View Full Version : Magpul's support for individual LEO's across the nation..or maybe not.
Yesterday:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/robert-farago/magpul-provides-complete-statement-on-ny-leo-ban/
ETA: FLIP. FLOP.
Today:
http://www.facebook.com/magpul/posts/566578336687853
Supporting the good guys behind enemy lines. This is a good thing and will help bring to light who is on our side..
The line where Fitz says, "If you have any Colts you're considering selling over this I am interested" was hilarious.
Thanks for sharing.
-Jax
On another forum I frequent there has been a big out cry against Magpul for doing this. Most of those types have an either you're with us or against us mentality though I haven't seen any of them trying to melt their PMAGs or cancel their backorders.
Magpul has my continued support. I love what they are doing with the Boulder Airlift.
BufordTJustice
02-28-13, 23:25
I completely understand what Magpul is doing and I'm 100% behind them on it.
Regular street cops and Deputies (like moi) aren't the problem. The REAL issue is the detached, mindless, lifetime-admins who run these things we call police departments.
The same guys who couldn't handcuff a T15, search a car and ACTUALLY FIND WEED, interrogate a suspect, get a statement, secure a scene, or search a building if their ****ing lives depended on it are the "top cops" and the ones calling all the shots that effect the real cops who are getting it done on the skreets. THEY are the ones speaking out against the 2nd Amendment. My boss, for example, is a goddamn CPA. Yes, a ****ing accountant. Now, he's not a bad guy and we've certainly had worse bosses than him....but what the **** could he possibly know about patrol work?
Answer: Not a ****ing thing.
So, Magpul has realized this (as has Paul @ BCM) and is continuing support of individuals but NOT supporting the big guys. Which is awesome, since it's AGAINST MY AGENCY POLICY to publicly oppose my Sheriff. He may be a ****ing mathematician, but he stills gets to enjoy courtesy of command and my ass would be out of a job 5 minutes ago if I even respectfully opposed him. So would most cops.
So, in a way, Magpul is becoming the voice for those who can't speak. I love it. I'll be buying many more Gen3 PMAGs. MANY more.
Mixed reviews on my LGF as well.
On another forum I frequent there has been a big out cry against Magpul for doing this. Most of those types have an either you're with us or against us mentality though I haven't seen any of them trying to melt their PMAGs or cancel their backorders.
Magpul has my continued support. I love what they are doing with the Boulder Airlift.
I don't understand this argument and the reason behind these guys who have this 'you're either with us or against us' mentality in this particular case.
Isn't this EXACTLY what Magpul is doing?? Showing support for who IS with us.....So what's the fuss?
-Jax
Yes, I had recently started switching over to the Lancer AWM 30rd mags as my go-to/duty mags (they are great mags), and I was also considering ordering a B5 Bravo stock when they come back in-stock. From now on ALL of my money allotted towards mags and stocks will go MagPul's way.
thopkins22
02-28-13, 23:52
The idiots in the comment section of your link believe that a circular firing squad is the best way to conduct business.
Magpul is doing alright by me.
SWATcop556
02-28-13, 23:55
I'm 100% behind this as well. The "us vs them" mentality that has been brewing is a huge part of the problem. Good for Magpul.
I hate the us vs them it should be all the same side citizens !!
the few jerk cops and the few jerk folks who seem to hate cops should be thrown out and look at the bigger picture the gun battle is gun owners against anti gun types not cops against civilians if anything that is what the left would want so they can further demonize folks !!!
On another forum I frequent there has been a big out cry against Magpul for doing this. Most of those types have an either you're with us or against us mentality though I haven't seen any of them trying to melt their PMAGs or cancel their backorders.
Magpul has my continued support. I love what they are doing with the Boulder Airlift.
I completely understand what they are trying to do and I won't punish them for trying to do the right thing.
I think Magpul is as stand up as they come.
Magpul is taking it to them head on. Seems they are doing more for the 2nd than other entities made specifically for protecting our rights.
Moose-Knuckle
03-01-13, 02:30
One thing is for certain; with all the recent attacks on the 2nd Amendment we are seeing the true measure of many companies and individuals. This is not 1994. I don't see the compromises that we saw then. Thankfully we have companies around now like Magpul who are not only taking a stand but leading the fight at their respective state house. During all the panic and now the Boulder Airlift, Magpul has had a MIL/LE PMAG program allowing individuals who are qualified to purchase Gen M3 PMAGs straight from them with no wait and or middle man price gouging.
One thing is for certain; with all the recent attacks on the 2nd Amendment we are seeing the true measure of many companies and individuals. This is not 1994. I don't see the compromises that we saw then. Thankfully we have companies around now like Magpul who are not only taking a stand but leading the fight at their respective state house. During all the panic and now the Boulder Airlift, Magpul has had a MIL/LE PMAG program allowing individuals who are qualified to purchase Gen M3 PMAGs straight from them with no wait and or middle man price gouging.
Link to mil/le pmag program? Is this departmental/unit level purchases only, or individual too?
Littlelebowski
03-01-13, 05:32
I support Magpul and BCM.
Magpul is doing what they think is right and I don't think badly about them for what they are doing.
Larry Vickers
03-01-13, 08:58
I believe the real question at hand is if say the extremely anti gun Chief of Police for Chicago wanted to equip his officers with AR's and Magpul mags and he went directly to Magpul to purchase what would they say? I am all for supporting individual officers who support us - I don't think anyone ever said anything against that- but doing business directly with an agency whose leadership that is antigun is the real question
I hear where Magpul is coming from but I think that is the area of lingering doubt - to me at least
parishioner
03-01-13, 09:16
On another forum I frequent there has been a big out cry against Magpul for doing this. Most of those types have an either you're with us or against us mentality though I haven't seen any of them trying to melt their PMAGs or cancel their backorders.
Magpul has my continued support. I love what they are doing with the Boulder Airlift.
Well I can see that since a lot of people here were happy to see Larue and BCM change their policy so that law enforcement officials and departments are restricted to the same type of products available to private individuals of that same city or state.
People cried "if only glock and smith would do the same, we could have a real effect."
Now Magpul will continue to provide LEOs with "banned" products and suddenly that's cool too. It gets confusing around here sometimes.
Personally I think it perpetuates the notion of class division. I don't think they deserve special exemption I'm sorry.
I believe the real question at hand is if say the extremely anti gun Chief of Police for Chicago wanted to equip his officers with AR's and Magpul mags and he went directly to Magpul to purchase what would they say? I am all for supporting individual officers who support us - I don't think anyone ever said anything against that- but doing business directly with an agency whose leadership that is antigun is the real question
I hear where Magpul is coming from but I think that is the area of lingering doubt - to me at least
My feelings as well.
I believe the real question at hand is if say the extremely anti gun Chief of Police for Chicago wanted to equip his officers with AR's and Magpul mags and he went directly to Magpul to purchase what would they say? I am all for supporting individual officers who support us - I don't think anyone ever said anything against that- but doing business directly with an agency whose leadership that is antigun is the real question
I hear where Magpul is coming from but I think that is the area of lingering doubt - to me at least
I'm glad you said this because I was feeling the same way.
Larry Vickers
03-01-13, 10:53
I just got off the phone with my buddy Ken Hackathorn; we talked about the Magpul statement- we are both in the hide and watch mode as this could go ugly for them; aka Recoil magazine/Jerry Tsai incident
And the way Rich worded his statement leaves no room for misinterpretation or for a change of heart
As Ken and I discussed individual law enforcement officers sales probably make up less than 5% of their sales overall - the overwhelming majority of their high capacity magazines most likely go to the civilian market that by and large was extremely pro Magpul; even more so in recent weeks with their struggle in Colorado and pro 2A position
This situation will be interesting to watch to say the least
DreadPirateMoyer
03-01-13, 11:06
Thanks for your comments, Larry. My sentiments echo yours, but I wasn't sure if it was worth stating and causing contoversy. Much appreciated to see your similar thoughts. :)
I don't even mind selling to police in ban states on a case-by-case basis; as we see, there are state police in NY that oppose all this non-sense. It doesn't need to be a blanket ban. However, selling to vehemently anti-gun PDs like LA, Chicago, Philly, and NY is what worries me. I'd hate to see Magpul go down that route, as that defeats the whole purpose of the 2A: equalizing the arms that are carried/owned by the people and those who would harm the people. This could get really ugly.
They could always pull a Maker's Mark and say, "We thought what we were doing was for the best, but our customers told us we were wrong, so we're changing policy. We love you guys and your passion for our product and your opinions." I think it would be gravy at that point.
Though I do agree with Rich's statement regarding Colt. How can people drool over Colt -- THE government supplier -- and hammer Magpul? There are more than a few on this forum in that basket.
But that's why all my rifles will come from BCM in the future. :D
I think selling weapons, or standard capacity magazines, to law enforcement that citizens are banned from possessing is a direct affront to the Second Amendment. I also realize that Magpul can't dictate who their distributors sell to and sympathize with their position.
Don't forget about Nathan Haddad who was arrested for possessing 5 empty magazines in January and is now facing felony charges and prison. Helping support and sponsor his legal defense fund (http://www.gofundme.com/1tkukc) would be a fantastic way to show support for the 2nd Amendment and would bring a lot of great publicity to any company who publicly supported him.
I just got off the phone with my buddy Ken Hackathorn; we talked about the Magpul statement- we are both in the hide and watch mode as this could go ugly for them; aka Recoil magazine/Jerry Tsai incident...
This situation will be interesting to watch to say the least
There are a lot of pissed off people and it seems to be gathering steam... http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/daniel-zimmerman/magpul-breaks-bad-continues-sales-to-ban-state-leos/
Supporting the good guys behind enemy lines. This is a good thing and will help bring to light who is on our side.
The citizens behind "enemy lines" aren't good guys? Rhetorical, I know. However, someone making a distinction between the two does help foster a US v. Them mentality and is offensive to many due to the equal rights issue. As in, why doesn't a citizen have rights to the same equipment to protect themselves and their families? Why should an officer hold you at gunpoint using a 30 round magazine so they can confiscate your 30 round magazine?
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others... - Animal Farm
Not picking a fight, just voicing my frustration.
I understand Magpul's reasoning and desire to support the individual troopers and deputies. But the fact is these LEOs for the most part will enforce the odious state gun laws when they encounter someone with an illegal magazine or firearm. Or they may lose their job.
It is not the protesting manufacturer that puts a trooper at risk for not selling them civilian banned mags or firearms. IT IS THEIR OWN STATE GOVT THAT PUTS THEM AT RISK by oppressing civilians and then trying to carve out exemptions for govt employees. Police that buy items under cover of the govt exemption are using saying they ARE representing the govt, not themselves.
How would Magpul feel about seeing a news photo of a SWAT team at a residential home to confiscate an "armory of illegal guns and magazines" and they all have Magpuls in their carbines?
Of course we do not want LEOs to be put at risk by not being as armed as possible. But neither do we want civilians to be put at risk. Any LEO that feels they need these items more than a civilian is de facto separating themselves from civilians and putting themselves in the govt basket. Where will their loyalties lie when push comes to shove and they are told to arrest someone and they are outfitted with "govt only" weapon systems?
LEO that refuse to carry out orders from their state, city or county to enforce the odious new gun laws are to be applauded. But it is one thing to say that now, and quite another when faced with refusing an order or seeing the items in front of them and risk losing a job, pension.
Magpul is standing tall with its refusal to cooperate with CO, and its efforts to pump out as many mags as cheaply as possible to ban state civilians. And I don't consider it offensive if a company just sells to whoever it is legal to sell to (neutral).
But I also think it is a sign of solidarity for civilians and the 2A (written specifically FOR civilians, not LEO or military) for a company to just refuse to sell to govt entities or representatives in banned localities. Let the LEOs in those locations vent their outrage and safety concerns to their depts and officials, since it is the same outrage we civilians feel. Don't blame manufacturers that support civilians because we should all be in the same boat. If you feel more special then you are part of the problem no matter your proclamations to the contrary.
This situation will be interesting to watch to say the least
I'm thinking Magpul will be given a pass on this. The reason is because they are probably going to pack their shit and leave CO. Heading out to Galt's Gulch scores enough points to cover the loss from supporting cops in the Communist States of America.
I personally wont boycott them because they don't make one single product I need. Why boycott what you are not going to buy?
Although, because they don't manufacture any game-changing products (sorry kids, the P-Mag is not a game changer), it could bite them.
I do, however, think they should stand with other companies and the Constitution on this.
Littlelebowski
03-01-13, 12:20
Reading about the cops in New Jersey charging citizens for owning 30 round mags makes me think the entire state needs to be blackballed insofar as LE sales.
The citizens behind "enemy lines" aren't good guys? Rhetorical, I know. However, someone making a distinction between the two does help foster a US v. Them mentality and is offensive to many due to the equal rights issue. As in, why doesn't a citizen have rights to the same equipment to protect themselves and their families? Why should an officer hold you at gunpoint using a 30 round magazine so they can confiscate your 30 round magazine?
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others... - Animal Farm
Not picking a fight, just voicing my frustration.
I agree, but it hasn't been equal for decades. The reality is that our 2A has already been infringed in EVERY state in the union. LEOs have been using items that non-LEOs have been barred from using for decades. While I would prefer Magpul told all the gov entities who have enacted a ban to pound sand I get his point.
Couple this with their desire to help Colorado and other state residents with a supply of pre-ban mags and I think they make a good case and will continue to get my business.
Cameron
I just got off the phone with my buddy Ken Hackathorn; we talked about the Magpul statement- we are both in the hide and watch mode as this could go ugly for them; aka Recoil magazine/Jerry Tsai incident
And the way Rich worded his statement leaves no room for misinterpretation or for a change of heart
As Ken and I discussed individual law enforcement officers sales probably make up less than 5% of their sales overall - the overwhelming majority of their high capacity magazines most likely go to the civilian market that by and large was extremely pro Magpul; even more so in recent weeks with their struggle in Colorado and pro 2A position
This situation will be interesting to watch to say the least
I think there is a huge and obvious distinction between the stated views of Jerry Tsai / Recoil magazine and those of Magpul. But that doesn't mean everyone will see it.
I think selling weapons, or standard capacity magazines, to law enforcement that citizens are banned from possessing is a direct affront to the Second Amendment. I also realize that Magpul can't dictate who their distributors sell to and sympathize with their position.
Here is the problem I have.
While I wholly support manufacturers who refuse to do business with the governments and LE officials who support these laws I don't want to see a LE officer who doesn't support the ban not be able to get them either.
We'd never support denying our loved ones a means of defense, well for some people their loved ones work in a LE capacity. The NYSP standing against the law is quite significant. Do we really want to say "no pmags for you?"
I think selling weapons, or standard capacity magazines, to law enforcement that citizens are banned from possessing is a direct affront to the Second Amendment. I also realize that Magpul can't dictate who their distributors sell to and sympathize with their position.
Don't forget about Nathan Haddad who was arrested for possessing 5 empty magazines in January and is now facing felony charges and prison. Helping support and sponsor his legal defense fund (http://www.gofundme.com/1tkukc) would be a fantastic way to show support for the 2nd Amendment and would bring a lot of great publicity to any company who publicly supported him.
I agree with this
Littlelebowski
03-01-13, 12:48
I think that the Jersey City department doesn't need PMAGs.
http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index.ssf/2013/01/jersey_city_police_say_man_had.html
I agree, but it hasn't been equal for decades. The reality is that our 2A has already been infringed in EVERY state in the union. LEOs have been using items that non-LEOs have been barred from using for decades. While I would prefer Magpul told all the gov entities who have enacted a ban to pound sand I get his point.
Couple this with their desire to help Colorado and other state residents with a supply of pre-ban mags and I think they make a good case and will continue to get my business.
Cameron
Here is the problem I have.
While I wholly support manufacturers who refuse to do business with the governments and LE officials who support these laws I don't want to see a LE officer who doesn't support the ban not be able to get them either.
We'd never support denying our loved ones a means of defense, well for some people their loved ones work in a LE capacity. The NYSP standing against the law is quite significant. Do we really want to say "no pmags for you?"
You both make valid points and I don't completely disagree. However, at this point in time there is a large movement, the "New York Boycott" (http://www.ncgunblog.com/new-york-boycott/), with 110 companies standing up so far and I think solidarity across the board will help inspire politicians to change some of these equal rights laws.
It's an interesting point for sure, standing up for ideology that sacrifices LEOs who probably aren't going to kick in doors looking for your guns and probably actually supports the 2a, or being practical about it and supporting LE even though it won't make as much of an impact with politicians.
I'm of the second (with Magpul) opinion.
I don't understand this argument and the reason behind these guys who have this 'you're either with us or against us' mentality in this particular case.
Isn't this EXACTLY what Magpul is doing?? Showing support for who IS with us.....So what's the fuss?
-Jax
I'll take a shot at answering this. First, I think the feeling is that if the government entity that your agency answers to is limiting a private citizen, why should an LEO be exempt from this. If it doesn't endanger the general public to be limited, how does it endanger an LEO.
Second, the feeling is that if you limit the individual LEOs, as well as their agencies, these individuals can pressure their administration who therefore will pressure the entity (city, county, state, federal) that they answer to.
Third, all well and good to support the officers that support us, but let's be honest here, not all of the LEOs support us. Some feel the same way the President feels, which is private citizens don't need certain firearms. How do you distinguish between an LEO that does support us from one that does not.
And, if you limit the agency that's fine, but what does it matter when you will supply the individual officer. All that happens is that the agency will possibly just supply the money to each officer (as in like part of the uniform allowance) to buy the mags. And where do you draw the line? Chicago, Los Angeles, New York? Where? If the federal ban kicks in, then what?
Take your pick of any or all of the above, but I think this is the line of thought regarding this situation. And I understand Magpul's stance and I understand why people are criticizing them for it. It's a complex situation.
