the psychological testing of LEOs must leave a lot to be desired, since about 20% are assholes or half-crazy. :mrgreen:
.
If you think that's a high number, you should check out the statistics for us Scorpios.
I posted a similar question in another thread but here goes for a wider set of views...
All things being equal many X military, X LEO's and civilians have as much training as do active and retired LEO's. The only real difference is the psychological testing for police and some military MOS'es. Most people with CCW licenses etc have had very extensive background checks as well.
So if people I mentioned had the same psychological testing as police, should they like the police be allowed access to the same weapons? Police are allowed access to teargas and grenade launchers, full auto weapons and even explosive etc grenades.
So if we the people have the same training, background checks etc as police. Why should only the peoples right be infringed?
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
I posted a similar question in another thread but here goes for a wider set of views...
All things being equal many X military, X LEO's and civilians have as much training as do active and retired LEO's. The only real difference is the psychological testing for police and some military MOS'es. Most people with CCW licenses etc have had very extensive background checks as well.
So if people I mentioned had the same psychological testing as police, should they like the police be allowed access to the same weapons? Police are allowed access to teargas and grenade launchers, full auto weapons and even explosive etc grenades.
So if we the people have the same training, background checks etc as police. Why should only the peoples right be infringed?
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
I feel it is the responsibility of the people who employ those officers to allow or disallow their inventory. If the people feel they need a police force with grenades and tear gas, then they should allow it. If they feel their local police force should only carry billy clubs, then that is up to the local area.
I would feel fine if my local police had 9mm, shotgun and riot gear. Pepper spray and taser would be fine as well. After that, I don't really see the need.
Not really my point, but an excellent point and addition to the topic...
I would have no problem with this. The people should decide. Instead it is left up to one or two administrators all the while the peoples right is imposed on in the name of "reducing gun crime" when we know this does not work as you are only addressing a tool used in crime, rather than the actual cause of the crime.
can anyone fashion a rational argument that weapons that government bureaucrats find MOST suitable for civilian police employees to deploy against criminals in a municipal environment, should also be found to be so dangerous that no other honest civilian should even be allowed to merely possess such firearms?
I sure cannot
Not really my point, but an excellent point and addition to the topic...
I would have no problem with this. The people should decide. Instead it is left up to one or two administrators all the while the peoples right is imposed on in the name of "reducing gun crime" when we know this does not work as you are only addressing a tool used in crime, rather than the actual cause of the crime.
I posted a similar question in another thread but here goes for a wider set of views...
All things being equal many X military, X LEO's and civilians have as much training as do active and retired LEO's. The only real difference is the psychological testing for police and some military MOS'es. Most people with CCW licenses etc have had very extensive background checks as well.
So if people I mentioned had the same psychological testing as police, should they like the police be allowed access to the same weapons? Police are allowed access to teargas and grenade launchers, full auto weapons and even explosive etc grenades.
So if we the people have the same training, background checks etc as police. Why should only the peoples right be infringed?
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
I posted a similar question in another thread but here goes for a wider set of views...
All things being equal many X military, X LEO's and civilians have as much training as do active and retired LEO's. The only real difference is the psychological testing for police and some military MOS'es. Most people with CCW licenses etc have had very extensive background checks as well.
So if people I mentioned had the same psychological testing as police, should they like the police be allowed access to the same weapons? Police are allowed access to teargas and grenade launchers, full auto weapons and even explosive etc grenades.
So if we the people have the same training, background checks etc as police. Why should only the peoples right be infringed?
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
Can you show that training makes any difference at all and serves some useful purpose to society. I shall not argue that personal safety and defence ability is improved by personal stuff has nothing to do with society. What does this training, money and impediments for CITIZENS do for society?
Which part of your arm are you willing to give up?
Why do you think rights are sub-divisible? Who conned you?
And
Once you accept gun control all you can do is argue over how much to accept, exactly as you are now doing.
Can you show that training makes any difference at all and serves some useful purpose to society. I shall not argue that personal safety and defence ability is improved by personal stuff has nothing to do with society. What does this training, money and impediments for CITIZENS do for society?
Well, if my experience is any guide, the psychological testing of LEOs must leave a lot to be desired, since about 20% are assholes or half-crazy. :mrgreen:
My main concerns about psych testing for 2A stuff is who gets to define where the bar is, what is normal, and the potential for abuse... if those issues could be adequately addressed I might change my mind.
As a gun owner, I believe it is your responsibility to seek training. However, it should not be federally mandated. State rights dictate they have the ability to add that feature to their laws. I don't see it as a necessarily bad thing.
Foster patents go through more extensive 'testing' than LEOs and military.I posted a similar question in another thread but here goes for a wider set of views...
All things being equal many X military, X LEO's and civilians have as much training as do active and retired LEO's. The only real difference is the psychological testing for police and some military MOS'es. Most people with CCW licenses etc have had very extensive background checks as well.
So if people I mentioned had the same psychological testing as police, should they like the police be allowed access to the same weapons? Police are allowed access to teargas and grenade launchers, full auto weapons and even explosive etc grenades.
So if we the people have the same training, background checks etc as police. Why should only the peoples right be infringed?
For the record I am OK with the system in place Federally. Locally New York, CA and a few others are in my opinion over the line of "shall not be infringed."
As a gun owner, I believe it is your responsibility to seek training. However, it should not be federally mandated. State rights dictate they have the ability to add that feature to their laws. I don't see it as a necessarily bad thing.
Foster patents go through more extensive 'testing' than LEOs and military.
You can't keep screwing the economy or suspend the people in fear while the population is armed.Yep they do.
Notice not one anti gun person will touch the question. It's because they know the answer, and it blows everything about their logic for gun control out the window.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?