View Poll Results: Is All This Necessary?

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    6 13.04%
  • No

    38 82.61%
  • Possibly. (Explain)

    2 4.35%
Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 197

Thread: Is All This Really Necessary?

  1. #171
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Police officers are professionals employed and empowered to do a specific job and as such are given tools to do that job and use those powers.

    You and other civilians, are not.
    Civilians job is to monitor and operationally change through the political process, those tools and jobs which they deem may be extreme or overbearing. These professionals you speak of work for civilians, therefore it is the civilians job to moderate extensive use of military tools as they see fit, as well as moderate what empowerment the police have. Civilians also have Constitutional rights supported by the SCOTUS to protect their own lives and property under the law.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  2. #172
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,564

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Civilians job is to monitor and operationally change through the political process, those tools and jobs which they deem may be extreme or overbearing. These professionals you speak of work for civilians, therefore it is the civilians job to moderate extensive use of military tools as they see fit, as well as moderate what empowerment the police have. Civilians also have Constitutional rights supported by the SCOTUS to protect their own lives and property under the law.
    employees of civilian law enforcement agencies are civilians as well. one of the biggest lies is the claim that civilian LEOs are not civilians. well they sure aren't military



  3. #173
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    more nonsense. Its tough pretending you are pro 2A and being hard core left a the same time. cops are far less likely to be attacked on the criminals' terms than other civilians. Indeed, other than say private security and bounty hunters, most civilians who have to engage criminals NEVER pick the time and place of the confrontation. Warrants-LOL-you EVER been on a warrant issue run? your military braggadocio is once again pathetic and has no relevance to this discussion. who is more likely to have reprisals directed against them? a cop who arrested a mope or the citizen who was the state's star witness testifying against the mope
    More CON deflection...

    Who said anything about 'on the criminal's terms'??? You try and parse the parameter to a tiny subset...

    But by far LEO is far more likely to be a situation of being the second one in the confrontation to know a firefight is about to break out- from that deadly 'routine' traffic stop to entering into the middle of a domestic dispute. A burglar just got life plus 20 for shooting a Lawton city cop after attempting to enter a home and the homeowner was present. Homeowner didn't testify in either trial (the shooter had a running buddy, separate trial)

    Again you dodge your 'commission', your academy... I never claimed to have been LEO, just have helped train hundreds and spent a few hours talking to them...

    Did I say ANYTHING about the military, you are just desperately trying to fling poo as you scuttle way...

    Your reprisal BS is just that, this isn't a one time deal for the LEO, it is for the Citizen, a 20 veteran LEO will have HUNDREDS of 'mopes' he put in prison and now are out and about. It is quite obvious you have no Commissioned LEO experience and don't spend much time talking to cops. Most convictions are done without a citizen being the 'star' witness as forensic evidence, LEO testimony to what was found, and video tape of the suspect interview are often all that is needed for the conviction.

    So once again, what court has held your 'theory' on why Citizens should have whatever the LEO has in firepower???

  4. #174
    Guru

    HonestJoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,485

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    so you are saying civilian police officers can engage (and by that I mean deploy lethal force) criminals under different rules than other civilians
    The specifics would depend on the jurisdiction but for example, police officers can be expected to forcibly enter a criminals home (with the appropriate warrants or authorisation) and they may defend themselves, their colleagues or other people in that home with deadly force if necessary. A civilian forcibly entering a home, even that of a known criminal would be on very different ground using deadly force inside, even in self-defence.

    As I said, none of this means that there are necessarily any weapons used by the police that should be denied to the general public, only that the concept that what the police do and what civilians do in this context being the same is flawed.

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    what weapons do you think the 2A were intended to cover. Police weapons are drawing the line a bit conservatively since the M16 or M4 select fire rifles are clearly protected as well
    I don't care. I'm talking about principles, not current or historic US law. You can close down pretty much any discussion about gun law with "But the Second Amendment..." but that won't actually get us anywhere will it. Establish the principles first, then worry about the practicalities. I honestly think this is the major sticking point in the whole gun debate in the US.