The best thing for everyone, except the criminal element, is for the government (city, county, state and federal) to back away from this, restore 2A to what it should be, make carry permits available to all who qualify for them (no felonies or domestic violence etc), are willing to do extensive training (which means much longer training periods and higher standards) and start instituting programs that actually do something to curb gun violence. This includes an overhaul of the mental health system and really going after violent criminals. Chicago and California have both proven that stricter gun laws don't help, they just hinder the law abiding citizen that is trying to defend himself. Will it happen? No, but it's still the best answer.
As usual a domestic dispute got the cops in the house and the wifes request for an order of protection forced him to turn in his weapons for safe keeping. The kicker was that as officers were removing the weapnos the wife stated theres one more and led officers to the dreaded bushmaster.
(This story has been discussed among us for the last month. I think its the same case)
This is our main concern as to whether we should register or not here in NY. One crazy fight with the wife and bang instant felon.
Oops. Wrong topic. Sorry
I support Magpul, with a small clause of explanation.
If they stopped selling mags to the states that banned them from civilian ownership, LE would start pressuring chiefs, who would hopefully start pressuring mayors, on up the line. If it were going to work it would work faster when the states were isolated.
That being said, this sort of embargo only works if all places stop selling mags there. If there is even one crack, the plan does not work. It could never work...
I support Magpul, with a small clause of explanation.
If they stopped selling mags to the states that banned them from civilian ownership, LE would start pressuring chiefs, who would hopefully start pressuring mayors, on up the line. If it were going to work it would work faster when the states were isolated.
That being said, this sort of embargo only works if all places stop selling mags there. If there is even one crack, the plan does not work. It could never work...
And Colt is a pretty major crack.
Larry Vickers
03-01-13, 13:54
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
I support the efforts to get LEO's off the bench by restricting sales to only those which are available to the citizens within their jurisdiction.
That said, all I can say is that I've seen several different approaches to supporting our rights, from Olympic Arms, to BCM, to Magpul, to Silencerco/SWR. While none of them have the same approach, what they all have in common is they are DOING SOMETHING! I'm much more concerned with what companies like Glock, Sigarms, S&W, Colt, Remington etc. are doing, or NOT DOING as the case may be.
We really need to be concentrating our efforts on portraying all these smaller companies as doing a better job of getting the message out than the mega-corps that should have a much more visible (and impactful) public message.
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
I think everyone, including Magpul gets that. Problem is I think Magpul is also acting in genuine good faith. Sometimes there are two equally valid considerations that must be taken into account.
I think if we took all the negative feelings some hold towards Magpul for not "toeing the line" and directed them against Colt it would be more productive.
Colt, Glock and HK (and maybe S&W) are the ones who need to be feeling the heat. They are the ones with the checkered past of leaving us hanging when the chips are down. They are the ones who need to pick a team. And if one of them is forced to take a stand, then it will be significant.
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
I am in agreement with Mr. Vickers on this. I love Magpul and their products, but IMO this move is not a good tactic in the overall fight we are faced with. The point if embargos is to out pressure on everyone in an area so that those faced with the embargo begin to put internal pressure on the leadership responsible for the embargo. Doesn't always work even when executed properly, but it NEVER works when people circumvent the embargo. Magpul just offered those who need to push back against their leadership and out. They also just offered a way for departments behind enemy lines to continue to equip themselves as there were doing before. Either at a budget discount by forcing officers to pony up for their own equipment or by reimbursing the officers after having made purchases individually. The mags made available to LEO behind enemy lines could be sold on the civilian market at full retail value and better fund their move plans.
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately
I agree.
While Pmags are really the only product they make that I like, I think this is going to push me towards other brands of magazines.
Alaskapopo
03-01-13, 15:24
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
Not allowing officers on the front line to have the gear they need will push them away not draw them closer to the cause. As you said we need to hang together right now not divide ourselves apart with us vs them. Also not allowing officers to get the gear they need is not going to magically restore rights to citizens in those areas. Do you honestly think anti gun polticians are going to care if a beat cop is not allowed to have the rifle and mags he needs? Do you think the citizens in these crime infested areas like LA will care if cops die because they were out gunned?
Pat
CEO Richard Fitzpatrick:
On the other side of this, we have seen the efforts of the Larimer County Sheriff and others in the CO Sheriffs’ Association, who have been incredible advocates for the Second Amendment here in the fight we are currently in. If a ban passes, these guys would be the ones hurt, and the politicians wouldn’t care.
You see this is simply incorrect. And if it were somehow allowed to be acceptable then those in law enforcement would have absolutely no one to blame but themselves in the end.
Set the precedent now. They are using anything and everything at their disposal and "we" still, somehow, are not.
Magpul: If you don't want to start designing accessories for bolt-actions in two years then you might want to re-evaluate. Just a humble suggestion folks but we need everyone on board and we need them yesterday.
Alaskapopo
03-01-13, 15:31
CEO Richard Fitzpatrick:
On the other side of this, we have seen the efforts of the Larimer County Sheriff and others in the CO Sheriffs’ Association, who have been incredible advocates for the Second Amendment here in the fight we are currently in. If a ban passes, these guys would be the ones hurt, and the politicians wouldn’t care.
That statement is 100% correct!
Pat
Do you honestly think anti gun polticians are going to care if a beat cop is not allowed to have the rifle and mags he needs? Do you think the citizens in these crime infested areas like LA will care if cops die because they were out gunned?
Pat
If unions and cops can pull together for the "blue flu" to get what they want for themselves then you bet your ass they can do it for the people who pay their salaries. They swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States not their pensions.
That statement is 100% correct!
Pat
What is 100% correct is that such a mentality is why they are taking away from us piece by piece. As nice a guy as you surely are, you ain't the man I'd pick for the job of frontman if we want LE to start discovering and utilizing their collective leverage. A good cheerleader on the sidelines perhaps, but if we want leadership we look to the Glocktogo type.
Facts aren't always friendly but they are indeed facts nonetheless.
PA PATRIOT
03-01-13, 15:47
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
Larry,
So basically what your saying is that freedom of choice by the individual Officer is no longer allowed and we as a collective are not going to allow free choice by cutting off equipment to force a political position onto the Officers.
"F" your free choice L/E's, we will starve you equipment wise into submission! Plus how do we know who we are affecting here with a No L/E sales ban, maybe we are screwing thousands of Officers who support are cause 100% but I guess thats OK lets just lump all L/E's into a single group.
Many Line Officers do not have a voice or is there a way for them to facilitate a political change within their departments as the Police Commissions and Mayors do not care what the employees think on certain issues. Open you mouth and find yourself "Officially "F"ed With" for the rest of your short career. Also many departments have very specific rules about Officers being involved in political action groups like what the NY Troopers are dealing with while trying to support a anti AWB position.
So in this situation what can a Officer do besides shipping money off to the NRA and voting against the AWB politicians in the next election? Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
We should be supporting all L/E's like MagPul is to generate support for are cause in a positive way as one can caught more L/E's with a little cooperation then a bucket of grief.
Are groups like FN, COLT or HK going to stop selling to anti-2A LE agencies?
I don't think for a second that Rich, or Drake, are against us.
I kinda like Silencerco's method. If an agency wants to purchase their products, they require them to sign a declaration that they support the citizen's right to purchase and possess the same equipment. Refusal to sign the declaration means no sale.
Later on when gun control efforts come up and the politicos march all their little toy soldiers up on the dais, Silencerco pulls out that stack of declarations. That puts the agency in charge of how important it is to arm their officers. :D
CEO Richard Fitzpatrick:
On the other side of this, we have seen the efforts of the Larimer County Sheriff and others in the CO Sheriffs’ Association, who have been incredible advocates for the Second Amendment here in the fight we are currently in. If a ban passes, these guys would be the ones hurt, and the politicians wouldn’t care.
Whether you agree with it or not, I can understand why this happened. Magpul is being victimized by the Colorado legislature and needs support of those with political influence inside the state. Magpul is being supported by the Sheriff's Departments in Colorado and the company is returning the favor.
So in this situation what can a Officer do besides shipping money off to the NRA and voting against the AWB politicians in the next election?
Sounds good to many of us.
Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
Yes sir, you are indeed free to choose between money and liberty and that's a great part of being an American. Personally I wouldn't look down on you for taking what you can get for now so long as you have done everything within your power to secure our rights from within. Yet somehow, just as with Pat, I'll disappointingly conclude that you have your limitations based upon self-interests.
Larry,
So basically what your saying is that freedom of choice by the individual Officer is no longer allowed and we as a collective are not going to allow free choice by cutting off equipment to force a political position onto the Officers.
"F" your free choice L/E's, we will starve you equipment wise into submission! Plus how do we know who we are affecting here with a No L/E sales ban, maybe we are screwing thousands of Officers who support are cause 100% but I guess thats OK lets just lump all L/E's into a single group.
Many Line Officers do not have a voice or is there a way for them to facilitate a political change within their departments as the Police Commissions and Mayors do not care what the employees think on certain issues. Open you mouth and find yourself "Officially "F"ed With" for the rest of your short career. Also many departments have very specific rules about Officers being involved in political action groups like what the NY Troopers are dealing with while trying to support a anti AWB position.
So in this situation what can a Officer do besides shipping money off to the NRA and voting against the AWB politicians in the next election? Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
We should be supporting all L/E's like MagPul is to generate support for are cause in a positive way as one can caught more L/E's with a little cooperation then a bucket of grief.
U mad bro? :D
You always have the option to hold a vote of no confidence in your union representation and/or administrators. You have a hundred options in opposing this nonsense, yet you're getting pissed at a Tier 1 operator who's done more than your entire department has to defend our rights, freedom and way of life? Seriously?
Get some skin in the game or stand on the sidelines quietly while others do the heavy lift for you. We'd appreciate your assistance, but your money to the NRA and ballot choices are not enough. It's time to put up or shut up. :mad:
Are groups like FN, COLT or HK going to stop selling to anti-2A LE agencies?
I don't think for a second that Rich, or Drake, are against us.
Ed the last thing anyone here wants is for them to be falsely portrayed as being "against us". Sorry but that is somewhat reckless talk because we all know that isn't the case at all.
The question is to what extent is it that they are willing to either utilize or attempt to utilize their potential leverage when it's needed most? Just as with law enforcement?
This isn't about demonizing Magpul, it's about imploring them for help at the most critical of times. There is a genuine sense of urgency here and they have the ability to be heard.
CarlosDJackal
03-01-13, 16:10
As a former LEO (and someone who is currently in the process of joining another agency) I am torn on this.
On the one hand, I can see their stance in that they want to make sure that those we as a society whom we have hired to perform duties that we are unwilling to do ourselves, have the tools they need to do so. It is akin to not providing our Firefighters and EMTs with the life-saving equipment they need.
For example, if there is a ban on selling body armor in a jurisdiction should this ban also apply to Emergency Services personnel? What about Firefighters or EMTs who service areas in which they themselves have been shot when responding to a call?
But at the same time, I don't feel like someone should be allowed to purchase a banned item for personal ownership just because they wear a badge. I do not think they should prevent agencies from purchasing items which they will be issuing to their Officers. But I am not sure that individual LEOs should be given exceptions except in certain circumstances.
And that's the rub. I spent 9-years a Volunteer Deputy who had to purchase his own uniform and equipment as well as pay for his own training (to include the LE Academy). I am in the process of once again volunteering to become an Auxiliary Deputy who will have to purchase his own equipment. And if a magazine ban is enacted, should I be allowed to purchase "banned magazines" so that I can perform my duties and serve my community to the best of my ability?
What if this would only be allowed when I was on duty? Unfortunately, the State Code explicitly states that anyone who is sworn in as an LEO is always on duty and is expected to perform their duties 24/7/12/365. What is worse is I am not even eligible for the protection of the FOP, PBA or any other LE Unions and have absolutely no say on how they should support such bogus laws.
There are current and former members of our military who also support these laws. Some have even stated so in public. Does this mean that we should not allow the individual Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine to be granted an exception to the banned items for use on duty? Why should anyone who wears or wore the uniform have to pay for mcchrystal or powell's views? Should every member of the NRA pay for what NRA board member joaquin jackson's views?
Is punishing the individual Officer really going to help turn the anti-gun sentiment against that bitch feinstein or that bastard obama? Do we really want to increase the dangers LEOs have to face for political reasons? I know obama and his cronies do, but does that mean we should lower ourselves to his standards?
But I also submit that not taking actions is not going to alleviate the problem. What BCM has done in response to that (POS) Police Chief testimony is very appropriate. Any Police Chief or Sheriff who uses their office to support these asinine and useless laws should loose the support of the very manufacturers and suppliers that they are trying to shut down. But I also think that the exceptions for individual Officers by MagPul also makes sense - but only to a point.
If the Police Departments start circumventing boycotts against their agencies by requiring individual Officers to purchase equipment that they should be supplying, then the manufacturers would have no choice but to pull support for all of them. There should be exceptions though, because I know of at least one Colorado Department that requires each new hire to purchase their own sidearm.
Unfortunately, it is the public that will inevitably suffer for this stupidity. And this will include those who voted against this POS of a POTUS. The Supreme Court has already decided that LEOs are not under any obligation to stop crime. While a huge majority of the LEOs I know will do everything they can to do so; not allowing them to purchase the items they will need to increase their chance of survival will result in an increase of LEOs who would rather not risk their life. This will result in an increase of unanswered 9-1-1 call. There is absolutely no law anywhere that requires an LEO to give his or her life up in the line of duty.
So where does this leave us? If I were a manufacturer or supplier I would enact two different policies for agencies in anti-gun jurisdictions. The first is for agencies whose Administrators have decided to support the anti-gun agenda. I would refuse to conduct business with these agencies but would, on a case-by-case basis, allow individual Officers to purchase products.
The second is for agencies in anti-gun jurisdictions whose Administrators who has either stayed neutral or spoken up in support of the Constitution. I would continue to conduct business with those agencies but not with individual Officers. The assumption would be that those agencies will supply their Officers with the equipment they need.
The problem with this approach is you are opening yourself up to a lawsuit just because their are way too many lawyers in this country - but that's another topic. While the U.S. Constitution is very specific on what is protected. It does not state whether or not fighting for rights we are about to loose includes taking away the rights of those who we have hired to perform specific duties. This is not as black-or-white as it might seem. JM2CW.
ADDED: If we really think that LEOs should suffer the same equipment ban as everyone else; then we should consider outright disbanding these agencies so that everyone has to fend for themselves. We hire these guys to perform certain duties and with that contract, there is a reasonable expectation that they must be equipped to be able to do so. If we do not allow them to have the same equipment when on or off-duty, then we cannot expect them to perform what they were hired for in the first place.
Larry,
So basically what your saying is that freedom of choice by the individual Officer is no longer allowed and we as a collective are not going to allow free choice by cutting off equipment to force a political position onto the Officers.
"F" your free choice L/E's, we will starve you equipment wise into submission! Plus how do we know who we are affecting here with a No L/E sales ban, maybe we are screwing thousands of Officers who support are cause 100% but I guess thats OK lets just lump all L/E's into a single group.
Many Line Officers do not have a voice or is there a way for them to facilitate a political change within their departments as the Police Commissions and Mayors do not care what the employees think on certain issues. Open you mouth and find yourself "Officially "F"ed With" for the rest of your short career. Also many departments have very specific rules about Officers being involved in political action groups like what the NY Troopers are dealing with while trying to support a anti AWB position.
So in this situation what can a Officer do besides shipping money off to the NRA and voting against the AWB politicians in the next election? Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
We should be supporting all L/E's like MagPul is to generate support for are cause in a positive way as one can caught more L/E's with a little cooperation then a bucket of grief.
First, as a citizen in jurisdiction F, the officers you're talking about have the same equipment available to them that every other citizen does. If your city, county state only allows ten round magazines that's what you get as well. Because as a citizen, you're allowed to buy what every other non LEO can buy from the same places the average citizen buys from. The officers in said jurisdiction just no longer get preferential treatment or exemption from the law.
Maybe expressing your doubt as an individual screws your career, but as a collective? I doubt it. Your union is way too strong for that. And lets be honest, they can't fire all of you. And they can't fire all of you for saying you need certain equipment that you no longer have access to. That's not supporting a cause, that's simply saying something needs to be done to get you the equipment you need. The pressure exerted from your POV is one of need, that in turn puts the responsibility on your superiors to apply pressure where needed. The participating gun companies have made their position clear. Step away from all of this anti 2A nonsense, restore the rights of average law abiding citizens and that in turn restores your rights.
I kinda like Silencerco's method. If an agency wants to purchase their products, they require them to sign a declaration that they support the citizen's right to purchase and possess the same equipment. Refusal to sign the declaration means no sale.
Later on when gun control efforts come up and the politicos march all their little toy soldiers up on the dais, Silencerco pulls out that stack of declarations. That puts the agency in charge of how important it is to arm their officers. :D
That's actually quite good. And it's a solution rather than a point of dissension.
But again Olympic, Magpul, Barrett and Ruger aren't the main players in the game. We need to direct our efforts to Colt, HK, Glock, FN, SIG and S&W.
Alaskapopo
03-01-13, 16:27
I kinda like Silencerco's method. If an agency wants to purchase their products, they require them to sign a declaration that they support the citizen's right to purchase and possess the same equipment. Refusal to sign the declaration means no sale.
I could support that.
Pat
I could support that.
Pat
See there are plenty of practical solutions that will work. Perhaps Magpul will simply adopt this policy.
We need to direct our efforts to Colt, HK, Glock, FN, SIG and S&W.
And what efforts are those? Seems like this board (and gun owners in general) are divided about what should and shouldn't be happening with these companies.
And what efforts are those? Seems like this board (and gun owners in general) are divided about what should and shouldn't be happening with these companies.
Well for starters if we are gonna write "I won't buy any of your guns unless you refuse to sell to NY" kind of letters we should be sending them to those guys and not trying to strong arm little guys.
