California Cops Call For Open Carry Ban

[E5RANGER375]

Good gosh.

This thread is on dangerous ground.




People drinking to people who kill police, and the firebombing of a city!

I think what we see here is a divergence of morality and politics.

Yes I agree it is wrong to ban guns.

No I do not agree to supporting, "drinking to" or otherwise unlawfully eliminating fathers and sons who protect and serve!

(im asking a serious question below, because i want to know the answer. i want a truthful answer from people on here)
I DONT CONDNE KILLING COPS. BUT THE ONES WHO DONT obey the law, are they cops or criminals??, If they THREATEN OUR LIVES, ARE WE JUSTIFIED IN DEFENDING OURSELVES AGAINST THEM HARMING US AS WE ARE IN SHOOTING A ROBBER WHOS TRYING TO KILL US???
If a cop walks up to you for no reason and starts bashing your skull with his batton and is trying to kill you, would you be justified in shooting him??? NO ONE condones the murder of innocent people, especialy cops. but when they act recklessly and criminaly does their cop status end there in that instand or does it take a fellow cop or a judge to revoke their authority??

WHO DO THE LAW BREAKING AND CONSTITUTIONALY OPPRESSING POLICE IN CALIFORNIA SERVE??? CAUSE ITS NOT US OR THE CONSTITUTION LIKE ITS SUPPOSED TO BE!!! SO DOESNT THAT INVALIDATE AND REVOKE THEIR AUTHORITY?? I THINK IT DOES IN EXTREME CEIRCUMSTANCES LIKE IS HAPPENING IN CALIFORNIA.

Good Lord people, they have a right to make the wrong decision, to belong to the wrong union, and to change their minds about it later!

SURE AFTER THEY PAY FOR THEIR ACTIONS, IF THEY ARE ILLEGAL!

They are humans. They are AMERICANS! Created in the image of God. Every person is someones son or daughter and NO ONE should rejoice or condone their killing. Certainly not over a political issue! And certainly not the wholesale destruction of civilians by the A-Bomb! Good Lord!

OH, HERE WE GO with that again. bleeding hearts to the front row for a prayer huddle. So i will remember that the next terrorist i get the chance to double tap... oh wait i cant do that, hes someones son or daughter, and he looks like god.

To memorialize with pride the firebombing of a city, or the ATOM BOMB is .. frankly sickening to me. Yes terrible things happen in war but they are to be regretted and not celebrated.

At some point it is a moral issue. Saying "Death to anyone to infringes on my rights, bomb their cities and heres to Hiroshima!" is simply...unfathomable.

WELL THEN I GUESS IM A D*CK that wont inherit the kingdom, BECAUSE I'LL DRINK ANY DAY TO THE BOMB BEING DROPPED ON THOSE B*STARD JAPS. ESPECIALY AFTER SEEING VIDEO OF WHAT THEY DID TO OUR MEN IN UNIFORM!!!! WATCHING THOSE BOMBS GO OFF IS BETTER THAN WATCHING A HALF TIME SUPER BOWL SHOW WITH JANNET JACKSON TITTY POPPING OUT!!! and that was a pretty good show!! ID LIKE TO SEE THE SAME DAMN THING HAPPEN IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN TOO!!!!

I understand there is a morality founded on something other than respect for life, and Judeo-Christian morals, but whatever moral system CELEBRATES the death and destruction of women and children en masse...

Is far more of a threat to the fabric of our society than anything that goes on in Californias legal system.

WHATEVER. maybe you should pray about it, but keep your hand on your gun because at least you know it will be in your hand to strike down your enemies when the time comes. dont wait around for the holy fog to engulf them.

MY REBUTTAL IS IN RED INSIDE YOUR QUOTE!

 

[dom1104]

My Rebuttal is this. E5Ranger.. killing american police, or praising those who do... is not good or something we should condone.

You seem to have a LOT of hate going on. You seem.. very mixed up in your thinking.

Let me spell it out for ya. Murder is wrong. Supporting murder is wrong.

Its that simple.

The rest of your post, although I admit totally hilarious, makes little sense.

The California police are our ideological enemies, but do not deserve to die because they are wrong.

I have no idea why that makes you so angry.

 

[dom1104]

I am going to leave this thread alone at this point, it is going nowhere fast and getting ridiculous even faster.

I seem to be feeding the fire,and the hatred in a few of the members of the forum is getting a little... over the top.

