• 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.

Shots Fired on I95 PWC

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

Agent19 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote: snip
There are people out there that should not be carrying and incidents like this will result.

Oh,you mean like this idiot that's still patrolling FFX county:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502245.html

Training didn't help him or his victim.
Or
Lee Paigewho endangered a room full of school kids.

If we should have to suffer (lose our rights)because someone does something stupid with a gun than LE should suffer (lose their firearms) every time an officer does something stupid with a firearm.


I think the English call them Bobby's.
We could call them booby's here in the U.S., not to be confused with .... well you now what I mean.
LEO's undergo an extensive application process including polygraphs, pysch evals, and interviews. Then they go under extensive training in the classroom and field. Every year they are evaluated, train, and qualify with their firearms during the day and at night.

What standards apply to someone who open carries a gun into a mall? None.

Of course there will be mistakes made by police. Not all are good at what they do and all are human, mistakes will be made. However, like mentioned above, there are factors involved to help decrease the chance of mistakes with such tight policies.

I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

I recently had a discussion with another federal LEO type who has said similar things NovaCop. The big difference though between LEO's and citizens - is that we only have to understand what escalation means and it's narrowly defined for us. A LEO in their daily duties are MANDATED by much broader rules for escalation and use of force. You have a whole checklist you have to run through, hence your intensive training. Granted it might take seconds to do but it is more cumbersome. If you are wrong or right, you are still screwed.

The law for citizens and shooting is pretty simple. Fear for your life. I know I'll probably get flammed for that but that's really it. What constitutes it in the eyes of a jury is something else and isn't always clear. That's why citizens need a lawyer afterwards. Of course, LEO's get lawyers too......

As far as actual range training - I have not found anything of public record that shows what the annual training budget for fire arms proficiency is for any local or state LEO agency. No requirement that an officer must spend X amount of time on the range every month - there is only a requirement that you qualify twice a year, once for day and once for night as you state....

This is not a bash, this is, back up your statements with specific qualifying data for your position, that LEO's are better equipped to determine when they should use deadly force.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Your thread on this subject was deleted.

You should probably take the hint.

TFred
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

TFred wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Your thread on this subject was deleted.

You should probably take the hint.

TFred
TFred,
Yeah, it was deleted. Hypocritical that a site promoting the 2A is so quick against the 1A (laughter). I didn't realize that this site will delete view points that differ from their stance. Somewhat disappointing and it shows the lack of integrity promoted on this site.

Bohdi,
You are correct that there is no actual "range time" requirement in VA (or any state that I'm aware of). Qualifications are timed draws from the holster and from a variety of distances including left/right hand shooting, picking the gun off the ground, shooting from the hip, laying down, high ready, etc. Night and Day. Not extremely difficult, but challenging enough to determine you can shoot well. Most officers are provided free ammo and free range time at their department range. I understand the differences between LEO's and citizens and shooting on a legal standpoint.

My opinion is that there is a small minority of citizens that carry weapons that are not qualified for a variety of reasons and was encouraging some sort of system to weed them out. I believe the majority of citizens who carry guns are qualified enough to have them for a self- defense only situation and I believe they should endorse a system to promote the safety of carrying by stopping those who aren't qualified from possessing a gun. So if you believe I am against carrying, then you are wrong (although I am somewhat against open carrying).
 

kennys

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2009
Messages
521
Location
Ruther Glen Va
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote: snip
There are people out there that should not be carrying and incidents like this will result.
As well as some fully trained leo. As well those that should be, but because of miss conception that police make you 100%safe.
LEO's undergo an extensive application process including polygraphs, pysch evals, and interviews. Then they go under extensive training in the classroom and field. Every year they are evaluated, train, and qualify with their firearms during the day and at night.

What standards apply to someone who open carries a gun into a mall? None.

Of course there will be mistakes made by police. Not all are good at what they do and all are human, mistakes will be made. However, like mentioned above, there are factors involved to help decrease the chance of mistakes with such tight policies.

