the public and keep communities safer. LER works closely with law enforcement throughout the country, implementing programs to reduce gun violence in schools and communities.
    ...SNIP
    Their LER only works with the top ranking officer corp of the police departments. Most line LEOs do not support the Brady group.

    A while back there was a big uproar because the national Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), donated a chunk of money to the Brady organization. A lot of Line LEOs objected strongly to this use of their dues.

    There are a lot of LEOs that see the "Brady bunch" in very much the same light as members of this forum do.

    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Why would they offend the police forces of America? That doesn't benefit them. Instead they play into the police'sfavorite idea that they are elite by excluding them from bans and restrictions. It's equivalent to giving the LEO's of America head, which assures their undying support of excessive and ridiculous gun control (something that, in itself,already strokes their hard-on for l33t status).



    You can't imagine how this hurts, but you have it right on target.

    Don't forget they need police who will also be on board with enforcing some increasingly tighter laws, so the Brady bunch NEEDS them.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    AWDstylez wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Why would they offend the police forces of America? That doesn't benefit them. Instead they play into the police'sfavorite idea that they are elite by excluding them from bans and restrictions. It's equivalent to giving the LEO's of America head, which assures their undying support of excessive and ridiculous gun control (something that, in itself,already strokes their hard-on for l33t status).



    You can't imagine how this hurts, but you have it right on target.

    Don't forget they need police who will also be on board with enforcing some increasingly tighter laws, so the Brady bunch NEEDS them.


    Are you an officer? My apologies. I understand there are plenty of good cops out there, but IMO there are a lot more bad ones. I'm just being realistic.

    Spend four years in college and they'll let you run a Walmart. Spend six months at the academy and they'll let you run peoples' lives.




    EDIT:

    Oh I get it. It hurts to agree with me, not because you're an officer. I have only this for you... :P

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Spend four years in college and they'll let you run a Walmart. Spend six months at the academy and they'll let you run peoples' lives.


    EDIT:

    Oh I get it. It hurts to agree with me, not because you're an officer. I have only this for you... :P
    Well, were I am I needed the four years in college AND three years in training, and I still don't get to run peoples lives. I do get to help put a few away, but a jury usually makes the final decision, for those that don't plead out.

    Yes that was the source of my pain.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    ...SNIP
    Spend four years in college and they'll let you run a Walmart. Spend six months at the academy and they'll let you run peoples' lives.


    EDIT:

    Oh I get it. It hurts to agree with me, not because you're an officer. I have only this for you... :P
    Well, were I am I needed the four years in college AND three years in training, and I still don't get to run peoples lives. I do get to help put a few away, but a jury usually makes the final decision, for those that don't plead out.

    Yes that was the source of my pain.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    Well, were I am I needed the four years in college AND three years in training, and I still don't get to run peoples lives. I do get to help put a few away, but a jury usually makes the final decision, for those that don't plead out.

    Yes that was the source of my pain.
    That's how it should be. Are you state (highway, or whatever the rest of the country calls it) or town?

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    AWDstylez wrote:
    Hawkflyer wrote:
    Well, were I am I needed the four years in college AND three years in training, and I still don't get to run peoples lives. I do get to help put a few away, but a jury usually makes the final decision, for those that don't plead out.

    Yes that was the source of my pain.
    That's how it should be. Are you state (highway, or whatever the rest of the country calls it) or town?
    No
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  11. #11
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Post imported post

    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    AWDstylez wrote:
    Hawkflyer wrote:
    Well, were I am I needed the four years in college AND three years in training, and I still don't get to run peoples lives. I do get to help put a few away, but a jury usually makes the final decision, for those that don't plead out.

    Yes that was the source of my pain.
    That's how it should be. Are you state (highway, or whatever the rest of the country calls it) or town?
    No


    No to which one or are you not a cop at all?

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,715

    Post imported post

    SFCRetired wrote:
    I've had a lot of good LEOs tell me that, barring immediate assistance from a fellow LEO, the best thing for them is an armed citizen backing them up.

    I, for one, would not hesitate to come to the assistance of a LEO I saw in trouble, drawing and firing if necessary.


    Then thank god you live in Alabama. If I evenexposed my gun near a cop (even one in trouble) I'd be arrested for allegedlytrying to shoot the cop.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    SFCRetired wrote:
    Try this idea: The Brady Bunch and their fellow-travellers are "elitists". The top-level LEOs (Chiefs and such) are usually political appointees and, as such, are also elitists.