It may die down if I stop disagreeing with them.

Adios. <--- notice the irony!

 

[E5RANGER375]

My Rebuttal is this. E5Ranger.. killing american police, or praising those who do... is not good or something we should condone.

You seem to have a LOT of hate going on. You seem.. very mixed up in your thinking.

Let me spell it out for ya. Murder is wrong. Supporting murder is wrong.

Its that simple.

The rest of your post, although I admit totally hilarious, makes little sense.

The California police are our ideological enemies, but do not deserve to die because they are wrong.

I have no idea why that makes you so angry.

I HATE THE FACT THAT A LOT OF MY FELLOW so called AMERICANS ARE BIG P*SSYS AND DONT GET MAD LIKE ME ABOUT PEOPLE TRASHING OUR CONSTITUTION THAT MEN DIED TO GIVE US AND HAVE DIED TO PRESERVE FOR US!!! I'LL BE DAMNED IF IM GONNA LET IN MY LIFETIME PEOPLE JUST THROW IT ALL AWAY!!! If I have to die to protect the constitution and my country AMERICA then so be it, i will gladly do it. because i have a daughter that i brought into this world to live as a FREE AMERICAN, not a slave to any government!!! The government is supposed to be OUR SLAVE!!!! WAKE UP FOOLS!!!!

Im not talking about murder, you missed my point!! I was talking about self defense. if someone is trying to kill me, the clothes they have on isnt gonna make a difference on whether i chose to deffend myself or not.
im talking about instances like rodney king. or the poor 80 year old woman in new orleans i saw getting the crap beat out of her by 2 cops in her own home after hurricane katrina. are you telling me they didnt have a right to deffend themselves when their lives were in danger? even though their attackers were sworn police, who were supposed to be protecting them??

so basicly you would just lay down and risk death?? when an illegal act is being commited against you?

THANKFULLY WE LIVE IN INDIANA AND NOT CALIFORNIA!!! but if it becomes a police state in this country like they want, you might wanna think over your beliefs and how far you would go to preserve your own life. do you think it was easy for our founders to kill fellow englishmen that they grew up with?? they looked past the man, and looked at the end purpose, and what it was furthering. Thats how any sane human can take another life in war. you have to disasociate the human factor from it. ITS NOT MURDER IF ITS RIGHT!!! and how do we determine which side was right?? Its the one who wins!! 2nd place is the first loser, and always ends up being the b*tch!!! So basicly im saying, dont be a Biznitch, WIN!!!!

Some of this is hypothetical anyways, to make you think about the WHAT IF??? Im all for a peacefull non violent solution. i think here in indiana, if marshal law was declared, you would see 2/3 of the police leave their post because we have mostly good law abiding police here who will fight to preserve the constitution. and i will proudly stand beside them.
but most of the cops in LA are nazis, and if you dont think so then go there and see for yourself.

 

[jbombelli]

Wow. I dont know what to say, other than that sums up the difference between two very different world views.

One values the human life, the other power over human lives.

One God given rights, the other rights gained and maintained by brute force and brutality.

I am glad I chose the side I am on. I think I would be a mean angry sad old man if I was on the other.

I wish you well Jbombelli but I doubt we will ever see eye to eye. We are lookin at the same duck from opposite sides of the pond.

Yeah, my world view isn't very popular. I don't see eye to eye with very many people. I know that. But we're all the products of our life experiences. Mine have been pretty harsh; I learned early on that life is cheap. Now this doesn't mean I want to see needless suffering, or killing. I don't. But I will always celebrate the deaths of my enemies. Even if they're public servants, even if they're my countrymen. Generally, I try to keep a live and let live attitude. Until someone tries to tread upon me.

As far as rights? To me, rights aren't given by any god. They are claimed, or taken, only by men. We retain only those rights we're willing to kill and die to keep; nothing more, nothing less. You can kill a free man, but he'll always be a free man.

I also wish you well, and will drink to that, too.

 

[smoking357]

When you lament the deaths of those who wish to take from you, you simply enable their cohorts to take from you. If more people said "f*** you, that's what you get for trying to take our rights", maybe THEN they'll change their ways. But lamenting them? Wishing them the best? Sympathizing with them and their supposed moral quandaries? That gets you nowhere but trod upon.

The above quote is positively airtight.

 

[smoking357]

Murder is wrong. Supporting murder is wrong.

