A Question.

[ChrisL]

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

I think I did.

 

[Black Dog]

Oh jeez, excuse me, I thought you asked ME a question. I didn't realize that you just wanted to make everyone listen to YOUR ideas and not state their own. You have not explained anything. You asked if I thought citizens should be able to have the same weaponry as police, and I said no and explained why I thought that way.

You stated your reason and I addressed it. Then I went on to explain why I disagree. And yes I mentioned it specifically...

You missed the point. If we have, like me for instance. The same training or better than any police officer. Why does he get to be above the law? So the training they go through must mean very little if people with even more training etc are restricted by laws that police are exempt from just because the local, state, federal authorities say so. It is obviously not based on training or we could have the same hardware. A civilian law enforcement officer is still just a civilian. So why are the civilian police forces not restrained by the same laws? How are they above the people?

No. My point is why are the police above the law? It's obviously not the training. Otherwise people like myself, Goshen etc could purchase the same arms no mater what state like police, and we can't.

They don't and will not. So it is irrelevant to police being above the law. You are still missing my point. The police should not be above the law or the people. The people should have the same rights as any law enforcement officer who is still a civilian and a citizen.

Unfortunately, you have YET to explain anything, just doing a lot of blathering.

Ad Homines, nice. As I have shown above, yes I have.

Your point is that you think regular old civilians should be able to own equivalent firearms as police, you say that some are trained as well if not better than police. MY point is that MORE people are not as well trained as police in general.

No. My point is the police should be no more above the law than the people, period. As I pointed out it has nothing at all to do with training. If it did, what you suggest would already be in place.

 

[Black Dog]

I never said anyone's rights should be taken away. I said special licensing requirements for those who wish to be armed as the police.

So now we need special licensing to practice a right? The police should not be above the people.

 

[ChrisL]

You stated your reason and I addressed it. Then I went on to explain why I disagree. And yes I mentioned it specifically...









Ad Homines, nice. As I have shown above, yes I have.



No. My point is the police should be no more above the law than the people, period. As I pointed out it has nothing at all to do with training. If it did, what you suggest would already be in place.

It does have to do with training. The police are trained in the operation and safety of such weapons, unlike the general public.

Now, I stated that people SHOULD be able to have the equivalent weaponry of law enforcement officers IF they also have equivalent or better training.

 

[ChrisL]

So now we need special licensing to practice a right? The police should not be above the people.

They wouldn't be if the regular citizenry were also entitled to obtain special licensing to obtain and own such weaponry.

Besides, I believe that a police officer is only able to USE those weapons in the course of his/her job. I don't think they are allowed to own or operate such weaponry OUTSIDE of their police duties.

 

[ChrisL]

IOW, a police officer may have access to such weaponry during the course of his job, but he most certainly cannot legally personally own this weaponry either.

 

[Black Dog]

Of course it does. That's just silly. The more you know about something, the more common sense you develop about such an issue. You aren't BORN with common sense you know.

You really need to spend some time with police officers or military personnel. It would give you a more realistic view of common sense. Good sense and sound judgment can only be taught to a limited extent. As the old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water."

You know to "exorcise" a right would be to get rid of it entirely? I think you meant to say "exercise" a right.

Spell check oy.

 

[Black Dog]

IOW, a police officer may have access to such weaponry during the course of his job, but he most certainly cannot legally personally own this weaponry either.

Sheriffs police take their weapons home like most police officers.

 

[Black Dog]

They wouldn't be if the regular citizenry were also entitled to obtain special licensing to obtain and own such weaponry.

Besides, I believe that a police officer is only able to USE those weapons in the course of his/her job. I don't think they are allowed to own or operate such weaponry OUTSIDE of their police duties.

Yes they are. Police are considered police 24/7. They are never off duty.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes they are. Police are considered police 24/7. They are never off duty.

No, wrong. They are not allowed to personally own anything that you cannot own yourself. They have access to such weaponry if needed during the course of their work. That is all.

 

[ChrisL]

Sheriffs police take their weapons home like most police officers.

Their side arms. They are NOT allowed to take home grenade launchers and other such weaponry for their personal use.

 

[Black Dog]

Their side arms. They are NOT allowed to take home grenade launchers and other such weaponry for their personal use.

Why are you harping on grenade launchers? Anyone can buy a grenade launcher. Getting grenades is another story. I don't really consider explosive ordinance as part of this, that falls under a different law altogether. I am only talking small arms, not ordinance. It was just an example in the original post. 99.9% of police do not have them. They do have access, this does not mean they have them. Citizens without proper licensing should not have them. I don't even know if you can get a license to have them, but I think you can.

 

[Black Dog]

No, wrong. They are not allowed to personally own anything that you cannot own yourself. They have access to such weaponry if needed during the course of their work. That is all.

Ummmm... I was a cop. That is wrong. If you have a special item it is yours until you quit. All you need to buy a special item is a submission by your chief on department letterhead. If you retire in most cases you keep it.

 

[ChrisL]

Ummmm... I was a cop. That is wrong. If you have a special item it is yours until you quit. All you need to buy a special item is a submission by your chief on department letterhead. If you retire in most cases you keep it.

You are not allowed to own anything that the general public is not.

 

[ChrisL]

I've got to say, this is a backwards ass way to try to get support. When you start talking this kind of bull crap, you drive more people away from you and your viewpoints.

 

[TurtleDude]

I think I did.

