• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

AB-357 on Officer.com

C

CaCop

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
64
Location
, ,
imported post

Hey guys. i would like to invite you all to check out out discussion on this subject at Officer.com. You will find that alot of Police Officers are very pro-AB357.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

My name is "IE Copper" on Officer.com. Please disregard my initial comments on the topic. As you can see, those comments were made the same day I first posted here. My opinion has changed drastically on the topic, and I expressed that towards the end of the thread.
 
Z

zigziggityzoo

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
1,543
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
imported post

I for one, hope this passes with a veto-proof majority.

As is said: One wouldn't need a gun, if they could carry a cop with them everywhere they went.

But then, if we could carry cops with us everywhere, there wouldn't be need for lawyers really, as there would always be a "reputable" witness to crimes!

Since we can't all carry cops, and since we don't want to put those nice lawyers out of a job, we need the RIGHT to keep and bear arms, as defined in the constitution.

I just can't wait to see the Brady Campain give California a B minus minus for this!
 
bigtoe416

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
imported post

Wow, I'm legitimately surprised.

No police officers I know outside of the ones on this forum have shown any support for open carry. I guess the logic must be that police officers are concerned that openly carrying firearms would give criminals more of a heads up as to who has a gun and who doesn't. There might be concern by police that open carriers might open themselves up to unwanted criminal attention.

Concealed carry is more of a hidden deterrent. Nobody can have a concealed weapon but the criminals wouldn't know that for sure.

Of course, with both concealed carry readily available to the public along with open carry available (in the form of no police harassment and the removal of 626.9), then the criminals would really not know what to do. Get day jobs perhaps?
 
fighting_for_freedom

fighting_for_freedom

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
223
Location
Pagosa Springs, Colorado, USA
imported post

bigtoe416 wrote:
SNIP:
Click to expand...
No police officers I know outside of the ones on this forum have shown any support for open carry. I
Click to expand...
You'd be surprised at how many LEO actually support OC, or the Second Amendment in general. I'm sure a lot of them aren't to vocal about it, as that can be looked upon unfavorably, but a lot of them DO support our rights. Sometimes rights go out the window when a cop is doing their job... but then again... they're human, aren't they? Sure, discipline or a complaint may be in order, but they learn, just like any of us. I believe that most LEO are inherently good; they sometimes just make poor and hasty decisions in the name of safety.

And hey, if I'm wrong, and most LEO actually hate our rights.... then go make friends with one and convince them otherwise!
 
C

ca2az96

New member
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
85
Location
Flagstaff, Arizona, USA
imported post

CaCop wrote:
Hey guys. i would like to invite you all to check out out discussion on this subject at Officer.com. You will find that alot of Police Officers are very pro-AB357.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

My name is "IE Copper" on Officer.com. Please disregard my initial comments on the topic. As you can see, those comments were made the same day I first posted here. My opinion has changed drastically on the topic, and I expressed that towards the end of the thread.
Click to expand...

Hmmm? Isn't this the same guy that said he was done with this website because we were too immature for him (articulated our positions better than he did)? Guess that didn't last too long :lol:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/22819-8.html
 
O

oilfieldtrash11

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
155
Location
Woodland, California, USA
imported post

It looks halfway good over there. Some of those officers are a little paranoid but I do understand why.

As for CA Cop. I am glad that even though there have been a lot of people who didn't like his presence on the site, and didn't like his views and voiced them very loudly, that he has changed his mind on OC and CCW.

That is the kind of change we need. I personally, am very very happy that being anti OC, that he is now pro OC. If more officers had an open mind like him, we would have a much much easier time carrying.

I hope more officers look at the CPOA memo on their cork board, because I have seen them up, and come check out this site. Maybe we can open some LEO's eyes.
 
demnogis

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
imported post

I noticed a LOT of positive comments about Law Abiding Citizens carrying from some Inland Empire (Riverside, Corona, San Bernadino, Norco, etc) officers. This makes me a little more confident when I take trips out there to see the family :celebrate
 
C

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

demnogis wrote:
I noticed a LOT of positive comments about Law Abiding Citizens carrying from some Inland Empire (Riverside, Corona, San Bernadino, Norco, etc) officers. This makes me a little more confident when I take trips out there to see the family :celebrate
Click to expand...
I hate to rain on your dancing banana, but I don't think there's much cause for excitement here... yet.

Keep in mind that the topic is the permit system we live with. Even "shall issue" will continue to require lots of tests, taxes, and associated costs. So these officers are only expressing support for the permit system. IMO, the permit system is a gross violation of the 2nd Amendment, and an affront to the rights of those too poor to be able to pay all the fees.
 
S

SOneThreeCoupe

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
55
Location
, ,
imported post

CaCop wrote:
Hey guys. i would like to invite you all to check out out discussion on this subject at Officer.com. You will find that alot of Police Officers are very pro-AB357.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

My name is "IE Copper" on Officer.com. Please disregard my initial comments on the topic. As you can see, those comments were made the same day I first posted here. My opinion has changed drastically on the topic, and I expressed that towards the end of the thread.
Click to expand...
You still say "If these requirements are met, citizens should be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights."

As weak as I believe the Second is, what part of "shall not be infringed" are you still a bit cloudy on? Freedom should have no requirements. The laws you and your fellow lawmen enforce are farcical.