Murder is the intentional killing of an innocent. Morally speaking, killing someone in defense of one's country or oneself receives a different classification.

Rare and unwelcome is the person who advocates murder.

 

[smoking357]

If that knowledge causes scumbags to shp, I'd rather not lure them in by feigning weakness first.

^^^^^^^
THIS is the correct attitude regarding OC.

 

[Bill of Rights]

A serviceable argument? There isn't one. The easier, more Constitutional answer is to have your dispatcher screen the calls better if you're worried about needless calls for MWG, especially in states that do NOT require a state-issued permission slip to carry. As was pointed out upthread, the easiest answer is "Ma'am, carrying a firearm is not an unlawful act. There aren't many criminals who will advertise the fact that they're armed... most of them want to surprise their victims with that knowledge. If the person you're calling about is just looking at the green beans/just buying some nachos/just walking down the sidewalk with her husband and kid, they're committing no crime, but making a false report to police IS a crime."

Denny can back me up on this. I agree with you fully, however, dispatchers often do not get quality information from complainants and it is often up to us to validate the call. Dispatch may get a quick call and hang up and no answer on the callback. They have to dispatch an officer. Dispatchers are not out on the street and cannot make that judgement call, nor do they have the time to educate the caller on the law. Until YOU have answered those calls and found a serious violent felon standing in a school parking lot with dope in his pocket and his Taurus .40 tucked in his pants while he's shaking down kids, please reserve judgement.

There's a "page 2" I have not read yet, however I want to answer this before I forget to do so: I know about dispatchers. I can't tell you how many times I've been sent to a "stroke" that turned out to be hyperventilation and conversely, an "elevated temperature and difficulty breathing" that was a full cardiac arrest. Neither is much fun, and I know it's less so when there're lives on the line... especially when one of those lives is yours!

No slam on dispatchers, either; they have no control over what info they're given and just pass it along to the folks in the field. They're my lifeline, and the hell with the classes that say you don't use "please" and "thank you" on the radio because they're "understood". . Good manners are NEVER "understood".

Last point here, if I gave the impression of passing judgment on the officers, I apologize. If anything, it was judgment on the scared little sheep who need a diaper change after seeing an object on someone's belt.

You do raise an interesting point, though, that I'd like to address: You describe it as an "odd" feeling to talk to someone with an exposed pistol. Do you get that same feeling talking to other uniformed officers? Would that feeling you describe experiencing be a bit of intimidation? That's a similar feeling that the rest of us who don't wear badges get when talking to some officers. I can say that I've stood and talked with people from this very board, walked with them as we picked up a couple of things at Walmart, etc. while they were OCing, and I have been more uncomfortable talking with uniformed officers than I was those times. (especially considering the point I read in the "gunfacts.info" pdf, that armed citizens are more accurate and have fewer erroneous shots than do police officers. In fairness, citizens know who the criminal is. You guys have to guess and pray you guess correctly.) No insult is intended here, so please don't take any: the thought that crosses my mind is "When people fear the government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty." Given the choice of one or the other, I would choose the latter, however with all the choices on the table, I'd prefer that no discomfort was even present, let alone perceived.

It IS an odd feeling to talk to someone with a gun. Now, common sense prevailing, no I do not feel "intimidated" or "uncomfortable" around other officers or even around good citizens exercising their 2A rights. However, getting dispatched to a trouble with a person call where the person at the center of the dispute has a firearm, even still in the holster, does raise the hair on the back of your neck quite a bit. It all goes back to our Officer Safety training. I don't take offense to your point of view, I just hate seeing all cops painted as a jack-booted thugs cruising around looking for good upstanding citizens to violate their rights. As I said earlier, in many cases, officers only have their training and experience to rely on. Given that we deal with the law in every interaction we have, there will be times where interpretation is key. The individual officer, in most cases, pays careful attention to each and every arrest that they make, so as not to violate those rights. I know I can't afford an attorney for a false arrest lawsuit, along with all the guys I know and work with.

Talking to someone with a visible gun vs. talking to a suspect (or "subject", if you prefer) with a visible gun... two different animals here. I can imagine that I'd agree with you on the latter. The former, not so much.
Gah. The whole JBT thing. OK, let me clarify my position on this once and for all: If you act like that, you earn that title. If you don't, you don't. I try really, REALLY hard to never use that term because I know that it's very, pardon the pun, loaded. That said, I have personally been present when officers I know specifically commented about going out to "violate someone's civil rights". I don't know how serious they were. Even so, those present at the time are the ones to whom I would apply that term, if at all, not all LEOs.