I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
And they all still dont get it right.

Just my two cents;

***Disclaimer: Public caneings in foreign lands often last longer than a simple wood shed whoopin.. [/b]



Nov Cop,

I haven’t caught all of your threads or each and every word you have written, or others that read this thread. You leave me with the impression that, if you are an actual law enforcement officer, you believe that law enforcement has all the answers. In your view, law enforcement officers, whether right or wrong, always have the upper hand. That in your deluded view, just because someone is a law enforcement officer, they are above the people and the law and we should bow down regardless of the issue.



You made no comment of when law enforcement crosses the line; no comment of where law enforcement officers have the tendency to go bad or even make mistakes. Your undying stride to show how often judges side with officers over lack of evidence and even broken procedures in certain situations seems to say “Just give it up, we are right and that is all you need to know”.



We are aware that you are all a brotherhood of officers, the same as we are all a brotherhood of gun owners. I know you don’t like to discuss the down fall and fault’s of officers and we, as gun owners don’t like hearing of gun owners going bad. But it does happen. It is no ones fault. Often we are told that we are to trust those in uniform. Can you tell me the difference between the good and the bad?



If we are not supposed to hold the actions of the bad cops against the good, shouldn’t the same be said for the law abiding gun owners? I understand your concern over officer safety, but don’t we have the right to our own safety? I have mentioned it before and I will mention it again, many times, in the name of safety, the public is put in harms way by an officer. The same could be said about the officer’s safety being put in jeopardy by himself or other officers at a scene. You know how response times can very and that’s all I have to say on it now.



Back to the title, mandatory training;

Driving has many training options: Rules and regulation’s (for clarity to some, yes driving is a privilege). To be able to drive you have driver’s education, mandatory tests including written and driving skills tests as well as an eye test. A step further, a CDL license requires many more tests and medical screenings. We often have free drivers awareness classes and courses, often being sponsored by law enforcement and safety councils across the nation. Then, we have those private defensive driving courses we can personally pay for and sometimes are court ordered.



Now, separating justifiable shootings by police and public shootings that were the result of an intentional crime, shootings that were either un-intentional or wrongly justified by cops, how many automobile accidents do we have on a whole? (Generally, I consider accident done by nature or something that could not be avoided due to uncontrollable circumstance) How many injuries to include minor, major, life threatening and death? Just because someone is a legal car owner, has a license, and training, does not fix the issue. Simply put”You can’t fix stupid”.



Of the many incidents of road rage accounting for deaths and injury without a gun, why do you attack the gun owner with lesser instances in a whole with a psychiatric evaluations and such? I guess this is fitting with your over all view that criminals would not break the law to conceal, while suspended or non licensed drivers would never openly drive and break the law.



While I believe some should not be behind the wheel for obvious reasons, even as a privilege, the law often protects the livelihood of negligent drivers over the law abiding ones, there are those perfect laws that have flaws and this is just one example.



Time and again repeat DUI offenders are often given the release and work release privilege to drive, only so they can pay their fines and with what’s left over, drink it up to go out and do it again; putting many in danger (with those exceptions of coarse). To the law abiding citizen that tries to keep up with things like child support and fails(with those exceptions of coarse), there is no relief, but yet, seems that intentionally stupid is often trumped by reason and excuse over safety.



In repeating the above that driving is a privilege, and gun ownership is a right, I do not agree with your mandatory training as well as other restraints and red tape on the law abiding. If anything, it adds undue obstacles and discourages those from their right because of lack of time or lack of money as well as the inconvenience of a paper trail from something the majority of us practice on a day to day basis, and that is responsible gun ownership.



You say you and many are there to protect and serve. There are many fine officers on the force and I do not have the intent as disrespect to those. Having said that brings me back to my final questions.