  5. #175
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that is really stupid. Its like saying people who are not professional fire fighters cannot have the same fire extinguishers pros use but they can own some fire extinguishers if you can claim cops are more likely to be attacked by multiple assailants at the same time as other civilians perhaps you can make a somewhat cogent argument that non LEO civilians can get by with less rounds. But you cannot. In fact, citizens who are not uniformed cops are far more likely to be attacked by multiple assailants than civilian LEOs
    Con spin again, it is like saying a Civilian is required to take his fire extinguisher into a burning house and fight a fire 6 blocks away...

    Please cite the 'facts' on civilians being attacked by multiple assailants rather than LEO???

  6. #176
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:29 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,629

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that is really stupid. Its like saying people who are not professional fire fighters cannot have the same fire extinguishers pros use but they can own some fire extinguishers

    if you can claim cops are more likely to be attacked by multiple assailants at the same time as other civilians perhaps you can make a somewhat cogent argument that non LEO civilians can get by with less rounds. But you cannot. In fact, citizens who are not uniformed cops are far more likely to be attacked by multiple assailants than civilian LEOs
    I fully agree that the fire extinguisher argument is "really stupid" - to quote you - as it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment or police officers and their jobs.

    I decline to take a swing at your own created strawman with the scrawled sign "multiple assailants" pinned to its chest as it is irrelevant and was never my argument.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  7. #177
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:29 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,629

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Civilians job is to monitor and operationally change through the political process, those tools and jobs which they deem may be extreme or overbearing. These professionals you speak of work for civilians, therefore it is the civilians job to moderate extensive use of military tools as they see fit, as well as moderate what empowerment the police have. Civilians also have Constitutional rights supported by the SCOTUS to protect their own lives and property under the law.
    Your "therefore" is one huge bridge too far. There is a huge and substantial difference between the American people watching over public policy and claiming that they deserve the same tools as police officers have because of the performance of their jobs. One has nothing at all to do with the other and all the "therefores" in the universe do not make up that difference.

    Civilians do indeed have the right to protect their own lives and property under the law and they have a myriad - or if you prefer - a plethora of ways to exercise that right irregardless if they can or cannot not have military or para-military weaponry to do so.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #178
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Your "therefore" is one huge bridge too far.
    Hardly. Civilians run the government, police are government employees.

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    There is a huge and substantial difference between the American people watching over public policy and claiming that they deserve the same tools as police officers have because of the performance of their jobs. One has nothing at all to do with the other and all the "therefores" in the universe do not make up that difference.
    Are you claiming the civilian population cannot regulate the weaponry of its own police force? If so, you'll need to prove your case which I already know you cannot.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  9. #179
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,940

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    Wow, you really don't read do you?
    Really. Care to tell me what part I did not read. Maybe you should admit that you were wrong that citizens can own all the same weapons cops can and be done with it.

  10. #180
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,564

    Re: Is All This Really Necessary?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I fully agree that the fire extinguisher argument is "really stupid" - to quote you - as it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment or police officers and their jobs.

    I decline to take a swing at your own created strawman with the scrawled sign "multiple assailants" pinned to its chest as it is irrelevant and was never my argument.

    No rather your argument is that cops have a job to do and that entitles them to better self defense tools than people who aren't government minions. Its a pathetic argument because it ignores several obvious points

    1) if a citizen can be trusted with 10 shots-why not 15

    2) cops have no more right to shoot a criminal than you or I do

    3) there is no rational reason to deny law abiding people POSSESSION of those weapons. Cops already have certain powers not extended to other civilians in terms of time place and manner use or bearing of those weapons

    4) that civilian cops are issued said weapons destroys the argument that there is no legitimate possible purpose for other civilians to even own such weapons.



Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 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
  •