• 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.

I need help finding a video clip

Jblack44

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
291
Location
Westland, Michigan, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
I stopped watching most the shows because of how they portray our 4th and 2nd amendment rights as a hindrance to Law enforcement and I know people just accept it as fact.

I have seen many times they talk about unregistered guns and searching gun databases. CSI seems to be the biggest offender.
The worst show for thatis "Cops"!!!!! :cuss::banghead: Or hell any "reality" law enforcement show.
 

Carnivore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
970
Location
ParkHills, Missouri, USA
imported post

These folks may be able to hook you up with positive footage/scenarios John..

http://www.leaa.org/Cops%20Versus%20Gun%20Control/copsversusguncon.html

http://www.leaa.org/Shield%202003/garyaldrich.html


he FBI has a new mission ­ to head off terrorism and prevent future attacks. This means that much of what the FBI does and learns will never see the public light of day. The new mission greatly empowers the “intelligence” side of the agency and helps to streamline the criminal side. No longer will the FBI be able to afford taking on every “Tom, Dick and Harry” violation of federal law that a pandering congress wants to throw at it.

A leaner, meaner FBI is being crafted as I write this article. The inherent danger of this newly shaped agency is that future politicians may be able to use the FBI to investigate domestic dissent, claiming that any opposition to the federal government’s agendas may indicate a willingness to commit terrorist acts.

History gives us a few examples to support this: abortion clinics blown up by pro-life advocates on the Right, various citizens blown up with letter bombs from a nutcase on the Left, and, of course, the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Office Building also serves as justification for some for watching our own citizens more closely.

But do these cases justify increased citizen scrutiny? Such domestic terrorist acts are rare, and when closely examined, it’s easily determined that these terrorists ­ deranged criminals, really ­ have acted on their own.

Will the FBI end up investigating us all by claiming that every one of us has potential to be a future terrorist because we have an opinion different from the party in power? These are the questions that we should be asking the FBI today.

The pratfalls of the FBI’s past are becoming a distant memory in the wake of 9-11. Let’s hope we’ve seen the last of these significant and preventable errors. But can we get security from terrorists ­ domestic or foreign ­ without significant loss of civil liberties?

That is the question that justifies closer scrutiny of the FBI. Let’s make sure they’re investigating the right people and not looking into your business or mine because we happen to own a gun, or vocally support a politician who adores the Bible or the Bill of Rights.



http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Weapons/Articles/2009/12/Unarmed-Victim-Zones.aspx



http://www.2ampd.net/


http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-32924109_ITM
 
Top