On your oath of being a law enforcement officer, which I have heard as attending various ceremonies, do you or any other of you brothers, question the perceptions you often project into public by statements you make? Among some of these statements; there is no reason to carry a weapon at whatever place, people shouldn’t have weapons, that’s what police are for, and it’s never a good idea to carry a loaded weapon amongst various other things? How many times would you rather run a legal citizen off from legal open carry rather to inform the public of the legalities and the safety there of?



Being law enforcement, if you are, you should know how response times very and the truth that you can not be everywhere at once. You should know how crimes happen in unlikely or thought to be unlikely areas; one example as in the Texas military base shooting. You know that a split second can mean life or death, and having to chamber a round in order to protect yourself could bring attention and put you at a disadvantage. In short you can not guarantee that even though you and many in uniform are there to protect, that things don’t happen. Do you show public awareness on this?



In driving, most laws are clear: you are either breaking them or not. Gun laws, however, are not so simple in many instances and often LEO hide behind that fact. Someone’s lack of knowledge is being used as an advantage tool and an officer’s lack of knowledge being excuse. There are many more instances of expressed public safety for driving, while exposure to public safety on guns often just a free trigger lock from time to time and the exposure of criminal acts over the good and lives saved from a lawful owner. How often will you admit to this?



In closing;

Fact: trained, experienced law enforcement officers go bad. Fact: elected officials above and in control of law enforcement making the laws and running this country, go bad and turn corrupt. Fact: people in general go bad.



This is life, Bad things happen, some times with no warrant or reason, get over it. I respect that you picked a job where you put you life on the line, but that is where it stops. You chose it, man up and stop using it as an excuse to make you feel that you are better than most. If you do not have the common sense to decipher the difference than maybe you picked the wrong job. Respect is given where respect is deserved.



 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

Kennys,

I am more on your side than you think I am. Of course police can't always be there to protect you and it would be wise to carry a firearm (concealed) legally if you can. I was merely stating that it might be wise to make sure that those carrying firearms are somewhat qualified to do so. Carrying a firearm (especially open carrying), requires a great deal of responsibility, maturity, and decision making. Although the 2A is a right (unlike driving which is a privilege) there are still many restrictions with the 2A.

In previous posts, I have touched upon the fact that there are some individuals that should not be police (just as there is in every profession). I also stated that police make mistakes at times. I encourage those officers that break laws to be held accountable, especially since it seems that we are grouped together when one screws up. I do feel as though LEO's get unfairly bashed on this site and that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. There are also misguided legal posts on this site as well. I don't understand your question about LEO's broadcasting their public opinion? I would need the specific example you are describing.I believe LEO's are more for 2A than you think. I have many opinions, and at times, put it aside when dealing with situations. It comes with the job, and I signed up so I play by the rules.

I've stated this before, I had a CCW before I was LEO. I have friends and family that have CCW's and carry regularly. I also know individuals that carry that are misinformed on the laws on carrying as well. I come into contact with many people who carry that shouldn't be carrying as well. It was just my opinion that someone who wishes to carry should undergo some sort of screening and education prior to carrying a loaded firearm into society. I was looking for a pros vs cons response. I posted a topic related to this earlier, but the site took it down. I understand that I am on a pro-carry site and there probably won't be any pros, so I shouldn't have bothered.

In closing, I never said I was better than anyone and I take offense to that. In most other threads I have been mocked for being a LEO while only trying to engage in discussions. Doesn't bother me. I do my job well within the law and with good intentions. I know people don't like me just cause of the badge and that's fine. I have morals and that's all that matters to me. I got onto this site after seeing misinformed posts regarding search and seizure laws and didn't want citizens to get into trouble just because of their ignorance to the law. I give my opinion just like all of you have posted your opinion. My opinion seems not to hold any weight because it differs from the majority on this site and that's understandable I guess.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
TFred wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Your thread on this subject was deleted.

You should probably take the hint.