While I appreciate what a lot of companies are doing, until Colt, HK, Glock, etc. does it, it's mostly just a symbolic objection.
brushy bill
03-01-13, 18:39
Well for starters if we are gonna write "I won't buy any of your guns unless you refuse to sell to NY" kind of letters we should be sending them to those guys and not trying to strong arm little guys.
While I appreciate what a lot of companies are doing, until Colt, HK, Glock, etc. does it, it's mostly just a symbolic objection.
Big or small, only the folks standing up for us now with the NY Boycott will get my business in the future.
Big or small, only the folks standing up for us now with the NY Boycott will get my business in the future.
And that is absolutely your decision to make. I'm not gonna say you are wrong.
From FB.
REGARDING LEO SALES
March 1st, 2013
Back in 1990, when I was deployed in Desert Shield and Desert Storm as a Marine grunt, some companies prioritized me items for my M16 for shipping that I purchased with my own funds. After getting out and forming Magpul in 1999, I established the same priority policy for Military and Law Enforcement, due to the requirements of their profession.
The same policy has been in place for 13 years now and has never been an issue until a few days ago. I do not support the idea that individual police officers should be punished for the actions of their elected officials. That said, I understand the concerns that some have with Law Enforcement officers getting special treatment while at the same time denouncing second amendment rights to another citizen in the same state.
With the fight in Colorado right now we do not have time to implement a new program, so I have suspended all LE sales to ban states until we can implement a system wherein any Law Enforcement Officer buying for duty use will have to promise to uphold their oath to the US Constitution - specifically the second and fourteenth amendments - as it applies to all citizens.
Richard Fitzpatrick
President/CEO - Founder
Magpul Industries
Larry,
So basically what your saying is that freedom of choice by the individual Officer is no longer allowed and we as a collective are not going to allow free choice by cutting off equipment to force a political position onto the Officers.
I'm not Mr. Vickers, nor have I been at a Holiday Inn Express lately, but my thoughts on this are as follows:
Freedom of choice for individual citizens is theoretically eliminated by laws passed by idiot legislatures. LEO in the area are going to enforce those laws and become the physical force to remove the freedom of choice for the individual citizen. LEO in these areas are free to do so because they do not have to deal with the consequences of their actions. They are protected by the exemptions and have no reason to become politically active. We have gone decades with tolerating exemptions. Exemptions to concealed carry laws, mag bans.... The only thing those laws have done is to create a protected class that doesnt have to with bother making a choice
"F" your free choice L/E's, we will starve you equipment wise into submission! Plus how do we know who we are affecting here with a No L/E sales ban, maybe we are screwing thousands of Officers who support are cause 100% but I guess thats OK lets just lump all L/E's into a single group.
We are effecting people who have been safe from the laws the rest of us have to deal with and forcing them into making a choice. Some will choose to hate us, some won't, but most will be forced to take a side. There will be no equipment starvation, unless you know something about the likes of Colt,Glock... The gestures being made by companies are more symbolic than anything, but they do raise awareness.
Many Line Officers do not have a voice or is there a way for them to facilitate a political change within their departments as the Police Commissions and Mayors do not care what the employees think on certain issues. Open you mouth and find yourself "Officially "F"ed With" for the rest of your short career. Also many departments have very specific rules about Officers being involved in political action groups like what the NY Troopers are dealing with while trying to support a anti AWB position.
So in this situation what can a Officer do besides shipping money off to the NRA and voting against the AWB politicians in the next election? Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
Everyone has a voice. LEO dont seem to have a problem finding their voices when its time to line up behind politicians signing asinine laws. They dont seem to have a hard time finding a voice when contract negotiations come into play. So they do have a voice, they just have had no reason to have to use it for this topic because they have been given a pass. Why stick your neck out when you dont have to?
I have a well paying career at a company that isnt all that gun friendly and I choose to tolerate their policies because they pay me well. They have made no effort to lobby for or against gun laws, but obey the laws of my sate. They allow us to exercise our first amendment rights as individuals so long as we dont purport to represent the company, which I feel is acceptable. If they were to change policy and try to force me to violate the rights of my coworkers or fellow citizens Id leave as fast as I could.
We should be supporting all L/E's like MagPul is to generate support for are cause in a positive way as one can caught more L/E's with a little cooperation then a bucket of grief.
Support is like respect: a two way street. LEO have had an out in the fight for the 2nd for decades and it hasnt worked out well for our side. Doing the same thing again and again and again while expecting different results does not lead to a good psychological diagnosis
As Ryan pointed out, apparently Mr. Fitzpatrick has taken the noble stand as of about an hour ago. We are strengthened gentleman, Magpul deserves our fullest acclaim.
I just read that as well.
From FB.
REGARDING LEO SALES
March 1st, 2013
Back in 1990, when I was deployed in Desert Shield and Desert Storm as a Marine grunt, some companies prioritized me items for my M16 for shipping that I purchased with my own funds. After getting out and forming Magpul in 1999, I established the same priority policy for Military and Law Enforcement, due to the requirements of their profession.
The same policy has been in place for 13 years now and has never been an issue until a few days ago. I do not support the idea that individual police officers should be punished for the actions of their elected officials. That said, I understand the concerns that some have with Law Enforcement officers getting special treatment while at the same time denouncing second amendment rights to another citizen in the same state.
With the fight in Colorado right now we do not have time to implement a new program, so I have suspended all LE sales to ban states until we can implement a system wherein any Law Enforcement Officer buying for duty use will have to promise to uphold their oath to the US Constitution - specifically the second and fourteenth amendments - as it applies to all citizens.
Richard Fitzpatrick
President/CEO - Founder
Magpul Industries
As Ryan pointed out, apparently Mr. Fitzpatrick has taken the noble stand as of about an hour ago. We are strengthened gentleman, Magpul deserves our fullest acclaim.
I am just relaying the message. Mr. Fitzpatrick has started a thread of his own here. My foot is going to steer well clear of my mouth tonight :D.
When citizens in NY and CA complain about their draconian gun laws, people here generally tell them tough shit, move.
Maybe it's time to tell LEO's the same thing.
You can own cool stuff when you move to and support free America, just like everyone else.
Cops who work for California cities that won't give them AWB letterhead know the score, they can take the bullet button off their M4 when they retire to AZ.
Burmese Karen rebels in hell wish they had new USGI mags with green followers. In 2002 many regular gun owners wished they could purchase boatloads of USGI mags for 9 bucks a pop. The gun owners behind enemy lines will wish they could legally purchase 9 buck USGI mags next year. Regular gun owners who can't move easily didn't do anything wrong either, but they're getting the short straw anyway.
The vast majority of ban state cops will violate the constitutional rights of ban state gun owners without giving it a second thought and say tough break, but you knew the law, should have turned your guns and mags in. I wouldn't want my products associated with that.
This is war. Good people get hurt in war, on all sides. There were good, honorable people in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in WWII. They got bombed right along side the bad ones and the ones who didn't care either way. I see people sacrificing everything to move to places like Arizona, or just stay employed in Arizona, because out here you can be free. Just like people left everything behind in Europe to not live under tyranny.
The vast majority of ban state cops will violate the constitutional rights of ban state gun owners without giving it a second thought and say tough break, but you knew the law, should have turned your guns and mags in. I wouldn't want my products associated with that.
I can assure you that you don't have a clue as to what the hell you are talking about in the above quote. But if it makes you feel better about gun manufacturers sticking it to the man because you got a speeding ticket somewhere down the line then more power to ya!
You can all continue to stir the pot and cannibalize each other with all of this "Us vs. Them" bullshit comparing the everyday 2nd amendment loving street cop to the nazis all you want. The ones who truly want to take your guns and mags away are laughing at all of this stupidity.
I can assure you that you don't have a clue as to what the hell you are talking about in the above quote. But if it makes you feel better about gun manufacturers sticking it to the man because you got a speeding ticket somewhere down the line then more power to ya!
You can all continue to stir the pot and cannibalize each other with all of this "Us vs. Them" bullshit comparing the everyday 2nd amendment loving street cop to the nazis all you want. The ones who truly want to take your guns and mags away are laughing at all of this stupidity.
Nick there's no need to distort truth. In fact the supposed "us vs them" you refer to in this case has been largely generated by law enforcement interest advocates and you're simply perpetuating the harmful spin.
We all know that those such as Pat and yourself almost certainly understand a group like Magpul is not out to hurt you in any way. In fact you must know they are striving for the greater good, yet still complain and chastise.
That is what is creating the divide you speak of. If even 55% of police officers say they will not accept what civilians in their perspective states can't legally own then this battle is all but won. However so long as those such as yourself within the ranks will be content with your special privileges there will never be a push for justice from within those same ranks.
I can assure you that you don't have a clue as to what the hell you are talking about in the above quote. But if it makes you feel better about gun manufacturers sticking it to the man because you got a speeding ticket somewhere down the line then more power to ya!
You can all continue to stir the pot and cannibalize each other with all of this "Us vs. Them" bullshit comparing the everyday 2nd amendment loving street cop to the nazis all you want. The ones who truly want to take your guns and mags away are laughing at all of this stupidity.
I've never gotten a speeding ticket in my life.
I'm from California I still know LEO's out there, some of who actually support gun companies applying non-cop rules to cops. Just like any gun owning guy who had a successful anchored life in CA before it went completely nuts on guns in 1999, they can't wait to retire and move somewhere like AZ or NV. They'd never go door to door confiscating firearms, even the bad cops and the ones just there for a paycheck won't do that, because dying isn't much of a living.
If someone is going through a divorce and one spouse calls the cops to harass the other one, would they rummage through the house and arrest someone for possession of any found contraband? Maybe 5-10% of cops would turn a blind eye. I read about it all the time on calguns. Now these politicians in ban states want to make contraband of lawfully held guns mags and ammo.
And no, I've never been arrested, or had crazy spouse issues, or had cops rummage through my house either. I don't even use 5.56 pmags.
Gun owners have economic power. The zumbo and recoil incidents prove it. If we can shut down the flow of guns to ban states and the politicians these guns protect, then we'll see some real change. We are 95% of the gun market. Fudds now only make up 20% of gun owners. Like He-Man, we have the power. The power to make and the power to break.
PA PATRIOT
03-01-13, 21:13
You know what guys I think I will gracefully withdraw from this discussion as I have no horse in this race. This L/E sales ban never affected me in the least but I was trying to give a voice to those Officers that work in a AWB state that could be possibly screwed by this so called boycott.
Now as many have stated there are plenty of other retailers that will happily accept L/E dollars for the gear they need or they can just use a middle man in a free state so I guess its really a mute point on my part to voice a opinion different then the prevailing theme here in GD.
Overall I still feel this Boycott of L/E sales is only going to drive a deeper wedge between L/E's and their civilian counterparts were L/E's will now lean to support enforcement of a AWB since no one had their backs with this sales ban business.
In closing it was very disappointing that MagPul has bailed on their previous position and have now copped out to the pressure of the internet. Not many have the moral character to stand firm for what they believe is right even if it directly clashes with the opinion of growing opposition. But as I have decided its just not worth my time to be involved in trivial debates which does not affect me in the least but I would think a company such as MagPul who is directly involved in this issue on so many levels would have bigger beans and stand their ground.
We all know that those such as Pat and yourself almost certainly understand a group like Magpul is not out to hurt you in any way. In fact you must know they are striving for the greater good, yet still complain and chastise.
"Complain and chastise"? I actually support the movement against agencies in ban states who's top admin support any kind of AWB or magazine ban. But not anything that affects the individual street cop looking to purchase weapons or mags for duty or any law abiding citizen either.
The only folks being "chastised" by any of this is the individual street cop with half of the people responding to these threads on this forum comparing them to nazis and claiming that they don't have any "skin in the game" or constantly making the ridiculous statement that individual LEO's think that their "life is more valuable" than the average citizen's life. Thats the only thing I am complaining about.
Frankly I think it's a joke that anyone believes that any of these companies will suffer financially from taking their "stand" against LE agencies inside of ban states. Every single one of them can't even keep up with the current demand for their products now. They sell out anything they have in minutes. They have more business now than they could ever handle regardless of their production capabilities.
I've never gotten a speeding ticket in my life.
The speeding ticket reference was a ridiculous assumption in-response to your ridiculous assumption that the "vast majority of ban state cops will violate the constitutional rights of ban state gun owners without giving it a second though"
I can assure you that you don't have a clue as to what the hell you are talking about in the above quote. But if it makes you feel better about gun manufacturers sticking it to the man because you got a speeding ticket somewhere down the line then more power to ya!
You can all continue to stir the pot and cannibalize each other with all of this "Us vs. Them" bullshit comparing the everyday 2nd amendment loving street cop to the nazis all you want. The ones who truly want to take your guns and mags away are laughing at all of this stupidity.
Then give them a reason to stop laughing! :mad:
Then give them a reason to stop laughing! :mad:
Im not the one making up stories of my dog getting shot, my wife getting pushed to the ground causing a miscarriage and me getting tased in the same alleged incident on top of my brother getting shot at by the police on a traffic stop, am I?
Im not the one making up stories of my dog getting shot, my wife getting pushed to the ground causing a miscarriage and me getting tased in the same alleged incident on top of my brother getting shot at by the police on a traffic stop, am I?
I slammed that guy too. What bearing does that have on what I posted? :confused:
brushy bill
03-01-13, 22:00
I am just relaying the message. Mr. Fitzpatrick has started a thread of his own here. My foot is going to steer well clear of my mouth tonight :D.
Where might one find it? Looking, but can't seem to find it.
Where might one find it? Looking, but can't seem to find it.
I posted it in this thread, Mr Fitzpatrick also started his own thread in the Magpul subforum.
Here is his thread.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=125685
brushy bill
03-01-13, 22:17
Here is his thread.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=125685
Thanks Ryan.
...
Many will call these Officers "Pussies" for not endangering their careers and the financial security of their families for not raising hell but lets be real here most M4 Carbine members talk a good game but if they were in the same position with a Pro AWB administration would they still shit can a well paying career over a political issue.
....
Let's not forget that LEO's are citizens first. When we start giving out exemptions (i.e. Congress) we are creating a privileged class and make it harder for them (it's human nature) to be willing to surrender those same privileges. Factually most LE's don't fire their weapons in the course of duty, even fewer fire a carbine enforcing the law. So tell me again why they have to have exemptions. How many standard capacity magazines do they "need"?
Thank God that in 1776 we didn't have unions and "well paying careers" that were more important than "political issues".
Overall I still feel this Boycott of L/E sales is only going to drive a deeper wedge between L/E's and their civilian counterparts
Uh, the only LEO's that aren't civilians are MP's in the US Military. Cops are civilians--that's probably the attitude that needs to be adjusted to, 'remove the wedge'.
So tell me again why they have to have exemptions. How many standard capacity magazines do they "need"?
I don't know? Exactly how many would you "need" if responding to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbqvWZoE5TE
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
Here's my view, call me Stalin or Hiltler if you like but you don't "need" any of these things that we are on here debating over. I don't think there should be a need for any type of exemptions for magazines or weapons because I truly believe it is your God given right to own it, as it is mine as a U.S. citizen to protect myself & my loved ones Just. Like. You. However, my job is such that I do indeed "NEED" the best equipment I can get to respond to incidents that you will never be tasked with responding to in order to protect life and/or take a life to save a life.
Alienating me and those like me as nothing more than some jack-booted thugs who are all on-board with coming into your homes and confiscating your guns is the exact type of conflict that our current POTUS and all of his minions want to occur. The default knee-jerk reaction by some here to do exactly that wont help anyone. It is all just emotion driven posturing that amounts to ZERO to further our cause.
Im done here in GD. Carry on.
I think that the Jersey City department doesn't need PMAGs.
http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index.ssf/2013/01/jersey_city_police_say_man_had.html
I worked for that agency for several years before escaping out west. I have four relatives that work or have worked there as well. I can tell you with absolutely no equivocation that the agency in question, and many agencies in Jersey, are rife with cops and their management who are all too happy to arrest anyone who even thinks about owning a P-Mag or a 15 round Glock magazine. Guns have been regulated so heavily in Jersey for so long that the average "non gun owner" there views an AR15 like you and I would view an RPG or Claymore mine. I swear there are people there that think a gun left to its own devices will jump up off the table, load itself and start shooting at school buses. My ex-father-in-law was chief of police of a town in Jersey that's not far from Jersey City. When he and his wife came out west for a visit once, he saw my AK47 in the gun safe and said: "Only ****ing maniacs own guns like that. What the hell is your problem? Those things are illegal. You need to get rid of that thing before you lose your job over it." He was completely incredulous when I told him that they were perfectly legal where I lived. Then I showed him the short-barreled one in my closet for home protection and he almost had a stroke. ****ing Jersey.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 00:44
Let's not forget that LEO's are citizens first. When we start giving out exemptions (i.e. Congress) we are creating a privileged class and make it harder for them (it's human nature) to be willing to surrender those same privileges. Factually most LE's don't fire their weapons in the course of duty, even fewer fire a carbine enforcing the law. So tell me again why they have to have exemptions. How many standard capacity magazines do they "need"?
Thank God that in 1776 we didn't have unions and "well paying careers" that were more important than "political issues".
Fact is fatal assaults on LEO's are up drastically the last 3 years. Fact more and more officers are getting involved in shootings. Fact officers now more than ever need to have good tools. Fact trying to alienate law enforcement will not bring us (Gun rights activists) together.
Pat
Fact is fatal assaults on LEO's are up drastically the last 3 years. Fact more and more officers are getting involved in shootings. Fact officers now more than ever need to have good tools. Fact trying to alienate law enforcement will not bring us (Gun rights activists) together.
Pat
Fact, fatal assaults are up on ALL citizens, including citizen LEO's. Fact, more and more armed home invasions by multiple assailants are happening every year. Fact, everyone now more than ever need the good tools. Fact, trying to alienate the citizens you police by accepting special privileges will alienate them and not bring us together.