    Therefore, you get a mutual support thing going. The beat cop generally doesn't have this mindset and is, in fact, glad to have the armed citizen at his back. I've had a lot of good LEOs tell me that, barring immediate assistance from a fellow LEO, the best thing for them is an armed citizen backing them up.

    I, for one, would not hesitate to come to the assistance of a LEO I saw in trouble, drawing and firing if necessary.
    Give that man a cigar!:celebrate

    Something people seem to forget. The first bullet that hit the Texas tower shooter came from a citizen assisting the one LEO on the scene at that moment by firing a rifle that he had retrieved from his car.

    That is not to say that getting involved in a shootout is not dangerous. The LEO may mistake your actions as hostile unless he is in direct communications with you. SO BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU DO.

    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    SFCRetired wrote:
    Try this idea: The Brady Bunch and their fellow-travellers are "elitists". The top-level LEOs (Chiefs and such) are usually political appointees and, as such, are also elitists.

    I, for one, would not hesitate to come to the assistance of a LEO I saw in trouble, drawing and firing if necessary.
    Give that man a cigar!:celebrate

    Something people seem to forget. The first bullet that hit the Texas tower shooter came from a citizen assisting the one LEO on the scene at that moment by firing a rifle that he had retrieved from his car.

    That is not to say that getting involved in a shootout is not dangerous. The LEO may mistake your actions as hostile unless he is in direct communications with you. SO BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU DO.
    I too WOULD help an LEO out, but not around here. In California that would get a man killed!

    Also, wasn't Brady a SS agent that was shot by someone intending to assassinate Regan? HE was LE trying to protect a public figure and was shot by a normal citizen.

    He believes deep in his heart of hearts that disarmament is only for normal citizens to that other SS don't get shot.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    ChickenFarmer wrote:
    SNIP Also, wasn't Brady a SS agent that was shot by someone intending to assassinate Regan? HE was LE trying to protect a public figure and was shot by a normal citizen.
    He was White House PressSecretary.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    612

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    ChickenFarmer wrote:
    SNIP Also, wasn't Brady a SS agent that was shot by someone intending to assassinate Regan? HE was LE trying to protect a public figure and was shot by a normal citizen.
    He was White House PressSecretary.
    Well, then it IS his job to protect the POTUS from shots taken at him...

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    ChickenFarmer wrote:
    SNIP Also, wasn't Brady a SS agent that was shot by someone intending to assassinate Regan? HE was LE trying to protect a public figure and was shot by a normal citizen.
    He was White House PressSecretary.
    So then I stand corrected and withdraw my previously misguided statement.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    ChickenFarmer wrote:

    Also, wasn't Brady a SS agent that was shot by someone intending to assassinate Regan? HE was LE trying to protect a public figure and was shot by a normal citizen.

    He believes deep in his heart of hearts that disarmament is only for normal citizens to that other SS don't get shot.
    Well, I would dispute that he was "shot by a normal citizen." From what I recall, the perp was not "normal."

    http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlf...to%20go%20home
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    It would seem that the Reagon/Brady shooting would be a good example of how we can't depend on LE to protect us. Isn't the SS suppose to be the crack elite personal protection? Even they couldn't defend against an act of violence, and the attacker was right there amidst them.

    The Brady Bunch expects the rest of us to rely on the average LEO to watch our backs?

    No thank you, I'll pack my own protection.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    It would seem that the Reagon/Brady shooting would be a good example of how we can't depend on LE to protect us. Isn't the SS suppose to be the crack elite personal protection? Even they couldn't defend against an act of violence, and the attacker was right there amidst them.

    The Brady Bunch expects the rest of us to rely on the average LEO to watch our backs?

    No thank you, I'll pack my own protection.
    To be fair a personally carried sidearm would not have given Reagan any protection in that situation either. If someone wants to get you and they do not care if they get away after the fact, they WILL get you.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  22. #22
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    My son-in-law's cousin is a local LEO in the tiny little town I live outside of here in the middle of nowhere Kansas. I've told him on several occasions that I had his back if he ever needed. I have discussed the RKBA with him and he's of the opinion that citizens should NOT have weapons. I keep asking him why not? but he's veary vague in his answers and opinions. Troublesome it is but he gladly accepted my support.
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485

    Post imported post

    Their LER only works with the top ranking officer corp of the police departments. Most line LEOs do not support the Brady group.

    A while back there was a big uproar because the national Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), donated a chunk of money to the Brady organization. A lot of Line LEOs objected strongly to this use of their dues.

    There are a lot of LEOs that see the "Brady bunch" in very much the same light as members of this forum do.
    Please refrain from interpreting this as a bash, and please do not start bashing.