I recommend you reevaluate the term "liberty" and get back to us.
 
C

CaCop

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
64
Location
, ,
imported post

SOneThreeCoupe wrote:
CaCop wrote:
Hey guys. i would like to invite you all to check out out discussion on this subject at Officer.com. You will find that alot of Police Officers are very pro-AB357.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

My name is "IE Copper" on Officer.com. Please disregard my initial comments on the topic. As you can see, those comments were made the same day I first posted here. My opinion has changed drastically on the topic, and I expressed that towards the end of the thread.
Click to expand...
You still say "If these requirements are met, citizens should be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights."

As weak as I believe the Second is, what part of "shall not be infringed" are you still a bit cloudy on? Freedom should have no requirements. The laws you and your fellow lawmen enforce are farcical.

I recommend you reevaluate the term "liberty" and get back to us.
Click to expand...


OK, I reevaluated the term "liberty", and I feel the same...what was supposed to happen? Was I supposed to all the sudden think that it would be OK to allow violent criminals to carry concealed legally? Yeah it is a great idea to hand out CCWs without a background check and mandatory training....

I think that armed, law abiding citizens are a great idea. Giving out CCWs to everyone that asked without checking them out first is irresponsible and will NEVER happen in California.
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

I've become so sick of the Law Enforcement State. This whole thing is a viscous cycle where circumstances are exacerbated and truly criminal behavior is created as a self-fulfilling prophecy through the arbitrary assignation of criminal status.

If there weren't so many damn laws, we wouldn't have so many damn criminals. Tragic situations like Mixon vs OPD are just as much a result of escalatory, prohibitive Law and Law Enforcement Practice as they are a result of people like Mixon actually being dangerous scumbags.

This isn't making America safer, and it isn't "responsible" for California. The government is only capable of creating problems in our hyper-authoritarian society of Prison Industry and Police Lobbies.

If we want to make society peaceable and nonaggressive, the first thing we need to do is stop initiating aggressive action against nonaggressive "offenders" at such an unprecedented scale. CCW is inherently not an aggressive act. Therefore, the prohibition of CCW is part of the very system that is tearing our society apart, and leading to violence in the streets. It is neither a "responsible" reaction to violence nor is it somehow any more reasonable, effective, ethical or moral than any other arbitrary, immoral prohibition of nonaggressive behavior.

/rant
 
P

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

CaCop wrote:
SOneThreeCoupe wrote:
CaCop wrote:
Hey guys. i would like to invite you all to check out out discussion on this subject at Officer.com. You will find that alot of Police Officers are very pro-AB357.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115719

My name is "IE Copper" on Officer.com. Please disregard my initial comments on the topic. As you can see, those comments were made the same day I first posted here. My opinion has changed drastically on the topic, and I expressed that towards the end of the thread.
Click to expand...
You still say "If these requirements are met, citizens should be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights."

As weak as I believe the Second is, what part of "shall not be infringed" are you still a bit cloudy on? Freedom should have no requirements. The laws you and your fellow lawmen enforce are farcical.

I recommend you reevaluate the term "liberty" and get back to us.
Click to expand...


OK, I reevaluated the term "liberty", and I feel the same...what was supposed to happen? Was I supposed to all the sudden think that it would be OK to allow violent criminals to carry concealed legally? Yeah it is a great idea to hand out CCWs without a background check and mandatory training....

I think that armed, law abiding citizens are a great idea. Giving out CCWs to everyone that asked without checking them out first is irresponsible and will NEVER happen in California.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the whole "no background check" thing happen in Vermont and Alaska with alarmingly good results?
 
C

CaCop

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
64
Location
, ,
imported post

marshaul wrote:
I've become so sick of the Law Enforcement State. This whole thing is a viscous cycle where circumstances are exacerbated and truly criminal behavior is created as a self-fulfilling prophecy through the arbitrary assignation of criminal status.

If there weren't so many damn laws, we wouldn't have so many damn criminals. Tragic situations like Mixon vs OPD are just as much a result of escalatory, prohibitive Law and Law Enforcement Practice as they are a result of people like Mixon actually being dangerous scumbags.

This isn't making America safer, and it isn't "responsible" for California. The government is only capable of creating problems in our hyper-authoritarian society of Prison Industry and Police Lobbies.

If we want to make society peaceable and nonaggressive, the first thing we need to do is stop initiating aggressive action against nonaggressive "offenders" at such an unprecedented scale. CCW is inherently not an aggressive act. Therefore, the prohibition of CCW is part of the very system that is tearing our society apart, and leading to violence in the streets. It is neither a "responsible" reaction to violence nor is it somehow any more reasonable, effective, ethical or moral than any other arbitrary, immoral prohibition of nonaggressive behavior.

/rant
Click to expand...

I had a hard time reading all of your nonsense after I reading this :

"Tragic situations like Mixon vs OPD are just as much a result of escalatory, prohibitive Law and Law Enforcement Practice as they are a result of people like Mixon actually being dangerous scumbags. "

How dare you disrespect the memory ofthe officers that were killed by this ANIMAL. To say that these officers where killed as a result of Police practice and escalatory law.... I can't respond with how I feel because I will probably get banned. They were killed because an ANIMAL had access to a gun and KILLED THEM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top