In 90% of the violent encounters in our society, the 1st person on the scene is the victim, not the police. Facts bear this out. Please stop trying to drive a wedge between citizens and LEO's. :(
I don't know? Exactly how many would you "need" if responding to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbqvWZoE5TE
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting
Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
Here's my view, call me Stalin or Hiltler if you like but you don't "need" any of these things that we are on here debating over. I don't think there should be a need for any type of exemptions for magazines or weapons because I truly believe it is your God given right to own it, as it is mine as a U.S. citizen to protect myself & my loved ones Just. Like. You. However, my job is such that I do indeed "NEED" the best equipment I can get to respond to incidents that you will never be tasked with responding to in order to protect life and/or take a life to save a life.
Alienating me and those like me as nothing more than some jack-booted thugs who are all on-board with coming into your homes and confiscating your guns is the exact type of conflict that our current POTUS and all of his minions want to occur. The default knee-jerk reaction by some here to do exactly that wont help anyone. It is all just emotion driven posturing that amounts to ZERO to further our cause.
Im done here in GD. Carry on.
The first thing you need to know is that there are no "God Given Rights" you can prove that by counting the number of people who died to secure us those rights.
All we have to figure out now is who will have to sacrifice to resecure them. Thats the tough question.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
DreadPirateMoyer
03-02-13, 01:03
Fact is fatal assaults on LEO's are up drastically the last 3 years. Fact more and more officers are getting involved in shootings. Fact officers now more than ever need to have good tools. Fact trying to alienate law enforcement will not bring us (Gun rights activists) together.
Pat
Really?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/no-mr-vice-president-cops_n_2568497.html
First chart tells me less cops are dying today than before.
Fact is fatal assaults on LEO's are up drastically the last 3 years. Fact more and more officers are getting involved in shootings. Fact officers now more than ever need to have good tools.
Pat
Fact, fatal assaults are up on ALL citizens, including citizen LEO's. Fact, more and more armed home invasions by multiple assailants are happening every year. Fact, everyone now more than ever need the good tools.
So, what's the numbers?
Really?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/no-mr-vice-president-cops_n_2568497.html
First chart tells me less cops are dying today than before.
The facts behind those statistics are that better medical technology, improvements in body armor, better police training and better skilled EMT's, Paramedics and hospital staff are behind that number. The real metric by which to gauge what you are discussing is the assault rate against law enforcement, which has been steadily rising for the last sixteen years according to the FBI. Deaths have been falling, but assaults are rising.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr
SWATcop556
03-02-13, 02:09
I'm just trying to figure out how we have people who try and demonize a company who sells to LEOs in ban states yet cheers "Patriots" for companies who wont sell in a ban state but will sell to an anti-2A liberal agency who happens to be located in a free state.
The first thing you need to know is that there are no "God Given Rights" you can prove that by counting the number of people who died to secure us those rights.
You're right. Its a basic human right.
Larry Vickers
03-02-13, 02:24
Hey gang we all understand this stance is painful for LEO's - we get it. What you guys need to realize is exemptions to LE have gotten us to where we are today - this time around the horn many companies, including Magpul for the time being , are saying enough is enough;
We are gonna hold LE to the same standards as the law abiding taxpayers who pay their salaries and buy all their equipment are held to - period
That way maybe if we get law enforcement pushing back against the politicians and chief LEO's who enact this crap we might see a different result - cause plan 'exemption' ain't working
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 03:06
Fact, fatal assaults are up on ALL citizens, including citizen LEO's. Fact, more and more armed home invasions by multiple assailants are happening every year. Fact, everyone now more than ever need the good tools. Fact, trying to alienate the citizens you police by accepting special privileges will alienate them and not bring us together.
In 90% of the violent encounters in our society, the 1st person on the scene is the victim, not the police. Facts bear this out. Please stop trying to drive a wedge between citizens and LEO's. :(
Actualy fatal assaults are down on citizens (violent crime has been trending down for a long time) but they are up on LEO's since the financial crisis. With death rates reaching those only experienced in the 1970's.
Pat
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 03:16
So, what's the numbers?
http://www.wtov9.com/news/news/line-of-duty-deaths-increasing-for-police-officers/nD6Yf/
http://www.odmp.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States
Officer deaths have gone up starting in 2010 sharly while overall violent crime has been trending down since the 1990's.
Pat
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 03:19
Hey gang we all understand this stance is painful for LEO's - we get it. What you guys need to realize is exemptions to LE have gotten us to where we are today - this time around the horn many companies, including Magpul for the time being , are saying enough is enough;
We are gonna hold LE to the same standards as the law abiding taxpayers who pay their salaries and buy all their equipment are held to - period
That way maybe if we get law enforcement pushing back against the politicians and chief LEO's who enact this crap we might see a different result - cause plan 'exemption' ain't working
Its more than painful it could end up with more officers getting killed and that blood will be on the hands of not just the politicians who passed the law but also on those that supported these type of efforts to keep good gear out of patrol officers hands. I know that is not what people want but that is where these efforts could very well lead if not one flinches in this game of chicken.
Pat
The facts behind those statistics are that better medical technology, improvements in body armor, better police training and better skilled EMT's, Paramedics and hospital staff are behind that number. The real metric by which to gauge what you are discussing is the assault rate against law enforcement, which has been steadily rising for the last sixteen years according to the FBI. Deaths have been falling, but assaults are rising.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/ucr
But Alaskapopo said "fatal assaults."
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 03:22
Really?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/no-mr-vice-president-cops_n_2568497.html
First chart tells me less cops are dying today than before.
56 officers were killed in 2009 in 2010 160 were killed. Last year it was 128. There was obviously a sharp upward trend after the financial crisis.
Pat
Its more than painful it could end up with more officers getting killed and that blood will be on the hands of not just the politicians who passed the law but also on those that supported these type of efforts to keep good gear out of patrol officers hands. I know that is not what people want but that is where these efforts could very well lead if not one flinches in this game of chicken.
Pat
For the love of god will you PLEASE stop playing this card, we get it...
I actually think companies should still sell to LE if there is an exemption, no point in punishing those who don't have a say beyond the same voting power everyone does. Those companies can then put profits from LE agencies into political donations/campaigns/etc against the sitting legislators and the governor who were in favor of the awb/mag ban/etc.
Use their own money against them.
I don't think refusal to sell to LE has as much sway over politicians as most people here believe, as politicians see it as the fault of the manufacturer if LE are under equipped due to their boycott, not their own fault. And they would be correct for the most part. Companies a part of the boycott are literally putting LE at risk over an ideology. I'm fine with putting your own life on the line, but don't hurt others who very well may be on your side, but are caught in the crossfire and can't do anything about it. I would sacrifice my life to defend the constitution and I've taken a few oaths saying so, but I won't force someone else to go into harms way under-equipped because his or her superiors are retarded.
I honestly feel like a boycott of LE is the same kind of knee jerk reaction that led to assault weapon bans from the other side of the aisle. We need to fight smarter, not harder. The way SKD made asshole proof mags to fight resellers, and donates the extra proceeds. BCM does the same with their BCGs. What I would do if I was, say, Magpul for example, would be to allow department sales, but add 15% to the cost and donate that entire 15% plus all profits to fighting the politicians so the next round of elections removes them all and gets rid of the state awb and mag ban. That has so many more benefits that comes with less democrats in office. Now adding to the cost may very well mean Magpul doesn't get the bid. But if everyone does it, then LEAs will pay the cost because they need the equipment.
Boycotting a trade show and convention is one thing, but refusing sales is another matter entirely.
Disclosure: I am not LE, I have no family that are LE, but I do have family both in ban states (Cali and Hawaii to an extent) and free states (Nevada and Oklahoma). I'm just trying to make the most logical argument and solution, not one based on emotion that burns bridges and puts more people in danger.
Historically speaking, LEOs in CA have always been exempt since the implementation of ban laws in CA. When has that changed anything for us? Never. It hasn't.
Simply speaking, a fire needs to be lit under the collective ass of a group of people--and that group is not the Calguns.net or CA RKBA crowd. Shit, we light that fire under our asses ourselves. We don't need anyone to do it for us. But cops never really had to worry about that since they have been exempt. And that has meant that they've never had the incentive to care. I'm not saying that they're bad people for that either. It's just that if something doesn't concern you, you don't really care about it. It's kinda like how people who generally protest the drinking age are on the lower side of 21, whereas people who are 21 and over don't really care since it doesn't affect them.
As many of you who already see the light realize, the fact of the matter is that by putting this kind of pressure on the LEO community can light that quintessential fire up under their ass to do something. Nothing will change otherwise, or the gun laws in CA would already have been decent.
Pat, I am very well aware of your stance on this topic and I understand where you are coming from. But remember that I am the guy who gets to defend his house with a locked-in TEN round mag. The cops here don't have to do that and naturally they've never worried about it like us regular folk have.
I hope my post makes sense since I am writing very late at night (or morning) and I am about to crash.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 04:00
Its more than painful it could end up with more officers getting killed and that blood will be on the hands of not just the politicians who passed the law but also on those that supported these type of efforts to keep good gear out of patrol officers hands. I know that is not what people want but that is where these efforts could very well lead if not one flinches in this game of chicken.
Pat
Pat, it pains me to be direct and blunt with you. Especially since you are a fellow officer but your life, my life, and the lives of all others serving in uniform isnt worth denying the rights of the citizen. We are citizens first, our occupation shouldnt define who we are as Americans. Elitist attitudes such as your is a primary reason we are having this class warfare and being pitted against each other. Grow up and forego the rhetoric. Its about the citizen, not the agent of the government whom we are fighting for.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Historically speaking, LEOs in CA have always been exempt since the implementation of ban laws in CA. When has that changed anything for us? Never. It hasn't.
Simply speaking, a fire needs to be lit under the collective ass of a group of people--and that group is not the Calguns.net or CA RKBA crowd. Shit, we light that fire under our asses ourselves. We don't need anyone to do it for us. But cops never really had to worry about that since they have been exempt. And that has meant that they've never had the incentive to care. I'm not saying that they're bad people for that either. It's just that if something doesn't concern you, you don't really care about it. It's kinda like how people who generally protest the drinking age are on the lower side of 21, whereas people who are 21 and over don't really care since it doesn't affect them.
As many of you who already see the light realize, the fact of the matter is that by putting this kind of pressure on the LEO community can light that quintessential fire up under their ass to do something. Nothing will change otherwise, or the gun laws in CA would already have been decent.
Pat, I am very well aware of your stance on this topic and I understand where you are coming from. But remember that I am the guy who gets to defend his house with a locked-in TEN round mag. The cops here don't have to do that and naturally they've never worried about it like us regular folk have.
I hope my post makes sense since I am writing very late at night (or morning) and I am about to crash.
It's 4am here :p
I agree that lighting a fire to get them motivated is a good thing, but this isn't the way to do it.
Attack the politicians, they put police chiefs in office. They vote for and create legislation. A few have veto power but don't use it. Raise public awareness. Get behind local gun organizations like calguns and give them money.
LE have almost no power in law making, they enforce the law. They can act as advisors to politicians, but politicians put them in power, so they can hear what they want to hear. Root cause analysis. The problem isn't LE, it's legislators and governors. The best way to beat them is to take their money and use it wisely against them. Don't waste it on NRA ads, just the letters NRA instantly alienates huge portions of the population. I'm not a poli sci major, but support their opponents, raise public awareness, and support lawsuits against the anti gun laws.
Pat, it pains me to be direct and blunt with you. Especially since you are a fellow officer but your life, my life, and the lives of all others serving in uniform isnt worth denying the rights of the citizen. We are citizens first, our occupation shouldnt define who we are as Americans. Elitist attitudes such as your is a primary reason we are having this class warfare and being pitted against each other. Grow up and forego the rhetoric. Its about the citizen, not the agent of the government whom we are fighting for.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
But you don't have to risk LE lives unnecessarily to get the same outcome! It is noble and valiant for LE to support a boycott, but lets face facts, every company won't join because in the end, someone is going to put profit first (especially a publicly traded company like S&W or Ruger) and make a boatload of cash via a de facto monopoly.
A boycott is dangerous to LE, doesn't gain public support from the non-2a savvy population, doesn't change politicians' minds, and doesn't help out pro-2a candidates to replace anti-2a politicians.
It's an ineffective gesture with a serious negative aspect.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 04:25
But you don't have to risk LE lives unnecessarily to get the same outcome! It is noble and valiant for LE to support a boycott, but lets face facts, every company won't join because in the end, someone is going to put profit first (especially a publicly traded company like S&W or Ruger) and make a boatload of cash via a de facto monopoly.
A boycott is dangerous to LE, doesn't gain public support from the non-2a savvy population, doesn't change politicians' minds, and doesn't help out pro-2a candidates to replace anti-2a politicians.
It's an ineffective gesture.
True. And whilst I agree with you in all aspects of your argument. I will contend that the division of citizens by class isnt going to get us over the goal line either. In the end we will ultimately be responsible for our own undoing if we dont unite under one banner.
I like Pat. I like most people. But we need more people to be part of the solution and strengthen our ranks versus being naysayers and weakening our position.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
True. And whilst I agree with you in all aspects of your argument. I will contend that the division of citizens by class isnt going to get us over the goal line either. In the end we will ultimately be responsible for our own undoing if we dont unite under one banner.
I like Pat. I like most people. But we need more people to be part of the solution and strengthen our ranks versus being naysayers and weakening our position.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
I agree, but a boycott isn't the answer. We can strengthen our ranks without depriving LE in ban states.
And if we do boycott them and no NY LEA can get any AR magazines, I can guarantee that a LEA in a different state, a Federal agency, or even the DoD, will get them mags via donation or essentially "straw purchases" which wouldn't be actually illegal in this context.
Pat, it pains me to be direct and blunt with you. Especially since you are a fellow officer but your life, my life, and the lives of all others serving in uniform isnt worth denying the rights of the citizen. We are citizens first, our occupation shouldnt define who we are as Americans. Elitist attitudes such as your is a primary reason we are having this class warfare and being pitted against each other. Grow up and forego the rhetoric. Its about the citizen, not the agent of the government whom we are fighting for.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Thank you. This has been my stance since this situation began to evolve. Despite my capabilities of being a police officer being challenged as a result of this thinking I have stuck with it. We are citizens and Americans first. Being a cop is merely our profession.
I know what we need to save LEO lives...gun control! At least that's one of the most common talking points of the antis. Again, the good LEOs need to direct their efforts in the proper place, not towards the pro 2A forces.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 04:43
I agree, but a boycott isn't the answer. We can strengthen our ranks without depriving LE in ban states.
And if we do boycott them and no NY LEA can get any AR magazines, I can guarantee that a LEA in a different state, a Federal agency, or even the DoD, will get them mags via donation or essentially "straw purchases" which wouldn't be actually illegal in this context.
Sometimes extreme circumstances require extreme solutions. Take the birth of our nation. Under extreme duress many people made great sacrifices to fight for the chance at something better. There was no guarantees for the Founders that we were going to win and be a nation.
Fast forward, there is no guarantee that agents of the state will side with the BOR and Constitution versus their political handlers. I am of the notion that if Joe Citizen cannot be afforded the same freedoms as me Johnny Law then we have created a de facto police state and I will have no part of that. Boycott is one way we can limit the availability of hardware to agencies that act irresponsible with the rights of those they swore to protect. An oath is and should be an unbreakable promise that above all else you will act in good faith on behalf of those who cant themselves. Granted individual officers arent the primary problem, the agencies and administrators are. But if we dont rally the rank and file on our side, I sure as hell want to be standing on equal footing in regards to accessible instruments of defending my personal freedoms when they act as a "thug" of the state.
SWATcop556
03-02-13, 04:44
I just wish I had as much sway with my Sheriff as everyone else in this argument seems to think I have. Put pressure on him? The least he can do is tell me to pound sand or he could just fire me (at will employment). I'm lucky enough he's a good man and supports us and the 2A. I have written letters, sent emails, made phone calls, donate to the NRA, and voiced my opinion at local meetings.
In TX we don't have unions and the most the FOP does here is throw a good Christmas party with free booze and give away a few guns.
Hey gang we all understand this stance is painful for LEO's - we get it. What you guys need to realize is exemptions to LE have gotten us to where we are today - this time around the horn many companies, including Magpul for the time being , are saying enough is enough;
We are gonna hold LE to the same standards as the law abiding taxpayers who pay their salaries and buy all their equipment are held to - period
That way maybe if we get law enforcement pushing back against the politicians and chief LEO's who enact this crap we might see a different result - cause plan 'exemption' ain't working
Funny how well-armed bad guys are this huge threat to LEO, and they the need best equipment, but that same equipment is useless and dangerous in the hands of the regular folk...this is the message we are trying to send.
Thank you. This has been my stance since this situation began to evolve. Despite my capabilities of being a police officer being challenged as a result of this thinking I have stuck with it. We are citizens and Americans first. Being a cop is merely our profession.
It's interesting to see le in free states saying le in commie states should limit themselves in magazine capacity and aw bans. Will you, in solidarity with your CA, CT, CO, HI, NY, and other ban state fellow citizens, only run 10 rds in your issued pistol even though Oklahoma has no such ban?
Are we American citizens first, or are we our state's citizens first? Do we all limit ourselves or do we hide in our shelters in places like TX, OK, AK, AZ, and FL and tell those LE behind the lines to do as we say, not as we do?
This isn't directly at you, not meant as a personal attack, just using your location in OK as an example. Where in OK btw?
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 04:48
I just wish I had as much sway with my Sheriff as everyone else in this argument seems to think I have. Put pressure on him? The least he can do is tell me to pound sand or he could just fire me (at will employment). I'm lucky enough he's a good man and supports us and the 2A. I have written letters, sent emails, made phone calls, donate to the NRA, and voiced my opinion at local meetings.