TFred
TFred,
Yeah, it was deleted. Hypocritical that a site promoting the 2A is so quick against the 1A (laughter). I didn't realize that this site will delete view points that differ from their stance. Somewhat disappointing and it shows the lack of integrity promoted on this site.
I really hope you have a better understanding of the laws you actually enforce than you appear to have of the First Amendment, which has absolutely no standing here.

Really folks, the thread on training was deleted for a reason. The owners of the forum did not want to deal with it, so lets all just walk away, and let this thread get back on topic.

TFred
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,662
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
imported post

johnfenter wrote:
Just a side comment.

The news story says that the dump truck was on the express lane and was merging into the main lanes; does this mean the truck was in the HOV lanes? If so, he wasn't supposed to be there; HOV excludes heavy commercial vehicles.

If the truck driver was merging, he didn't have right of way; the other guy didn't have to let him merge ahead. It would have been the polite thing to do, but not required. I've seen the traffic on 95 where the HOV ends; it's gridlock, so neither of them were going anywhere fast anyway.

And I'm pretty sure Philip made those comments before the full story was published on what the truck driver did and was charged with. A truck is as much of a deadly weapon as a gun. F=ma, and all that... Basically, both guys were in the wrong, and deserve what they are getting. The one who didn't deserve any of what was experienced here was that child.
You are incorrect. Trucks are not restricted from most HOV lanes during non-HOV hours in VA.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,662
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
Agent19 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote: snip
There are people out there that should not be carrying and incidents like this will result.

Oh,you mean like this idiot that's still patrolling FFX county:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502245.html

Training didn't help him or his victim.
Or
Lee Paigewho endangered a room full of school kids.

If we should have to suffer (lose our rights)because someone does something stupid with a gun than LE should suffer (lose their firearms) every time an officer does something stupid with a firearm.


I think the English call them Bobby's.
We could call them booby's here in the U.S., not to be confused with .... well you now what I mean.
LEO's undergo an extensive application process including polygraphs, pysch evals, and interviews. Then they go under extensive training in the classroom and field. Every year they are evaluated, train, and qualify with their firearms during the day and at night.

What standards apply to someone who open carries a gun into a mall? None.

Of course there will be mistakes made by police. Not all are good at what they do and all are human, mistakes will be made. However, like mentioned above, there are factors involved to help decrease the chance of mistakes with such tight policies.

I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Why are we applying 'standards' to RIGHTS. That's like a poll tax.... Or eugenics.
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

TFred wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
TFred wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Your thread on this subject was deleted.

You should probably take the hint.

TFred
TFred,
Yeah, it was deleted. Hypocritical that a site promoting the 2A is so quick against the 1A (laughter). I didn't realize that this site will delete view points that differ from their stance. Somewhat disappointing and it shows the lack of integrity promoted on this site.
I really hope you have a better understanding of the laws you actually enforce than you appear to have of the First Amendment, which has absolutely no standing here.

Really folks, the thread on training was deleted for a reason. The owners of the forum did not want to deal with it, so lets all just walk away, and let this thread get back on topic.

TFred
Oh I'm sorry. I kept reading threads with citizens on this site crying about private owners restricting guns on their property. I guess they don't mind a private website restricting the 1A.

My thread had no insults. Just links to news articles and the question about education to carry a gun. It was deleted because it goes against their pro-gun propaganda. It's their site, they have every right to delete anything. I just thought a forum and discussion was open to have rebuttals.

Back to the topic at hand...
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

simmonsjoe wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote:
Agent19 wrote:
NovaCop10 wrote: snip
There are people out there that should not be carrying and incidents like this will result.

Oh,you mean like this idiot that's still patrolling FFX county:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502245.html

Training didn't help him or his victim.
Or
Lee Paigewho endangered a room full of school kids.

If we should have to suffer (lose our rights)because someone does something stupid with a gun than LE should suffer (lose their firearms) every time an officer does something stupid with a firearm.