    I think it's time to realize that belonging to the Fraternal Order of Police is practically equal to belonging to a gun control organization. All members of the FOP lend their collective voices to the organization. When the organization backs taking firearms away from the citizens, it is a gun control group.

    This is a binary choice folks, and the FOP has often times chosen to be a ZERO just like the Brady, VPC and others of their mindset.

    http://www.rangerfop.com/Guns%20release.doc

    check out this "discussion" about the parks issue. Divided, yes. But, no attempt to "re-steer" the direction. No uproar or exodus from the lodge. For all the ballyhooing about supporting the 2nd and disapproving of the actions, that's it.

    Passive acceptance.

    There are archived previous discussions of this in which it came to light that some of the park rangers had busted local/state leos. FOIA confirmed 2 incidents, 1 of which is on my site. These people have a mindset that so long as THEY are armed, everything else is secondary.

    "Guns for me, but not for thee".

    Years ago we were told howLE would get behind national reciprocity if we supported it for LE.So, what group has come out and supported national citizen reciprocity? How about which LE groups have supported the Parks ban repeal?

    If you're in law enforcement and reading this, you probably say that you support the rights to keepand bear arms. You may shoot regularly, or instruct, you may be a pillar of the community. Do you belong to FOP, or another organization which advocates for law enforcement and yet supports gun control?

    I'd be genuinely interested to hear your rationalization for that.

    More importantly, I'd be interested to know how we can end this division and bringour respective factions together to fight this.




  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    Mr. Y wrote:
    ...SNIP
    More importantly, I'd be interested to know how we can end this division and bringour respective factions together to fight this.


    I do not wish to foster a fight on this either, but membership in FOP means a lot more than firearms rights lobbying. Most LEOs are not single issue people. So just because an organization does not support a particular position on a single issue, that does not mean that the organization does not bring benefit to them in a lot more areas that are worth the trade off. Also remember that there is peer pressure to belong to that organization right from the top of most departments. So membership is not always as voluntary as you might think.

    I personally am about as strong an advocate of firearms rights as you will find anywhere, however that does not mean that I will ignore everything else in favor of that single issue. I also support free speech, but I am not prepared to give up part of my free speech rights to expand my firearms rights. Same thing.


    But it seems to me that uniting could starts LEAA), resists the FOP, NEAA, Brady, and even at times the NRA if the legislation is not inclusive.

    To be fair the organization does maintain a tiered membership which in my view is wrong headed, but that distinction does not seem toimpact on their mission.

    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    Mr. Y wrote:
    ...SNIP
    More importantly, I'd be interested to know how we can end this division and bringour respective factions together to fight this.
    I do not wish to foster a fight on this either, but membership in FOP means a lot more than firearms rights lobbying. Most LEOs are not single issue people. So just because an organization does not support a particular position on a single issue, that does not mean that the organization does not bring benefit to them in a lot more areas that are worth the trade off. Also remember that there is peer pressure to belong to that organization right from the top of most departments. So membership is not always as voluntary as you might think.

    I personally am about as strong an advocate of firearms rights as you will find anywhere, however that does not mean that I will ignore everything else in favor of that single issue. I also support free speech, but I am not prepared to give up part of my free speech rights to expand my firearms rights. Same thing.


    But it seems to me that uniting could starts LEAA), resists the FOP, NEAA, Brady, and even at times the NRA if the legislation is not inclusive.

    To be fair the organization does maintain a tiered membership which in my view is wrong headed, but that distinction does not seem toimpact on their mission.
    It may mean more to the members, but that membership necessarily means for us that those people are lending their support to an organization that supports gun control. All other issues and advocacy aside, that's the net effect. I don't see how free speech is implicated here. In a nutshell what I'm asking for is reationalization of professing to support the rights to keep and bear arms and belonging to, supporting and lobbying on behalf of a group which undermines those rights.

    BTW, are members of the FOP frat boys & frat girls(is there such a thing?) :P

    Anyway, my point here was that we've been way too tolerant of the ... lack of support from law enforcement for our rights.

    If you think about it in abstract, LE actually spend a great deal of effort to either prevent you from exercising, suppressing or usurping your rights and curbing your freedom. Essentially, that is likely the outcome of a professional encounter - you'll either be persuaded to talk yourself into admitting guilt, or perhaps a search conducted under unclear circumstances that the courts back, etc. I'm sure it's happened, but when was the last time we had a sheriff or PD chief testifying "we need to repeal this law!" ? <- again, an abstract observation, that's it.

    I'm not saying I have the answer, but maybe someone here does.







Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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