In TX we don't have unions and the most the FOP does here is throw a good Christmas party with free booze and give away a few guns.
Thank God my Sheriff is so right wing and Constitutionally proactive, we would probably be fired if we didnt support a boycott...LOL.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 04:49
For the love of god will you PLEASE stop playing this card, we get it...
Is it difficult for you to accept that this is where this game could lead. Putting politics in front of peoples lives cop or citizen is inexcusable.
Pat
Sometimes extreme circumstances require extreme solutions. Take the birth of our nation. Under extreme duress many people made great sacrifices to fight for the chance at something better. There was no guarantees for the Founders that we were going to win and be a nation.
Fast forward, there is no guarantee that agents of the state will side with the BOR and Constitution versus their political handlers. I am of the notion that if Joe Citizen cannot be afforded the same freedoms as me Johnny Law then we have created a de facto police state and I will have no part of that. Boycott is one way we can limit the availability of hardware to agencies that act irresponsible with the rights of those they swore to protect. An oath is and should be an unbreakable promise that above all else you will act in good faith on behalf of those who cant themselves. Granted individual officers arent the primary problem, the agencies and administrators are. But if we dont rally the rank and file on our side, I sure as hell want to be standing on equal footing in regards to accessible instruments of defending my personal freedoms when they act as a "thug" of the state.
We're not at extreme circumstances yet. We will be if scotus rules against us. Until then, work within the system.
It's interesting to see le in free states saying le in commie states should limit themselves in magazine capacity and aw bans. Will you, in solidarity with your CA, CT, CO, HI, NY, and other ban state fellow citizens, only run 10 rds in your issued pistol even though Oklahoma has no such ban?
Are we American citizens first, or are we our state's citizens first? Do we all limit ourselves or do we hide in our shelters in places like TX, OK, AK, AZ, and FL and tell those LE behind the lines to do as we say, not as we do?
This isn't directly at you, not meant as a personal attack, just using your location in OK as an example. Where in OK btw?
Sure. I'll take three rounds out starting tomorrow and order some 10 round PMAGs. I've said my peace in the LEO area but keeping it simple; LEOs will not be "blessed" forever and once the population is disarmed, expect them to go after LE next because society is now "safe" like in Britain. It's a slippery slope. We either stand now for what we believe and took an oath to protect, or we standby and play an active part in fueling the us vs. them situation. Like I said, I look at as I'm an American first and foremost, a Marine second, and a cop like fourth or fifth after husband and or family man.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 04:54
We're not at extreme circumstances yet. We will be if scotus rules against us. Until then, work within the system.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum".
So when should I go ahead and consider it extreme? When they are at my front door, or when I am ordered to be at yours?
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 04:54
Pat, it pains me to be direct and blunt with you. Especially since you are a fellow officer but your life, my life, and the lives of all others serving in uniform isnt worth denying the rights of the citizen. We are citizens first, our occupation shouldnt define who we are as Americans. Elitist attitudes such as your is a primary reason we are having this class warfare and being pitted against each other. Grow up and forego the rhetoric. Its about the citizen, not the agent of the government whom we are fighting for.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Let me be blunt this stupid ploy has the potential to get officers killed. Its not rhetoric its the truth. Also your label of elitist is incorrect with me. If I actually believed only cops should have the guns in questions then you would be right but you know that is not true. I don't support these laws and I have said that 100 times or more and I have given money to the NRA and GOA as well as written letters to my congressmen and the whitehouse. Lets not ignore the elephant in the room. The end result of trying to disarm cops will be cop deaths.
Pat
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 05:00
Let me be blunt this stupid ploy has the potential to get officers killed. Its not rhetoric its the truth. Also your label of elitist is incorrect with me. If I actually believed only cops should have the guns in questions then you would be right but you know that is not true. I don't support these laws and I have said that 100 times or more and I have given money to the NRA and GOA as well as written letters to my congressmen and the whitehouse. Lets not ignore the elephant in the room. The end result of trying to disarm cops will be cop deaths.
Pat
I am glad you are on our side Pat. Take notice though. It will get worse, so whose lives and personal freedoms are more important? The LEO or the citizen. You took an oath, death to protect those you swore to defend is part of the deal. We cant opt out brother, unless you turn in your tin!
Sure. I'll take three rounds out starting tomorrow and order some 10 round PMAGs. I've said my peace in the LEO area but keeping it simple; LEOs will not be "blessed" forever and once the population is disarmed, expect them to go after LE next because society is now "safe" like in Britain. It's a slippery slope. We either stand now for what we believe and took an oath to protect, or we standby and play an active part in fueling the us vs. them situation. Like I said, I look at as I'm an American first and foremost, a Marine second, and a cop like fourth or fifth after husband and or family man.
Please don't do that. Hell, I want you to run surefire 60s if they work properly for you.
Symbolic gestures that only do harm are what I'm arguing against.
But if you do continue down that path, at least publicize it so it has a small chance of doing some good too. And if you want a 10 rd lancer awm or 30 rd pmag, come pay me a visit in sw ok and you can have one for free.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum".
So when should I go ahead and consider it extreme? When they are at my front door, or when I am ordered to be at yours?
Again, the system is working it out right now. Wait until the system has a chance to fix this before we elevate it unnecessarily. But yes, when you are told to go house to house, it's time to make a stand. Thankfully, that hasn't happened anywhere to my knowledge, which is again why we're not at extreme situations yet.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 05:26
I am glad you are on our side Pat. Take notice though. It will get worse, so whose lives and personal freedoms are more important? The LEO or the citizen. You took an oath, death to protect those you swore to defend is part of the deal. We cant opt out brother, unless you turn in your tin!
Both lives are equal and taking guns away from LEO's will not restore rights to the rest of the people. We need to fight this battle where we can be effective. I don't believe this is an effective strategy. Maybe I am wrong time will tell. With LEO's its not about our rights rather our responsibility to serve and protect and having the tools to do that effectively. I am all for the idea of having officers sign a document in support of the 2nd amendment before they can purchase items. But I am not for banning weapons for officers in the areas where they are needed the most like New York, LA, Chicago etc.
Pat
Magic_Salad0892
03-02-13, 05:40
Thankfully, that hasn't happened anywhere to my knowledge, which is again why we're not at extreme situations yet.
It did happen in Katrina. But that's not really related.
I'm just saying that it's happened.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 05:50
Both lives are equal and taking guns away from LEO's will not restore rights to the rest of the people. We need to fight this battle where we can be effective. I don't believe this is an effective strategy. Maybe I am wrong time will tell. With LEO's its not about our rights rather our responsibility to serve and protect and having the tools to do that effectively. I am all for the idea of having officers sign a document in support of the 2nd amendment before they can purchase items. But I am not for banning weapons for officers in the areas where they are needed the most like New York, LA, Chicago etc.
Pat
Regrettably those cities/states you speak are so far off the reservation that I fear that even our tools we use will be of little use to negate the issues they have daily. I do hope that when things come to a head that we will be able to count on those we serve with nationally. But I applaud any company who has clarity regarding the equality of rights and status for all citizens, even the exempt status ones. This is definitive of true character and courage. I support this even if I am one who will suffer. It is for the greater good. Stop thinking short term Pat. This isn't about us, its about those who will follow after us when we are but ashes.
Pat and other LEO's,
You guys have to understand something. I know some of you may think it's a "ploy" and will jeopardize officers lives. But, you need to step outside of the uniform and badge and understand where the civilian populace is coming from.
1. You guys respond to crime after the fact and sometimes as they are unfolding. But civilians are in fact the target of these assholes. So we can't have xxx because some idiot legislature says we can't but you guys can. They do this for a reason and it's not just about your job. It's a leverage tool. Because let's face it- many times people don't care about an issue unless they are directly affected.
2. In many states after you retire you get to carry a firearm when and where others can't. In some cases you are allowed to keep xxx items if you honorably retire. Kind of like a treat for sticking it out. This rubs people the wrong way. Especially because you aren't wearing the uniform any longer but you get some of the perks.
3. I support LE, and I have tried many times to help out where I can. I know there are many that support the 2nd Amendment. But, unfortunately that's not enough. There are those who will not rest until they have us sucking our thumbs in the corner. They don't want us armed- they want us to depend on the welfare/ nanny state. This is why we have record numbers of people on food stamps and assistance.
4. I know you guys have to be careful and that just like in the military you have to deal with having some of your rights being "curtailed" especially in matters that relate to politics and such. But, some how and some way the rank and file need to tell their chiefs and their city councils that they are against the stupid weapons and magazine bans. You have to beat them down with facts and make them understand that they are not going to affect the criminal element. What they will do is make law abiding citizens into criminals and leave us defenseless. You guys need to make them understand the legally armed citizen is not the one to be feared.
Now as to the direct issue of Magpul's policy. Are you serious going to tell me that your agency and others wouldn't be able to survive using regular stocks, and aluminum magazines? Let's be real- before PMAG's came onto the scene aluminum magazines killed many of shitheads the world over.
In some ways as it relates to weapons I see a bit of a silver lining. Many of the companies that are doing a "boycott"(I call it standing up for our rights and their livelihood) are junk peddlers and maybe now some agencies will have to suck it up and buy better rifles, pistols, etc.. because the field will be smaller. I am not saying it will happen 100%, but it's possible.
Maybe some agencies will find better ways to spend their money aside from buying armored vehicles that are "overkill", buying new computers every year, or wasting it on other crap.
Ultimately what everyone needs to remember is that the Constitution is supposed to guarantee that the rights we have remain ours. Politicians need to be taught and need to understand that they have to answer to US! We are the ones that pay them and they need to focus on the serious issues. I have yet to see any SERIOUS dialogue from any of those who would attempt to steal our rights about how to handle mental health and those who are a potential harm. Instead they are using a tragedy to attempt to take away our rights as they always have.
Whether it be the California AWB, the Bush Import Ban, the 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, the 1986 FOPA, 1994 AWB, Patriot Act, etc... they have shown over and over again that they want to destroy the 2nd Amendment. Don't think for a minute they care. Most of them know that every so often the idiots will flock to the polls and pull the lever for them time and again. Just look at Rangle, Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Jackson-Lee, Jackson Jr., etc....
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 05:54
Please don't do that. Hell, I want you to run surefire 60s if they work properly for you.
Symbolic gestures that only do harm are what I'm arguing against.
But if you do continue down that path, at least publicize it so it has a small chance of doing some good too. And if you want a 10 rd lancer awm or 30 rd pmag, come pay me a visit in sw ok and you can have one for free.
Again, the system is working it out right now. Wait until the system has a chance to fix this before we elevate it unnecessarily. But yes, when you are told to go house to house, it's time to make a stand. Thankfully, that hasn't happened anywhere to my knowledge, which is again why we're not at extreme situations yet.
I was going to say Katrina, but my brother "tossing his salad" spoke first. Pandora's box has been open. We don't go back and undo what
has already been done. If we aren't proactive we will succumb to the state, our voices will be silenced. Our efforts will be trampled. If I take a stand when I am ordered to go to your door, its already too late.
If the antis actually believed their own rhetoric they wouldn't exempt LEOs
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 05:56
Pat and other LEO's,
You guys have to understand something. I know some of you may think it's a "ploy" and will jeopardize officers lives. But, you need to step outside of the uniform and badge and understand where the civilian populace is coming from.
1. You guys respond to crime after the fact and sometimes as they are unfolding. But civilians are in fact the target of these assholes. So we can't have xxx because some idiot legislature says we can't but you guys can. They do this for a reason and it's not just about your job. It's a leverage tool. Because let's face it- many times people don't care about an issue unless they are directly affected.
2. In many states after you retire you get to carry a firearm when and where others can't. In some cases you are allowed to keep xxx items if you honorably retire. Kind of like a treat for sticking it out. This rubs people the wrong way. Especially because you aren't wearing the uniform any longer but you get some of the perks.
3. I support LE, and I have tried many times to help out where I can. I know there are many that support the 2nd Amendment. But, unfortunately that's not enough. There are those who will not rest until they have us sucking our thumbs in the corner. They don't want us armed- they want us to depend on the welfare/ nanny state. This is why we have record numbers of people on food stamps and assistance.
4. I know you guys have to be careful and that just like in the military you have to deal with having some of your rights being "curtailed" especially in matters that relate to politics and such. But, some how and some way the rank and file need to tell their chiefs and their city councils that they are against the stupid weapons and magazine bans. You have to beat them down with facts and make them understand that they are not going to affect the criminal element. What they will do is make law abiding citizens into criminals and leave us defenseless. You guys need to make them understand the legally armed citizen is not the one to be feared.
Now as to the direct issue of Magpul's policy. Are you serious going to tell me that your agency and others wouldn't be able to survive using regular stocks, and aluminum magazines? Let's be real- before PMAG's came onto the scene aluminum magazines killed many of shitheads the world over.
In some ways as it relates to weapons I see a bit of a silver lining. Many of the companies that are doing a "boycott"(I call it standing up for our rights and their livelihood) are junk peddlers and maybe now some agencies will have to suck it up and buy better rifles, pistols, etc.. because the field will be smaller. I am not saying it will happen 100%, but it's possible.
Maybe some agencies will find better ways to spend their money aside from buying armored vehicles that are "overkill", buying new computers every year, or wasting it on other crap.
Ultimately what everyone needs to remember is that the Constitution is supposed to guarantee that the rights we have remain ours. Politicians need to be taught and need to understand that they have to answer to US! We are the ones that pay them and they need to focus on the serious issues. I have yet to see any SERIOUS dialogue from any of those who would attempt to steal our rights about how to handle mental health and those who are a potential harm. Instead they are using a tragedy to attempt to take away our rights as they always have.
Whether it be the California AWB, the Bush Import Ban, the 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, the 1986 FOPA, 1994 AWB, Patriot Act, etc... they have shown over and over again that they want to destroy the 2nd Amendment. Don't think for a minute they care. Most of them know that every so often the idiots will flock to the polls and pull the lever for them time and again. Just look at Rangle, Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Jackson-Lee, Jackson Jr., etc....
Nothing but truth right here folks!
Thank you.
Pat and other LEO's,
You guys have to understand something. I know some of you may think it's a "ploy" and will jeopardize officers lives. But, you need to step outside of the uniform and badge and understand where the civilian populace is coming from.
1. You guys respond to crime after the fact and sometimes as they are unfolding. But civilians are in fact the target of these assholes. So we can't have xxx because some idiot legislature says we can't but you guys can. They do this for a reason and it's not just about your job. It's a leverage tool. Because let's face it- many times people don't care about an issue unless they are directly affected.
2. In many states after you retire you get to carry a firearm when and where others can't. In some cases you are allowed to keep xxx items if you honorably retire. Kind of like a treat for sticking it out. This rubs people the wrong way. Especially because you aren't wearing the uniform any longer but you get some of the perks.
3. I support LE, and I have tried many times to help out where I can. I know there are many that support the 2nd Amendment. But, unfortunately that's not enough. There are those who will not rest until they have us sucking our thumbs in the corner. They don't want us armed- they want us to depend on the welfare/ nanny state. This is why we have record numbers of people on food stamps and assistance.
4. I know you guys have to be careful and that just like in the military you have to deal with having some of your rights being "curtailed" especially in matters that relate to politics and such. But, some how and some way the rank and file need to tell their chiefs and their city councils that they are against the stupid weapons and magazine bans. You have to beat them down with facts and make them understand that they are not going to affect the criminal element. What they will do is make law abiding citizens into criminals and leave us defenseless. You guys need to make them understand the legally armed citizen is not the one to be feared.
Now as to the direct issue of Magpul's policy. Are you serious going to tell me that your agency and others wouldn't be able to survive using regular stocks, and aluminum magazines? Let's be real- before PMAG's came onto the scene aluminum magazines killed many of shitheads the world over.
In some ways as it relates to weapons I see a bit of a silver lining. Many of the companies that are doing a "boycott"(I call it standing up for our rights and their livelihood) are junk peddlers and maybe now some agencies will have to suck it up and buy better rifles, pistols, etc.. because the field will be smaller. I am not saying it will happen 100%, but it's possible.
Maybe some agencies will find better ways to spend their money aside from buying armored vehicles that are "overkill", buying new computers every year, or wasting it on other crap.
Ultimately what everyone needs to remember is that the Constitution is supposed to guarantee that the rights we have remain ours. Politicians need to be taught and need to understand that they have to answer to US! We are the ones that pay them and they need to focus on the serious issues. I have yet to see any SERIOUS dialogue from any of those who would attempt to steal our rights about how to handle mental health and those who are a potential harm. Instead they are using a tragedy to attempt to take away our rights as they always have.
Whether it be the California AWB, the Bush Import Ban, the 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, the 1986 FOPA, 1994 AWB, Patriot Act, etc... they have shown over and over again that they want to destroy the 2nd Amendment. Don't think for a minute they care. Most of them know that every so often the idiots will flock to the polls and pull the lever for them time and again. Just look at Rangle, Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Jackson-Lee, Jackson Jr., etc....
Magic_Salad0892
03-02-13, 06:03
but my brother "tossing his salad" spoke first.
:lol:
I can feel the love, bro.
I couldn't say it better than IG did.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 06:09
:lol:
I can feel the love, bro.
I kinda figured that's why it was "magic"!
Add some canned unicorn meat and you have a party.
Well said IG, you cut to the heart of it.
Bravo to LAV for standing up for us! I'm sure he's treading on thin ice and lots of folks in the industry are listening to what he is saying...and he could be jeopardizing his own career etc..thanks again for sticking up the citizens he fought for for many years.
Thanks to IG for his comments as well!
I respect LEOs and what they do night and day.
I do find it interesting that some LEOs are calling foul when their rights are trampled on like the rights of the citizens in "ban" states/cities. I didn't see too many LEOs standing up to fight when it was just the non-LEOs effected.
Bravo to all the manufactures that are standing up as well. I think Larue was the "first" to do it and I hope more continue to follow, especially the bigger players.