I think the English call them Bobby's.
We could call them booby's here in the U.S., not to be confused with .... well you now what I mean.
LEO's undergo an extensive application process including polygraphs, pysch evals, and interviews. Then they go under extensive training in the classroom and field. Every year they are evaluated, train, and qualify with their firearms during the day and at night.

What standards apply to someone who open carries a gun into a mall? None.

Of course there will be mistakes made by police. Not all are good at what they do and all are human, mistakes will be made. However, like mentioned above, there are factors involved to help decrease the chance of mistakes with such tight policies.

I did not say anything about infringing on the 2A, I just think that there should be a way to mandate training, education, and to make sure people are qualified enough to carry a firearm.
Why are we applying 'standards' to RIGHTS. That's like a poll tax.... Or eugenics.
There are already STANDARDS regarding firearms. How about not being a felon, not having an active Protective Order on file, age requirements, restrictions on where you can carry, standards on how many guns you can purchase, standards on how you carry, just to name a few of the hundreds of standards and criteria you need to meet regarding firearms. You must pay for a CCW (almost like a poll tax). Why not add some education to the mix?
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

NovaCop10 wrote:
I understand the differences between LEO's and citizens and shooting on a legal standpoint.

My opinion is that there is a small minority of citizens that carry weapons that are not qualified for a variety of reasons and was encouraging some sort of system to weed them out. I believe the majority of citizens who carry guns are qualified enough to have them for a self- defense only situation and I believe they should endorse a system to promote the safety of carrying by stopping those who aren't qualified from possessing a gun. So if you believe I am against carrying, then you are wrong (although I am somewhat against open carrying).
I shortend your response for brevity. I appreciate how you answered, and you might be surprised I think some folks shouldn't carry guns, vote, breed or drive......but that's MY opinion :) Thanks for your insight. It can be a tough crowd here but we aren't all mean spirited just out to get LEOs either. We may be a tad bit more cautious and encourage others to be aware of what they are allowed to do. That doesn't make us bad folks though - and I'm not saying that YOU think that either. Lots of people read this board though so it's good to show there is alot of middle road too.
 

NovaCop

New member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
471
Location
, ,
imported post

bohdi wrote:
I shortend your response for brevity. I appreciate how you answered, and you might be surprised I think some folks shouldn't carry guns, vote, breed or drive......but that's MY opinion :) Thanks for your insight. It can be a tough crowd here but we aren't all mean spirited just out to get LEOs either. We may be a tad bit more cautious and encourage others to be aware of what they are allowed to do. That doesn't make us bad folks though - and I'm not saying that YOU think that either. Lots of people read this board though so it's good to show there is alot of middle road too.
I appreciate your comment and I understand that there's a variety of people on this thread. I might disagree with a lot of views, but I wouldn't consider anyone I've seen on this thread as a bad person.

Ha, I can agree with the breeding. I wish there was a way to regulate that. Haha, and I do what I can about the driving.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

I haven’t caught all of your threads or each and every word you have written, or others that read this thread. You leave me with the impression that, if you are an actual law enforcement officer, y
Oh I think he's a real Cop Kenny, and unless I miss my guess, one that's been here before.:X
 

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
imported post

:

Oh I think he's a real Cop , one that's been here before.:X
1+




Based on novacop10's thinking in VT and AK the blood should be flowing in the streets, NV should have little to no incidents being they have training requirements and firearm qualification for every firearm carried.

That way of thinking=epic fail.
 

Wooley

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2007
Messages
673
Location
Hoodbridge, Virginia, USA
imported post

I don't think a good hardcore combat pistol course a bad idea for anyone that carries.

That said, the firearms training we go through in LE is a joke. Its enough to make you think you know it all when in reality its enough to get you smoked.
 

Neplusultra

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
2,224
Location
Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

peter nap wrote:
bohdi wrote:
Man, it's things like this that make me glad I have a 3 mile commute.
Makes me glad this is the nearest highway

normal_road.jpg
Gee whiz Pete, how many neighbors do you have???
 
Top