I don't think you read what I wrote correctly. You never argued that honest people should not own stuff cops have

 

[TurtleDude]

Their side arms. They are NOT allowed to take home grenade launchers and other such weaponry for their personal use.

I am unaware of most police departments having anything other than tear gas launchers

 

[ChrisL]

I am unaware of most police departments having anything other than tear gas launchers

I don't really know what they have, but I do believe the cops aren't able to own anything for their own personal use that you yourself wouldn't be able to own.

And I would be all for people being able to own specialized weaponry that regular citizenry cannot usually own if they have training.

 

[TurtleDude]

I don't really know what they have, but I do believe the cops aren't able to own anything for their own personal use that you yourself wouldn't be able to own.

And I would be all for people being able to own specialized weaponry that regular citizenry cannot usually own if they have training.

most cops are crappy shots compared to competitive shooters. I would put my 15 year old son up against any major police department and bet he'd outsthoot at least 85% of them

 

[Black Dog]

You are not allowed to own anything that the general public is not.

Yes they can...

A department-by-department breakdown of purchases made this year, released as part of the AP's records request, shows that Los Angeles Police Department officers bought 146 guns, the most in the state. The department's policy says the guns are to be used only for police purposes.

Today, about 1,300 of the nearly 10,000 LAPD officers have assault rifles, more than 500 of them purchased by the officers themselves.

Investigators have not said what kinds of weapons were involved, but did say they were ones that officers can buy but civilians cannot. That category also can include certain types of handguns and high-capacity ammunition magazines. - Calif. officers bought 7,600 banned assault weapons through legal exemption | 89.3 KPCC

Effective immediately, peace officers who have legislative authority to carry and use firearms may, without a letter signed by the head of their agency or the agency head's designee, purchase non-rostered handguns and/or large capacity magazines. The peace officer must present a valid peace officer identification card and the dealer must retain a copy of the identification card on file. (PC 12132 & 12133). A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078). - Policy Change Regarding State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General

Almost every state has such exemptions.

 

[Black Dog]

I don't really know what they have, but I do believe the cops aren't able to own anything for their own personal use that you yourself wouldn't be able to own.

You were wrong.

And I would be all for people being able to own specialized weaponry that regular citizenry cannot usually own if they have training.

Training is not needed to exorcise a right.

 

[ChrisL]

most cops are crappy shots compared to competitive shooters. I would put my 15 year old son up against any major police department and bet he'd outsthoot at least 85% of them

Your son has years of training. Are you saying that because you think the police are not trained well enough or at least not as well as a competitive shooter that everyone should be able to own any weapon that the police use during the course of their duty?

 

[ChrisL]

Yes they can...

A department-by-department breakdown of purchases made this year, released as part of the AP's records request, shows that Los Angeles Police Department officers bought 146 guns, the most in the state. The department's policy says the guns are to be used only for police purposes.

Today, about 1,300 of the nearly 10,000 LAPD officers have assault rifles, more than 500 of them purchased by the officers themselves.

Investigators have not said what kinds of weapons were involved, but did say they were ones that officers can buy but civilians cannot. That category also can include certain types of handguns and high-capacity ammunition magazines. - Calif. officers bought 7,600 banned assault weapons through legal exemption | 89.3 KPCC

Effective immediately, peace officers who have legislative authority to carry and use firearms may, without a letter signed by the head of their agency or the agency head's designee, purchase non-rostered handguns and/or large capacity magazines. The peace officer must present a valid peace officer identification card and the dealer must retain a copy of the identification card on file. (PC 12132 & 12133). A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078). - Policy Change Regarding State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General

Almost every state has such exemptions.

And your very own link says that these weapons are to be used for police purposes only.

Also, according to your link, these officers NEED a special permit. So this is no different than the suggestions I have made, specialty training required along with special permit.

 

[Black Dog]

And your very own link says that these weapons are to be used for police purposes only.

Ummm... yes one representative says this AFTER they got caught...

"I think it's much more questionable whether we should allow peace officers to have access to weapons or firearms that a private citizen wouldn't have access to if the use is strictly personal," said Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, a Democrat who represents the Sacramento region.

The information was obtained through a California Public Records Act request filed after federal authorities served search warrants in November as part of ongoing investigation into allegations of illegal weapons sales by several Sacramento-area law enforcement officers.

The investigation has raised questions about the kinds of restricted weapons that the more than 87,000 peace officers in the state are entitled to purchase and about a 2001 law that allows them to buy assault weapons "for law enforcement purposes, whether on or off duty."

The sad part is in the end nothing was changed, nothing.

The state Department of Fish and Game is among several state agencies that allow officers to buy assault weapons and use them while off-duty.

"I don't know exactly what they're using them for," department spokesman Patrick Foy said. "What they're not using them for is patrol, I can tell you that."

Also, according to your link, these officers NEED a special permit. So this is no different than the suggestions I have made, specialty training required along with special permit.

Please point out where it says this?

Effective immediately, peace officers who have legislative authority to carry and use firearms may, without a letter signed by the head of their agency or the agency head's designee, purchase non-rostered handguns and/or large capacity magazines. The peace officer must present a valid peace officer identification card and the dealer must retain a copy of the identification card on file. (PC 12132 & 12133). A letter is still required from the head of the agency to exempt the peace officer from the ten day waiting period. (PC 12078). - Policy Change Regarding State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General

 

[Ikari]

I am unaware of most police departments having anything other than tear gas launchers

Anything the cops have, the People should have. At the very least.