Larry Vickers
03-02-13, 08:01
IG - well said
As far as me standing up for what's right - no sweat; that's the only way I know how to be
I've made a life out of picking the hard right vs the easy wrong
Be safe and stay in the fight
I keep hearing talk about how chiefs, politicians, etc. don't listen to cops. This may be true if they're only hearing from a small percentage.
But I'm having a hard time believing that if the majority of rank and file officers came out and said enough is enough that they wouldn't listen; they wouldn't have a choice. LE is the teeth behind any legislation as it won't be the politicians and chiefs out investigating and arresting people.
I suppose this raises the question: what percentage of sworn officers are pro-gun? New York and California have a lot of anti-gun legislation in place that tramples all over the constitution. Where are all the Cali and NY officers coming forward to say this is a problem and that they won't enforce any legislation that makes them violate their oaths? Are these states just aberrations or could we expect the same trend as other states begin to "fall"? If I get caught with an unregistered "assault weapon" during a traffic stop, what's the likelihood that I will get a ticket and sent on my way or will I be carted off in jail?
I don't doubt for a second that users like Pat, nick, and other officers here are as pro-gun as they come; my question is a more general one about where LE in general stands. Obviously, getting a majority of rank and file officers to stand up in opposition will be challenging if a majority of them don't think non-LEOs should be allowed to own "assault weapons." Hell, even some high ranking members of the NRA seem to harbor similar feelings.
I was never high on magpuls LE/MIL go to the front of the line policy.
And the excuse that these people are deploying with these things and need them now is also BS.
What is wrong with the aluminum mags that are issued? In some ways they are better than PMAGs.
Thank you. I and others also support you and appreciate all that you have done and do for the community.
IG - well said
As far as me standing up for what's right - no sweat; that's the only way I know how to be
I've made a life out of picking the hard right vs the easy wrong
Be safe and stay in the fight
What is wrong with the aluminum mags that are issued? In some ways they are better than PMAGs.
In what ways are aluminum gi mags better than pmags?
I was never high on magpuls LE/MIL go to the front of the line policy.
And the excuse that these people are deploying with these things and need them now is also BS.
What is wrong with the aluminum mags that are issued? In some ways they are better than PMAGs.
Perhaps the polymer mags stand up better to being run over by misappropriated armored vehicles? :D
IG very well said, earlier.
I know my opinion matters for little however I would like to say this..
Many firearms and firearm accessory companies are fighting the good fight right now. Some have different strategies and/or ideals. However they are still fighting the fight and that is what is important. Magpul has stepped up in CO in a way that few if any companies have int he past.
The real problem is that we are all to willing to "eat our own young". For a company like Magpul it has become a no win situation. No matter what they do they are going to piss off a lot of people. These people ignore what Magpul or BCM, or DD, or whoever is doing to help and focus on whatever small thing they can find that they disagree with.
I am not so young as to not remember the events leading up to 94'. A number of gun companies sold us out. Now in the face of an even harder fight those same companies and so many more are stepping up to the line and fighting along with us. We need to remember that. Sell to officer or departments. Don't sell to officers or departments. If your overall goal is to fight the good fight with us, then I don't give a ****. Because I will take money and legislative action over gestures that most people will never even know about any day.
Littlelebowski
03-02-13, 13:55
I think we should be giving Colt and S&W hell for NOT moving as opposed to Magpul moving and selling mags to individual LE.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Here's something I am curious about....
Why is it that no one is shouting from the rooftops for Colt, FN, HK, etc to stop supplying weapons to our military?
The assumption by many here is that if confiscations are ordered that local & state LE will be the ones going door-to-door to take everyones weapons & hi-capacity magazines, etc. This is a complete fantasy scenario and about as ridiculous as it gets.
The reality is that local & state LE do not have the manpower, money or resources to ever be able to facilitate confiscations. I would also argue that the desire is not there by the overwhelming majority of LEO's to go and take away the guns of their friends, neighbors, and the citizens they have come to know in their beats over the years, even if they are not strong, vocal supporters of the 2nd amendment most don't want to be involved in anything like that.
So who would be tasked with confiscations? The National Guard? The governors of these ban states could hypothetically request that the NG be sent it to conduct the confiscations. Would the NG be on board with confiscations? I doubt it. They would be going into their own communities to disarm their friends & neighbors as well. Highly unlikely that will ever happen but I would argue that it is more of a reality than any broke-ass, undermanned state/local LE agencies being able to do it.
So what is it exactly that is driving the movement to throw local & state LEO's (both agencies and individual LEO's) "under the bus" during this trying time?
As improbable as it is that either (Local/state LE or the National Guard) will be tasked with confiscations, I think it is more likely that the NG would be called in due to states like IL, NY, CA which are all completely broke and don't have the money, resources or manpower to effect confiscations. You also have more young impressionable kids in the NG that will be easier to convince to go door-to-door as them just "following orders" than it will be to convince a 42 year old street cop like myself to do. In all honesty I could never be convinced.
So why isn't anyone calling out Mark LaRue, or Colt, FN, etc for not banning all sales to the military??? I think it is simply because most of us, including myself, somewhere down the line have been inconvenienced by a police officer either during a traffic stop, or some other interaction during our lives along with how the media & hollywood portrays our LEO's that has formed our emotional response to LE in general making it that much easier to simply dismiss us as "agents of the state" hell-bent on taking your guns away.
Grow-up & snap out of it. It ain't gonna happen.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 16:52
Nick, I get w hat you are saying. Granted in reality LE will probably not be used in the capacity of confiscation on a national level. However it doesnt change the fact I get asked daily by my fellow citizens if I am coming for their firearms. The people have this fear, therefore I will share that same fear with them...true or not.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Interesting. You are saying that even though you know the fear to be not based in much, if any reality that you still share it?
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 17:05
Interesting. You are saying that even though you know the fear to be not based in much, if any reality that you still share it?
It does seem contradictory. But I confess it does allow me to relate and have more empathy for those I serve.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
It does seem contradictory. But I confess it does allow me to relate and have more empathy for those I serve.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Well, I would say that yes, I do also indeed share a fear of the assault on the 2nd amendment that is coming out of D.C. as well as some states. I also want to inform as many folks as I can that "I" am NOT coming for anyone's guns other than the thugs I deal with on a daily basis who run around shooting at each other for no apparent reason. I also explain why the idea of local & state LE coming to confiscate anyone's guns is a far fetched proposal due to a complete lack of: manpower, funding, resources and desire from my peers to do so.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 17:57
Thank you. I and others also support you and appreciate all that you have done and do for the community.
Frankly it does not take courage right now to throw LEO's under the bus. That is the current popular thing to do with many in the firearms community. It takes a lot more courage to stand up and say no we will still sell to LEO's in ban states because we feel they need our products/training and we do not hold them responsible for the idiot politicians in charge in their areas. Magpul was getting a lot of flack for thier position before they joined the popular tide of throwing LEO's under the bus. It takes courage to buck the trend when you feel its wrong. It takes no courage to follow the popular trend. In fact there is so much pressure on gun companies right now to throw cops under the bus that if you don't your attacked and risk losing buisness.
Pat
Yes, we should begin a campaign against S&W and Colt as stated. And also Glock.
Unfortunately at this time we also need to tune out the constant dissenters consumed with self-interest who are clearly content to sit and watch the show.
We remember great players. There is no such thing as a great spectator.
Frankly it does not take courage right now to throw LEO's under the bus. That is the current popular thing to do with many in the firearms community. It takes a lot more courage to stand up and say no we will still sell to LEO's in ban states because we feel they need our products/training and we do not hold them responsible for the idiot politicians in charge in their areas. Magpul was getting a lot of flack for thier position before they joined the popular tide of throwing LEO's under the bus. It takes courage to buck the trend when you feel its wrong. It takes no courage to follow the popular trend. In fact there is so much pressure on gun companies right now to throw cops under the bus that if you don't your attacked and risk losing buisness.
Pat
The policy of selling to LE in ban states got us to where we are now. Old industry policies got us to where we are now. It got us 3 gun bans in 10 years and we have come close to having a forth one twice, once in 2004 and now.
Something has to change. LE does not have any skin in the game.
The FOP, other police organizations, and larger city police chiefs are overwhelmingly anti gun.
It is time for the gun industry to set the agenda and set the discussion, not the liberal media and police chiefs standing on stage with politicians.
If by "constant dissenters consumed with self-interest who are clearly content to sit and watch the show" you mean individual LEO's behind enemy lines who are at risk of losing everything for standing up against the power brokers in their area, then ok.
Something has to change. LE does not have any skin in the game
I keep hearing this regurgitated by folks who live in states that are under no threat of new gun control legislation. "No skin in the game" really? Just our jobs and our lives. That is all.
If by "constant dissenters consumed with self-interest who are clearly content to sit and watch the show" you mean individual LEO's behind enemy lines who are at risk of losing everything for standing up against the power brokers in their area, then ok.
Nick I already acknowledged you and most other cops have a higher than likely immediate need for substantial firepower than most average citizens. Today, or maybe tomorrow, or otherwise "soon". No doubt about it and I certainly appreciate your civil service.
However the others you speak of may need them next week, next year, or most importantly generations from now. That need is even more fundamentally important because it sets the standard of true freedom.
I keep hearing this regurgitated by folks who live in states that are under no threat of new gun control legislation. "No skin in the game" really? Just our jobs and our lives. That is all.
Irrelevant. Completely irrelevant.
What does me living in a free state have to do with anything?
This is what is means to have skin in the game:
1. Are at-least a life member of the NRA, SOF, GOA, etc
2. Have an FFL.
3. Have a large gun collection and keep the gun industry afloat.
4. Donate to right wing causes to stop liberals at any impasse.
Most gun owners are freeloaders, that have been riding the coat-tails of serious gun owners like myself and a majority of the people on this website. We have paid our fair share and more. WE are tired of the crap.
LE has been given alot by the NRA as far as training and we have not gotten anything in return.
Irrelevant. Completely irrelevant.
What does me living in a free state have to do with anything?
A federal AWB isn't likely to happen. You live in a state that is "free" from the threat of new gun restrictions.
Exactly what "Skin" do you have in the "game"?
Here's something I am curious about....
Why is it that no one is shouting from the rooftops for Colt, FN, HK, etc to stop supplying weapons to our military?
Same reason they are not calling for them to stop selling to the PDs in places like FL, TX, AZ, etc. They have NOTHING to do with the STATE AW BANS. It is about putting pressure on the STATES that passed AW Bans. Really it has nothing to do with who would go door to door enforcing laws.
jklaughrey
03-02-13, 18:52
Exactly what "Skin" do you have in the "game"?
This attitude is exactly what the antis' want. We are all Americans, we all lose if we dont stand for each other.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
A federal AWB isn't likely to happen. You live in a state that is "free" from the threat of new gun restrictions.
Exactly what "Skin" do you have in the "game"?
This is exactly the attitude that rubs private gun owners the wrong way and turns them against LE.
The below needs the be read again. This is absolutely central to the issue.
I think finding a way to provide items to individual officers that are banned to the citizens while denying department sales is nothing more than a work around. It completely undermines their assertion that the Police Departments in areas with such bans should not have the tools of defense to defend themselves that is denied to the citizens. If they are going to deny department sales, they must deny individual officer sales as well. Otherwise, it is a cop-out....
I understand Magpul's reasoning and desire to support the individual troopers and deputies. But the fact is these LEOs for the most part will enforce the odious state gun laws when they encounter someone with an illegal magazine or firearm. Or they may lose their job.
It is not the protesting manufacturer that puts a trooper at risk for not selling them civilian banned mags or firearms. IT IS THEIR OWN STATE GOVT THAT PUTS THEM AT RISK by oppressing civilians and then trying to carve out exemptions for govt employees. Police that buy items under cover of the govt exemption are using saying they ARE representing the govt, not themselves.
How would Magpul feel about seeing a news photo of a SWAT team at a residential home to confiscate an "armory of illegal guns and magazines" and they all have Magpuls in their carbines?
I don't support these laws and I have said that 100 times or more and I have given money to the NRA and GOA as well as written letters to my congressmen and the whitehouse. Lets not ignore the elephant in the room. The end result of trying to disarm cops will be cop deaths.
Pat
Will you arrest someone that has an illegal magazine if a ban passes?
Will you arrest someone that has an illegal magazine if a ban passes?
My response: **** NO.
My response: **** NO.
What about an illegal MG?
Fact is fatal assaults on LEO's are up drastically the last 3 years. Fact more and more officers are getting involved in shootings. Fact officers now more than ever need to have good tools. Fact trying to alienate law enforcement will not bring us (Gun rights activists) together.
Pat
Fatal assault are not up... I don't see it, Pat.
Police Officer line of duty deaths...LINK (http://www.odmp.org)
All causes.....Gunfire......Stabbing.....Assault
2012: 128........48............5..............1
2011: 175........67............2..............5
2010: 176........59............N/A..........6
2009: 140........47............N/A..........1
2008: 153........40............2..............3
2007: 202........67............NA............NA
This attitude is exactly what the antis' want. We are all Americans, we all lose if we dont stand for each other.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
Has this place turned into Bizzaro World or what? ScottyRyan is the one who has continually made the blanket statement that "LE does not have any skin in the game".
Clown shoes I tell ya!
Has this place turned into Bizzaro World or what? ScottyRyan was the one who has continually made the blanket statement that "LE does not have any skin in the game".
Clown shoes I tell ya!
Nope. If you followed this from the beginning, several people have made such comments.
My response: **** NO.
So you'll go on record here as stating you will not enforce a law you disagree with? What if every police officer chose to do that with random laws they also find fault with?
Don't you see, it's not about your good sense or personal understanding of our rights. The issue rises above you and any other noble officer in that respect.
Nope. If you followed this from the beginning, several people have made such comments.
:confused:
EXACTLY. It is one of several slogans that have been tossed around here like foodstamps by YOU and several others to try and make it look like LE is on the other side of this whole fight.
Now somehow I am the one with the separatist "attitude"?
BTW, If you had followed this thread from the beginning you would have noticed that I started this thread.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 19:47
Will you arrest someone that has an illegal magazine if a ban passes?
No and during the last ban I had the opportunity to do so and did not.
Pat
No and during the last ban I had the opportunity to do so and did not.
Pat
Good. You were able to verify that the mag was manufactured after the ban date?
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 19:54
Fatal assault are not up... I don't see it, Pat.
Police Officer line of duty deaths...LINK (http://www.odmp.org)
All causes.....Gunfire......Stabbing.....Assault
2012: 128........48............5..............1
2011: 175........67............2..............5
2010: 176........59............N/A..........6
2009: 140........47............N/A..........1
2008: 153........40............2..............3
2007: 202........67............NA............NA
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/us/defying-trends-killings-of-police-officers-are-on-the-rise.html?_r=0
According to statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 72 officers were killed by perpetrators in 2011, a 25 percent increase from the previous year and a 75 percent increase from 2008.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 19:55
Good. You were able to verify that the mag was manufactured after the ban date?
Actually it was some imported mags from Austria during the ban.
Pat
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/us/defying-trends-killings-of-police-officers-are-on-the-rise.html?_r=0
According to statistics compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 72 officers were killed by perpetrators in 2011, a 25 percent increase from the previous year and a 75 percent increase from 2008.
Using a percentage increase to enhance such a low instance rate is pretty weak.
LINK (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/2011)
In 2011, 72 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty.
In 2010, 56 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty.
In 2009, 48 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty.
41 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty in 2008.
In 2007, 57 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in 51 separate incidents.
The FBI stats seem to be higher because they include more than LEOs.
and who met certain other criteria (e.g., they had full arrest powers; they ordinarily wore a badge and carried a firearm).
Either way, an increase from 48 to 72 is pretty insignificant. Considering the number of LEOs in this country, their rate of assault and death in incredibly low.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 19:59
This attitude is exactly what the antis' want. We are all Americans, we all lose if we dont stand for each other.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
True but where are all our fellow citizens showing us support when governments are on a rampage to slash our pay/benefits and retirements. If cops do stand in a united front against future control I hope our fellow citizens remember that when we need the support.
Pat
True but where are all our fellow citizens showing us support when governments are on a rampage to slash our pay/benefits and retirements.
Pat
HOLY ****!
Are you SHITTING me?! Cry a ****ing river. At least you are employed but don't forget where your damned pay check comes from. Tax Goddamned revenue. Taxes.
This attitude pisses me the **** off. Every industry is getting kicked in the nuts and you want cry about government threats to your benefits. Businesses are cutting staff, cutting hours for the staff they retain, and not hiring more employees because of government regulation and you want people to take time to support YOU!
That's rich as hell.
Same reason they are not calling for them to stop selling to the PDs in places like FL, TX, AZ, etc. They have NOTHING to do with the STATE AW BANS. It is about putting pressure on the STATES that passed AW Bans. Really it has nothing to do with who would go door to door enforcing laws.
Wasn't all of the recent frenzy by states to pass new gun control legislation all motivated by the POTUS and his new federal gun control committee run by VP Biden? If so, then why not included all branches of the military?
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 20:36
HOLY ****!
Are you SHITTING me?! Cry a ****ing river. At least you are employed but don't forget where your damned pay check comes from. Tax Goddamned revenue. Taxes.
This attitude pisses me the **** off. Every industry is getting kicked in the nuts and you want cry about government threats to your benefits. Businesses are cutting staff, cutting hours for the staff they retain, and not hiring more employees because of government regulation and you want them to support YOU!
That's rich as hell.
See you want support but don't want to give support. That is sad.
Pat
True but where are all our fellow citizens showing us support when governments are on a rampage to slash our pay/benefits and retirements. If cops do stand in a united front against future control I hope our fellow citizens remember that when we need the support.
Pat
Not the best argument to bring into this topic. When it comes down to it, we've been pretty well off compared to the private sector during the recent economic downturn.
See you want support but don't want to give it. That is rich and sad.
Pat
What support am I asking for from you? Standing up for individual rights and supporting the 2nd Am against idiot politicians?
That is an oath you, and I, both took.
I'm not asking you to take a stand for my pay and benefits as you are asking others to do for you.
That is the BIG difference between us.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 20:44
Not the best argument to bring into this topic. When it comes down to it, we've been pretty well off compared to the private sector during the recent economic downturn.
That depends on where you live. But for example if the New York State troopers are successfull in getting their union to send a message to thei Govenor it would be nice if fellow gun owners fought for them when the time comes when the Governor starts trying to slash their budget and wages in retaliation.
Pat
That depends on where you live. But for example if the New York State troopers are successfull in getting their union to send a message to thei Govenor it would be nice if fellow gun owners fought for them when the time comes when the Governor starts trying to slash their budget and wages in retaliation.
Pat
I think what I and others are trying to convey is that the issue between the 2nd Amendment and worker's benefits are two separate animals. On the first we are talking about a God given right from our country's forefathers. The second we are talking about a labor issue which is not constitutional in nature. The Right is something we are entitled to as a free citizen of the country. The labor issue is just that and one that someone can change for themselves with a change of employment. The support for either is not equal given recent events within the country.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 20:57
I think what I and others are trying to convey is that the issue between the 2nd Amendment and worker's benefits are two separate animals. On the first we are talking about a God given right from our country's forefathers. The second we are talking about a labor issue which is not constitutional in nature. The Right is something we are entitled to as a free citizen of the country. The labor issue is just that and one that someone can change for themselves with a change of employment. The support for either is not equal given recent events within the country.
I get it. I just hope all these people demanding we stand up (which I think we should) have our back when the politicians try to have their revenge.
Pat
Pat,
My response had nothing to do with LE underthebusthrowing or anything else. It was directed to Larry and my overall support. Nothing more or less.
Frankly it does not take courage right now to throw LEO's under the bus. That is the current popular thing to do with many in the firearms community. It takes a lot more courage to stand up and say no we will still sell to LEO's in ban states because we feel they need our products/training and we do not hold them responsible for the idiot politicians in charge in their areas. Magpul was getting a lot of flack for thier position before they joined the popular tide of throwing LEO's under the bus. It takes courage to buck the trend when you feel its wrong. It takes no courage to follow the popular trend. In fact there is so much pressure on gun companies right now to throw cops under the bus that if you don't your attacked and risk losing buisness.
Pat
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 21:07
Pat,
My response had nothing to do with LE underthebusthrowing or anything else. It was directed to Larry and my overall support. Nothing more or less.
My post meant no disrespect to Larry or anyone else but rather an observation. It seems to me that if you want to make sales right now you need to be on this band wagon. At least there are a lot of people threatening companies that if they sell to cops in banned areas they will not buy from them. I do like how the discussion has stayed fairly civil despite very huge differences of opinion.
Pat
True but where are all our fellow citizens showing us support when governments are on a rampage to slash our pay/benefits and retirements. If cops do stand in a united front against future control I hope our fellow citizens remember that when we need the support.
Pat
What about everyone that lost money out of their 401k in the private sector?
Government employees have had much less cuts than the private sector since the recession started.
Grow-up & snap out of it. It ain't gonna happen.
Maybe it doesn't require door to door confiscation. See the NJ, NY, and DC arrests and convictions of people merely traversing and possessing illegal 'high' capacity magazines. The police are perfectly happy to arrest and prosecute them (just not the TV anchorman with a magazine and politician waving an AK as a demonstration). By those examples, how are we observers to assume it won't be true any where else implemented?
What about everyone that lost money out of their 401k in the private sector?
Government employees have had much less cuts than the private sector since the recession started.
And their pay and benefits are derived from those very same private sector employees, you know the ones who shouldn't have the same rights.
My post meant no disrespect to Larry or anyone else but rather an observation. It seems to me that if you want to make sales right now you need to be on this band wagon. At least there are a lot of people threatening companies that if they sell to cops in banned areas they will not buy from them. I do like how the discussion has stayed fairly civil despite very huge differences of opinion.
Pat
I don't think it matters much to sales right now no matter which way you go on this issue. Either way, you risk pissing people off, but either way everything sells out in minutes as it is. While you may not agree with the tactic, I think it has very little to do sales, and has a lot to do with principle.
Alaskapopo
03-02-13, 21:38
And their pay and benefits are derived from those very same private sector employees, you know the ones who shouldn't have the same rights.
Again no LEO who has posted here thinks other citizens should not have the same guns we do. The argument is on how best to fight the current gun legislation that is being proposed. One way is to throw cops under the bus thinking that will help. The other is do keep writing our congressman and donating money and time to groups like the NRA and GOA.
Pat
In 1994, gun companies answered to the ban by designing and selling smaller capacity handguns. Kahr, KelTec. etc. In a way, they caved in to the government and in a way they let the people down by profiting from the AWB.
I think what is happening now is the right thing to do.
Yes, I am LE but I have different views. Common sense is not being used here.
We are all in agreement that NO laws enacted will reduce crime.
We are all in agreement that law abiding citizens will become
criminals overnight and in some cases, already have been.
We are all in agreement that there are enough magazines and weapons in circulation now that it would only take door to door confiscation to make a dent for decades to come.
I look at it this way, I have a lifetime of quality standard capacity magazines. I have no problem not being able to purchase any of these items if they are banned. I am a civilian first and I would never put myself in a higher bracket than anyone else because of my employment.
Can this restriction cost lives? Absolutely. We are at war people. Not a physical war quite yet but we are in the stages. No war can be fought without the loss of life. The question is how much life needs to be lost for the lawmakers, administrators and Chiefs realize that they are only hurting the people that will actually obey these laws (or at least care about getting in trouble)? I am a civilian first and civilians die in war too.
I was a Police officer for 6 of the 10 years of the last AWB and I only purchased ONE firearm (Glock 23) under the LE exemption and that was only because I had to use a personal firearm at that job. I paid the $55 for Glock mags just like everyone else. My AR had a fixed stock and a non threaded barrel just like everyone else.
It's time we stand together and fight. It's time we show this country that we still have a voice.
Wasn't all of the recent frenzy by states to pass new gun control legislation all motivated by the POTUS and his new federal gun control committee run by VP Biden? If so, then why not included all branches of the military?
Well, the Feds certainly talked a lot following Newtown, but IMHO, New York slamming their new law through is really the catalyst for all of the current state attacks on 2A. It seems to have empowered extremely liberal Democrats. And over the years, the states have been more aggressive about attacking 2A. Think New York, Massachusetts, California here. In addition, many Police Chiefs have expressed their support for this attack on 2A rights. It seems as if many do as deals are cut to exempt them, their departments and their personnel from the bans. Until recently, that included the retiring officers as well. So when it's said that LEOs don't seem to be supportive because you're not included in the bans, it's because as a unit, you're not. Until recently most LEA administrations haven't been at all involved in the fight for private citizens 2A rights and neither have police unions. And honestly, you really only have power in numbers. Some individual officers, like the LEO members of this forum, have expressed support. But not in large enough numbers to matter. Subjecting LEAs/LEOs to the same bans that the various state legislatures are proposing for private citizens either forces your administrations to re think their positions or puts the same restrictions on their personnel.
On the other hand, to my knowledge, the military branches haven't expressed anything one way or the other. General McChrystal doesn't count because he's not active and no one really cares what he thinks anymore. Plus I doubt he would have expressed his opinion if he was still on active duty.
That's the difference. No one wants to see anyone get hurt because of these ridiculous laws, but unless more LEAs get behind the fight for 2A rights, the legislatures are going to keep proposing these ridiculous laws. And many of the administrations/unions won't do it unless they're somehow more invested in it. Which means they and you are no longer exempt from it.
morbidbattlecry
03-02-13, 23:34
Guys to me it is real simple ; if we don't hang together we will most certainly hang separately- we are in the fight of our lives right now and we need everyone pulling in the same direction; LEO exemptions hurt our cause , not help it
If we eliminate the exemption maybe, just maybe, we can get some law enforcement officers and agencies engaged and pulling in the same direction - which is what we need now more than ever
Good Benjamin Franklin quote LAV.
gunrunner505
03-02-13, 23:48
I believe the real question at hand is if say the extremely anti gun Chief of Police for Chicago wanted to equip his officers with AR's and Magpul mags and he went directly to Magpul to purchase what would they say? I am all for supporting individual officers who support us - I don't think anyone ever said anything against that- but doing business directly with an agency whose leadership that is antigun is the real question
I hear where Magpul is coming from but I think that is the area of lingering doubt - to me at least
Mr. Vickers, you sir can tell the future. Currently Illinois is debating a statewide ban on "assault weapons" at the behest of the mayor of Chicago, or as I like to call him, the Napolionic Dwarf. In their very next breath the legislature wants to know why the CPD does not have AR type rifles in their cars to patrol the Engelwood neighborhood. So Superintendent McCarthy may be getting rifles that we may be denied. And the shell game is one for the ages, DHS buys thousands of AR's and calls them personal defense weapons, police agencies buy them and they are patrol rifles. A civillian owns one and it is a dreaded assaiult weapon. What a load.
On the embargo thing or whatever we're calling it I will say this one thing. While I am not in any way anti police, I agree with it. If I am legally limited to X weapon, or X rounds in my magazine, why do the police need anything more?
I resent our elected representatives pidgeon holing this debate into who needs what to hunt deer. Nowhere in the constitution is the word hunting, anywhere. They pass these rediculous laws and then specifically write exemtions for the police. Why? If the citizens only have 7 or 8 or 10 rounds, why do police need more? Oh yeah, because the gang member with his illegal gun doesn't care about the law and didn't download the mag in his gun to 7. So if the cop needs standard mags, I need standard mags. There's not a cop on every corner yet no matter where I go, there I am. You, the individual are all you have when the shit finds you. Why should you be at a disadvantage to the thugs and punks? I resent this attitude in our legislature that just because someone is not a police officer they some how lack the character or are not responsible enough to own a standard AR or AK with a standard capacity mag. Like if you aren't a cop and you have these things you are simply a latent psycho waiting to go off the reservation. You have the governor of New York standing at a lecturn yelling into a microphone about how you need to forget the extremists, and how you don't need 10 bullets to kill a deer all while sounding like what? An extremist. This giant unflushed turd.
Colorado Dem senator Jessie Ulibarri is quoted as saying "When you have the means available to you at every single corner to commit a horrendous act, we will continue to see what we have seen, which is the status quo, where unfortunately gun violence and violence in general is prevelant in our communities". Who the hell does this guy think he is? The responsible armed citizen is not the problem here, this is not 1994 Clinton era America. For comapies like Magpul and LWRCi to put their current states on notice that if this pending legislation is passed they will pack up and leave. These guys are ok by me, no matter what you think of their products. This takes moxy.
The second amendment and private civillian gun ownership is under attack like never before. You let them get the short edge of the wedge in and these liberals will keep hammering it endlessly until we are all unarmed.
We all need to stand together, now, or we are all screwed.
Again no LEO who has posted here thinks other citizens should not have the same guns we do. The argument is on how best to fight the current gun legislation that is being proposed. One way is to throw cops under the bus thinking that will help. The other is do keep writing our congressman and donating money and time to groups like the NRA and GOA.
Pat
can you climb out from under the bus? We're not throwing anyone under the bus. You may not like the stance taken, and you make you some good points as to why, but can you at least acknowledge that we have our reasons as well, and they are not based on being anti-LEO? We've been writing politicians, we've been giving to the NRA, but the shit is still hitting the fan all across the republic.
In 1994, gun companies answered to the ban by designing and selling smaller capacity handguns. Kahr, KelTec. etc. In a way, they caved in to the government and in a way they let the people down by profiting from the AWB.
I think what is happening now is the right thing to do.
Yes, I am LE but I have different views. Common sense is not being used here.
We are all in agreement that NO laws enacted will reduce crime.
We are all in agreement that law abiding citizens will become
criminals overnight and in some cases, already have been.
We are all in agreement that there are enough magazines and weapons in circulation now that it would only take door to door confiscation to make a dent for decades to come.
I look at it this way, I have a lifetime of quality standard capacity magazines. I have no problem not being able to purchase any of these items if they are banned. I am a civilian first and I would never put myself in a higher bracket than anyone else because of my employment.
Can this restriction cost lives? Absolutely. We are at war people. Not a physical war quite yet but we are in the stages. No war can be fought without the loss of life. The question is how much life needs to be lost for the lawmakers, administrators and Chiefs realize that they are only hurting the people that will actually obey these laws (or at least care about getting in trouble)? I am a civilian first and civilians die in war too.
I was a Police officer for 6 of the 10 years of the last AWB and I only purchased ONE firearm (Glock 23) under the LE exemption and that was only because I had to use a personal firearm at that job. I paid the $55 for Glock mags just like everyone else. My AR had a fixed stock and a non threaded barrel just like everyone else.
It's time we stand together and fight. It's time we show this country that we still have a voice.
+1, great post.
threeheadeddog
03-03-13, 09:29
Its more than painful it could end up with more officers getting killed and that blood will be on the hands of not just the politicians who passed the law but also on those that supported these type of efforts to keep good gear out of patrol officers hands. I know that is not what people want but that is where these efforts could very well lead if not one flinches in this game of chicken.
Pat
I dont know how to say this, but understand I do mean it respectfully.
I have family that are in the military, I know some great guys in LEO. What really distinguishes the character of one man from another in those professions is the emphasis they place on service(as in serving the people). I personally know people from both groups who believe they are "above" the rest of us, and I know people who believe they are in the service of the rest of us. Basically the good ones have decided there lives are worth sacrificing.
If LEO dont believe their blood is worth spilling find another occupation. If the laws they are sworn to protect dont jive with the belief they have in freedom than find another occupation.
If LEO dont believe their blood is worth spilling find another occupation. If the laws they are sworn to protect dont jive with the belief they have in freedom than find another occupation.
Absolutely. It is true for the military and it is true for LEO.
I find Pat, and too many officers, have the attitude that it is the citizens that are to be sacrificed in the name of officer safety....
Kind of like this guy: LINK (http://www.policeone.com/bizarre/articles/6111266-24-things-cops-know-but-most-people-don-t/)
1.) Even though you say differently, you probably don’t know your rights.
8.) Arguing with me here will not go well for you. Arguments are for courtrooms, where you can make any statements and ask me any questions you want. Out here, I win all the arguments.
14.) The gun isn’t to protect you. It is to protect me.
jklaughrey
03-03-13, 09:55
Not this officer. My fellow man comes before my personal needs/wants.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3
To all of the current cops on here, I have a simple question.
Would you arrest/charge someone for the simple possession of an unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun?
If not, would you confiscate said unlicensed weapon?
I understand that some won't want to answer that publicly but it is no different than asking would you arrest/charge someone for simple possession of an "assault rifle" or high capacity magazine if a ban were to take effect.
I have often thought about this.
My first question is:
Why did I come in contact with said device?
LowSpeed_HighDrag
03-03-13, 13:51
I have often thought about this.
My first question is:
Why did I come in contact with said device?
Bingo.
threeheadeddog
03-03-13, 13:54
Dave,
I have asked that question before and it is amazing how it just gets ignored. When I asked it I asked if any would/HAS instead of just would.
Absolutely. It is true for the military and it is true for LEO.
I find Pat, and too many officers, have the attitude that it is the citizens that are to be sacrificed in the name of officer safety....
Kind of like this guy: LINK (http://www.policeone.com/bizarre/articles/6111266-24-things-cops-know-but-most-people-don-t/)
I feel that you allow too much of what you see in Hollywood to form your personal view of law enforcement and your only mission here is to stir the pot.
While you may feel that all "citizens" that LE comes in contact with are equal in every sense of the term, that is not the case. While I took this job knowing that I may get seriously hurt or killed doing it some day, that does not mean that I should walk around like a human backstop to satisfy your perception of what my job entails. Frankly, from your commentary it seems that your perception of what my job entails is the same as what Jane Fonda's perception of what our troops mission in Vietnam was in 1972. You simply do not have a clue.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
03-03-13, 14:14
Dave,
I have asked that question before and it is amazing how it just gets ignored. When I asked it I asked if any would/HAS instead of just would.
What would you have prudent and patriotic officers talk about on a public forum?
Dave,
I have asked that question before and it is amazing how it just gets ignored. When I asked it I asked if any would/HAS instead of just would.
Is it truly "amazing" that LE doesnt want to answer a question like that over an open internet forum and because some here are merely trying to use that hypothetical question to put all LE in the same box so they can stir the pot some more and say "see, we told you so!"?
Littlelebowski
03-03-13, 14:32
I think the LARGE majority of officers on this site have expressed as much pro-liberty views as they possibly can. Maybe 2 or 3 have not. I think you are totally out of line and YOU are creating the "us vs them" as well as those few officers. You should check yourself...
Agreed. Pat is in the minority nearly all of the time on every non gun related topic on this site. I've had the honor of meeting and training with several LEOs on this forum. Not a one of them that I would not trust with my rights.
I think the LARGE majority of officers on this site have expressed as much pro-liberty views as they possibly can. Maybe 2 or 3 have not. I think you are totally out of line and YOU are creating the "us vs them" as well as those few officers. You should check yourself...
LSHD is on point.
To all of the current cops on here, I have a simple question.
Would you arrest/charge someone for the simple possession of an unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun?
If not, would you confiscate said unlicensed weapon?
I understand that some won't want to answer that publicly but it is no different than asking would you arrest/charge someone for simple possession of an "assault rifle" or high capacity magazine if a ban were to take effect.
Please do not discuss actual or past events for the reasons stated a few posts further down.
YES.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
I think the LARGE majority of officers on this site have expressed as much pro-liberty views as they possibly can. Maybe 2 or 3 have not. I think you are totally out of line and YOU are creating the "us vs them" as well as those few officers. You should check yourself...
THIS +1
Did we read the entire thread before posting? NOPE
PA PATRIOT
03-03-13, 18:05
To all of the current cops on here, I have a simple question.
Would you arrest/charge someone for the simple possession of an unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun?
Willful non-enforcement of felony laws is a federal crime punishable by serious prison time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 USC § 4 - Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Asked and Answered
I would not give up my House, Pension or Freedom for someone else's lack of judgment/violation of Federal Law. It is not up to me to decide the intent of the owner of said unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun that is for the courts to decide.
Now Hi-Cap Magazines or a AR which was legally purchased and then was prohibited by a off again then on again AWB's is another story. Gun law changes like the wind depending on who the POTUS or Congress is at the time. So unless they change the 2nd Amendment by official means then the Bill of Rights trumps all the political non-sense.
Is it difficult for you to accept that this is where this game could lead. Putting politics in front of peoples lives cop or citizen is inexcusable.
Pat
And yet that is what a lot of officers and LE agencies are doing in these ban states. Every officer that enforces these elitist laws is in fact doing irreparable harm to the LE/citizen relationship. This further endangers LE and citizens alike when some fool on one side or the other goes and does something incredibly foolish.
I'm gonna say this right here and right now, these laws carry the weight of law enforcement action, the boycotts do not. Who has the power in this arrangement? For another thing, these officers who may be endangered by this non-force of law boycott have every right to start their own company manufacturing whatever piece of equipment they see fit to support their government actions. The citizens in these ban states are prohibited by law from doing so!
Your complaints should fall on deaf ears here.
Let me be blunt this stupid ploy has the potential to get officers killed. Its not rhetoric its the truth. Also your label of elitist is incorrect with me. If I actually believed only cops should have the guns in questions then you would be right but you know that is not true. I don't support these laws and I have said that 100 times or more and I have given money to the NRA and GOA as well as written letters to my congressmen and the whitehouse. Lets not ignore the elephant in the room. The end result of trying to disarm cops will be cop deaths.
Pat
Yes it potentially does, Don't like it? Then do something about it. All a "disarmed cop" has to do to prevent cop deaths is refuse to enforce the law while disarmed. Why are any NYSP troopers working Cuomo's protective detail now? Because some of them agree with him. I have no sympathy for them, at all. They should be required by law to use non-"assault weapons" and 7 round magazines. Their lives and Cuomo's life are not one iota more valuable than the citizens they intend to disarm. NO MORE EXEMPTIONS AND SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR ELITISTS! :mad:
Both lives are equal and taking guns away from LEO's will not restore rights to the rest of the people.
And we completely disagree. If the officers have to suffer under the same draconian controls as the rest of the citizenry, those politicians who promote them will never again receive the support of a single police union, on anything!
Simply put, police agencies and unions who fight for these exemptions are partially responsible for their passage and retention. To put it bluntly, for a long time now, cops have been part of the problem, not the solution.
Here's something I am curious about....
Why is it that no one is shouting from the rooftops for Colt, FN, HK, etc to stop supplying weapons to our military?
The assumption by many here is that if confiscations are ordered that local & state LE will be the ones going door-to-door to take everyones weapons & hi-capacity magazines, etc. This is a complete fantasy scenario and about as ridiculous as it gets.
So why isn't anyone calling out Mark LaRue, or Colt, FN, etc for not banning all sales to the military??? I think it is simply because most of us, including myself, somewhere down the line have been inconvenienced by a police officer either during a traffic stop, or some other interaction during our lives along with how the media & hollywood portrays our LEO's that has formed our emotional response to LE in general making it that much easier to simply dismiss us as "agents of the state" hell-bent on taking your guns away.
Grow-up & snap out of it. It ain't gonna happen.
Simply put, the military is not civilian, law enforcement is. Another point, the initial confiscations and abridgement of rights will be the individual officers who will arrest and jail those persons discovered with "contraband" mags. Like it or not, we would be the front line of enforcement. We might not like it, but if the entire city and department are opposed to citizens having this equipment, the choice would be to turn in your badge or enforce the law. :(
Frankly it does not take courage right now to throw LEO's under the bus. That is the current popular thing to do with many in the firearms community. It takes a lot more courage to stand up and say no we will still sell to LEO's in ban states because we feel they need our products/training and we do not hold them responsible for the idiot politicians in charge in their areas. Magpul was getting a lot of flack for thier position before they joined the popular tide of throwing LEO's under the bus. It takes courage to buck the trend when you feel its wrong. It takes no courage to follow the popular trend. In fact there is so much pressure on gun companies right now to throw cops under the bus that if you don't your attacked and risk losing buisness.
Pat
As stated above, it was cops asking for exemptions that really started this. It sucks that you're lumped in with your brother officers who disagree with you, but I thought that was what the whole "thin blue line" was all about? In this case, you get to stick together with the anti-gun officers as well.
True but where are all our fellow citizens showing us support when governments are on a rampage to slash our pay/benefits and retirements. If cops do stand in a united front against future control I hope our fellow citizens remember that when we need the support.
Pat
The less you look like the enforcement arm of an oppressive government, the more likely you are to get that support. :)
Again no LEO who has posted here thinks other citizens should not have the same guns we do. The argument is on how best to fight the current gun legislation that is being proposed. One way is to throw cops under the bus thinking that will help. The other is do keep writing our congressman and donating money and time to groups like the NRA and GOA.
Pat
Or use option three: throw everything, to include the kitchen sink at the antis. Refusing to do business with the enforcement arm of an oppressive government is a viable and effective part of option three.
Just from the posts on this thread alone it's pretty clear how a big majority of law enforcement officer's think. Not that we did not already know this anyways, but.. yeah..
It's very unfortunate and telling of the times we live in when our "public servants" think that they somehow have the +1 on all of us and feel like they are a class above us. You're supposed to be to "protect and serve" - not to disrespect, harass, accuse, and otherwise mistreat us lowly peasants.
To think that any Joe Schmoe patrol officer giving speeding tickets to soccer moms and strip searching people for dime sacks of marijuana somehow needs an AR15 w/ a 30rd magazine anymore than a 'normal' citizen is just... batshit crazy...
You're wrong. Most of us have stood up for and will stand shoulder to shoulder with law abiding citizens. Even the officers we're debating with are pro-gun, they just disagree on how to combat the antis.
Larry Vickers
03-03-13, 19:01
Just got this email from a Cali cop buddy of mine who agrees with my/our point of view
'* Once they start flying the "your picking on LE flag" you won't sway them with logic.* It seems that most of these officers are from CA.* The magpul issue will have zero effect on them, agencies will get their mags one way or another, DRMO is handing out M16A2, mags, and other goodies to agencies for free.* GSA purchasing is alive and well and will fill agency orders before supplying civilian outlets with mags.* Magpul is a GSA provider.* CA is a lost cause, outside of the range staff of any given departement it is rare that officers own more than one pistol or any at all outside of what is issued, or belong to the NRA.* I have some officers that are just now noticing that pistols, rifles and mags are hard to get and they ask why?* This is the same mentality that has existed since I started 22 years ago and explains why the chiefs, captains, admin...policy makers are anti gun...they came from these same ranks.* Our Chief recently decided to stop signing assault weapon letters for officers purchase...due to liability on him...he said we have enough rifles to use..I asked to issue a carbine to every officer..he said no because of liability.* Yes I have enough to give every officer two carbine's since the downsizing!* This is typical of every chief at least in SOCAL.* Sheriffs are a mixed bag around here...metro sheriff's are liberal, rural progun, pro CCW.* So arguing with these idiots is a waste of time, the equipment is there....but it won't get used when needed except by maybe...maybe the 10% of each department who are meat eaters.* Its the 90% that I worry about when it comes to "helping" the state or feds confiscate or regulate registration...it is coming here...no way to stop the laws at this point.* We have a solid democrat gov here so its going to make NY look like a great place.'
He was referring to some of the comments made toward me on Soldier Systems in the Magpul LEO exemption post- I realized yesterday I was dealing with a bunch of Jerry's kids and quit posting over there
His comments are enlightening - and depressing
In 1994, gun companies answered to the ban by designing and selling smaller capacity handguns. Kahr, KelTec. etc. In a way, they caved in to the government and in a way they let the people down by profiting from the AWB.
So they were suppose to go out of business instead?
How is making product that is compliant with the laws to stay in business with a legal product "letting people down"?
Magic_Salad0892
03-03-13, 19:18
So they were suppose to go out of business instead?
How is making product that is compliant with the laws to stay in business with a legal product "letting people down"?
Because the laws hadn't been enacted yet.
Because the laws hadn't been enacted yet.
There have been small pocket handguns since the invention of firearms.
I realized yesterday I was dealing with a bunch of Jerry's kids
Has the red mark and the lump gone down where you slapped your forehead yet? :jester:
I actually did slap my forehead once and call myself an idiot out loud when I realized I had fallen that trap. Got some strange looks from around the room.
I realized yesterday I was dealing with a bunch of Jerry's kids.
Roger that. You reach a point where you are wasting your time.
Asked and Answered
I would not give up my House, Pension or Freedom for someone else's lack of judgment/violation of Federal Law. It is not up to me to decide the intent of the owner of said unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun that is for the courts to decide.
Now Hi-Cap Magazines or a AR which was legally purchased and then was prohibited by a off again then on again AWB's is another story. Gun law changes like the wind depending on who the POTUS or Congress is at the time. So unless they change the 2nd Amendment by official means then the Bill of Rights trumps all the political non-sense.
Do you not see the folly in this? The 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional. How is enforcing these any different than a mag capacity or semiauto ban? You are playing right into the hands of the gun prohibitionists.
Alaskapopo
03-04-13, 00:54
I dont know how to say this, but understand I do mean it respectfully.
I have family that are in the military, I know some great guys in LEO. What really distinguishes the character of one man from another in those professions is the emphasis they place on service(as in serving the people). I personally know people from both groups who believe they are "above" the rest of us, and I know people who believe they are in the service of the rest of us. Basically the good ones have decided there lives are worth sacrificing.
If LEO dont believe their blood is worth spilling find another occupation. If the laws they are sworn to protect dont jive with the belief they have in freedom than find another occupation.
Life is more valuable than politics. Dying because I got bested in a gun fight with a bad guy so be it. Dying because I did not have the tools to do the job because of some stupid political BS no that is not acceptable. And no I don't need to find another job because I feel this way. Basically your saying a police officers life is worth less than yours.
Pat
PA PATRIOT
03-04-13, 01:27
Do you not see the folly in this? The 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional. How is enforcing these any different than a mag capacity or semiauto ban? You are playing right into the hands of the gun prohibitionists.
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
86 ban is tied to FOPA 86. Open that can of worms and we might be recording ammo sales like firearms again.
Similarly challenges to the 1934 NFA could open that up to changes such as adjusting for inflation. That $200 NFA tax adjusted would amount to $3384.92 in 2012.
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
Iirc, scotus said it's constitutional in US v Miller. And they reiterated in Heller and McDonald that firearms regulation itself is not unconstitutional - speech is regulated all the time. But a de facto ban on handguns is unconstitutional because handguns are the preferred firearm for self defense. Taxing firearms and ammo is definitely something the Federal Govt can constitutionally do within reason - a $1 mil tax per bullet or gun would not fly, but a 100% tax would probably be constitutional. A ban via tax isn't legal.
The Hughes amendment is a ban via taxation power. They could always throw some interstate commerce bullshit tagline into it, but as it stands, it is theoretically an illegal law. And if they did, the firearms freedom act cases might mean some states allow MG production and ownership.
Of course if we start messing around with that, they might make an equivalent tax on MGs, something like $3500, which is about what $200 was back in the 30s. Imagine that, a $50 rdias but a $3500 tax stamp, lol.
Apparently there's a split in the circuit courts on the constitutionality of the Hughes amendment, with the 10th striking it down and the 4th and 7th upholding it. But I don't think scotus ever touched it.
My question is why? You do realize that until 1934 so-called NFA weapons weren't regulated. The 1934 NFA came about due to the all the crimes being committed by "criminals aka mobsters/gangsters" which as I understand it was mostly overblown.
We could also argue that the passing of prohibition was directly responsible for the crime and actually made them richer.
Let me ask you an honest question. In 1934 there was no central database and in fact (unless I am wrong) until the GCA of 1968 a felon could still own firearms. So what exactly did the NFA prevent? The NFA was designed as a control measure. The tax in 1934 would have all but killed the average persons ability to buy a 10.00 suppressor or make an SBS from a 10.00 shotgun. Do you think that rich criminals raking in thousands of dollars cared about a 200.00 fee?
I have no doubt that they still obtained weapons as easily as they did before the law was passed.
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
My question is why? You do realize that until 1934 so-called NFA weapons weren't regulated. The 1934 NFA came about due to the all the crimes being committed by "criminals aka mobsters/gangsters" which as I understand it was mostly overblown.
We could also argue that the passing of prohibition was directly responsible for the crime and actually made them richer.
Let me ask you an honest question. In 1934 there was no central database and in fact (unless I am wrong) until the GCA of 1968 a felon could still own firearms. So what exactly did the NFA prevent? The NFA was designed as a control measure. The tax in 1934 would have all but killed the average persons ability to buy a 10.00 suppressor or make an SBS from a 10.00 shotgun. Do you think that rich criminals raking in thousands of dollars cared about a 200.00 fee?
I have no doubt that they still obtained weapons as easily as they did before the law was passed.
Not only that, but prior to 1934 NFA, and since, gangsters typical STOLE their weapons such as Dillinger and Clyde Barrow robbing armories or police stations to get BARs, even though they could be bought legally. Why would a violent criminal pay for a gun they are going to use to rob a bank or shoot someone? NONE of the gun laws have ever changed the fact that criminals are going to steal weapons they want because IT IS CHEAPER THAN BUYING THEM no matter what the laws are to regulate sales or possession. Even if they can afford a certain weapon, why spend money on it when they can just steal it from the military or law enforcement?
BufordTJustice
03-04-13, 03:50
To all of the current cops on here, I have a simple question.
Would you arrest/charge someone for the simple possession of an unlicensed machine gun, suppressor, or sawed-off shotgun?
Those have been regulated since 1934. So, yes. I wouldn't dig to find out a whole lot about said weapons, but if I discovered that info I would arrest. That's not new.
If not, would you confiscate said unlicensed weapon?
Also yes.
I understand that some won't want to answer that publicly but it is no different than asking would you arrest/charge someone for simple possession of an "assault rifle" or high capacity magazine if a ban were to take effect.
Please do not discuss actual or past events for the reasons stated a few posts further down.
No. It is different. One has been illegal to possess when unregistered since 1934 and is already a felony. If one is dumb enough to reveal that they have an illegal SBS/SBR/Select fire weapon, then they deserve to get caught and arrested. WTF happened to OPSEC?!?!
I would not arrest for mere possession of (nor even inquire about any) weapons, magazines, or accessories that were made "illegal" by any forthcoming assault weapons ban.
BufordTJustice
03-04-13, 04:01
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
I don't. Regardless of any SCOTUS decision, the constitution as-written does NOT provide for the 1934 NFA. It simply doesn't support it. I don't care what the Miller decision says. This is the same SCOTUS who refuses to acknowledge that Obama has a SS Number registered to a deceased white male from CT. I place little value in their recognition of my God given rights.
BUT, we have to be smart about this. We're on the ropes with regard to this red-herring fallacy that is currently being battled about under the guise of an AWB. IF we make headway on that, we can start worrying about the 1986/1968/1934 pieces of legislation. Not before then.
If you gents care to read the decisions coming from our federal appellate courts, they are depressing. Hell, read Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, or Soto-Mayor's opinions.
**** ME!!! They think the constitution is dead already. They are true communists. We're hanging by a thread as a Democratic Republic.
I don't see this ending well.
Because I believe that burst/full auto firearms, SBR, AOW and suppressors should be regulated but not at its current standard. I would shorten the wait time and reduce the cost 75% plus I would not requirer a Chief of Police or Sheriff sign off but a serious back ground check would be needed as a requirement.
And I would like to ask a question, if the 1934 NFA and 1986 ban are unconstitutional then why has there not been legal challenges from the NRA and other groups to the Supreme Court to over turn same?
Tons of time has passed but nothing in any way of a change has occurred. Why Not?
I disagree with you about regulating fullautos, suppressors, et al. We will just have to agree to disagree.
You raise a good question about why these were never challenged. Miller ruled that a short barreled shotgun was not protected under the 2a because it is not a martial arm. I believe this ruling is incorrect. Just because SCOTUS rules on an issue does not mean their ruling is true Gospel. This is such a case.
As such, there has long been concern in the pro-2a community about challenging firearm prohibition. What if we get another ruling of the same type in Miller. When the DC vs Heller case was being heard by SCOTUS, there was a mass collective butt pucker by the pro-2a community, because of the "what if" aspect. I do not know how long you have been following firearm policy/politics, so forgive me if I stating things you already know.
"Shall not be infringed" is both explicit and unequivocal. The 2a applies to ALL firearms, from 22lr bolt actions to title-2 firearms. If we continue to allow stratification of regulation, we will lose.
Life is more valuable than politics. Dying because I got bested in a gun fight with a bad guy so be it. Dying because I did not have the tools to do the job because of some stupid political BS no that is not acceptable. And no I don't need to find another job because I feel this way. Basically your saying a police officers life is worth less than yours.
Pat
Yet it's ok, well less bad, if it's a father not having the tools to do the job of protecting his family in the event of a home invasion? One cop to another, you're not making us look good.
The 1934 NFA came about due to the all the crimes being committed by "criminals aka mobsters/gangsters" which as I understand it was mostly overblown.
The single biggest catalyst (or straw that broke the camel's back) was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. And you are absolutely correct that the instances if violence were not as widespread as it seems from 80 years removed. However, even then the media was all over any instance of violence because it was dramatic and the public ate it up.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.