The problem here, as I said before, is not the enforcement. It's the law itself. Don't hate the cops because of bad legislation. The cops are doing doing what the court tells them. And remember who runs the courts - liberal judges.

Good point, and one I don't forget. (also one I try not to let those who try to legislate from the squad car forget!)

Also, I don't have to "pray, and pray I guess correctly who the bad guy is." It's simple - it's the person violating the law. I would also be curious to see the numbers involving civilian-civilian vs. LE-civilian uses of force. My gut tells me there are more police action shootings than civilian self-defense shooting each year.

Sure... but are they still violating the law when you get there? What about the oft-quoted by Brady, etc. (but exceptionally rare), situation where you arrive and two people are armed? Who do you either shoot or disarm or both? Do they both end up cuffed until you sort it out? Based on accounts from officers, I would guess so. As to your other point, I'm sure in some places this is true. Overall, I don't have any way of evaluating it, though with the figures from Kleck indicating 2.5 million DGUs a year and the FBI (or CDC) figures showing how many die in police-action shootings, I'd guess that the reverse had a possibility of truth, solely because there are so many fewer police than armed, non-LEOs.

Gpfury86 - I am with you 100%. I go with the notion "An armed society, is a polite society."

Again, if I've mispainted you or other officers as JBTs or otherwise exceeded my intended meaning, I apologize.

Stay safe out there!

Blessings,
Bill

 

[smoking357]

Your property is not worth my life. Not sure if your life is worth my life.

Then you're fired.

Firemen, true public servants, never say things like this.

However, but my number one goal IS to come home to my family at night WHILE getting the job done that it entrusted to me.

Sorry. Can't serve two ends that may be exclusive. As long as you're taking my dime, you do the job I pay you to do. That, or find some private-sector employment like the rest of us.

Please do not make it sound as if I am cannon fodder for you to keep you stuff intact, or your life for that matter. We are indeed paid to take risks, but calculated ones. We are not bullet sponges.

Then just what do I need you for? If you're not going to do the above, then I have no use for your "services," and taking taxes from me to pay for your salary is done completely against my will.

You are paid to go into harm's way for my benefit. Let's all hope you never have to do that, but if that's the current call, by accepting my money, you have agreed to risk your life to protect mine.

Here's what happens when the cops start "calculating" risks:

Helpless college kids were being executed by one delusional nutjob with handguns while the risks were being "calculated."

As for the reference to "rank and file" officers...what it your point? Using 3 examples to prove what? Seems to be a small sample size to prove anything about CA officers as a whole.

Weak. How many crimes do I need to publish?

 

[Roadie]

Then you're fired.

Firemen, true public servants, never say things like this.



Sorry. Can't serve two ends that may be exclusive. As long as you're taking my dime, you do the job I pay you to do. That, or find some private-sector employment like the rest of us.



Then just what do I need you for? If you're not going to do the above, then I have no use for your "services," and taking taxes from me to pay for your salary is done completely against my will.

You are paid to go into harm's way for my benefit. Let's all hope you never have to do that, but if that's the current call, by accepting my money, you have agreed to risk your life to protect mine.

Here's what happens when the cops start "calculating" risks:

Helpless college kids were being executed by one delusional nutjob with handguns while the risks were being "calculated."



Weak. How many crimes do I need to publish?

So then, I take it you do not agree with Supreme Court when they ruled that the police do not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm?

 

[smoking357]

So then, I take it you do not agree with Supreme Court when they ruled that the police do not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm?

I would like to ask the Supreme Court just what I'm paying for. You must understand why the SC held suchly. As the police are really ineffective at protecting people, indeed, we gun owners call 911 "government-sponsored Dial-a-Prayer," the SC intervened to protect every government from being sued out of existence for breaching a duty to every citizen who came to harm.

The ruling, as are so many, was reverse engineered.

I don't mind the Police, as long as I don't have to pay for them or listen to them. If I am forced to pay for PoliceCare, the only thing I want them to do is protect me. If they don't have a duty to do that, I'm not getting my money's worth, and we need to ask ourselves some deep questions about the purposes for which the government uses them.

 

[Denny347]

Then you're fired.

Firemen, true public servants, never say things like this.

True public servants????? What do you know about this? So your life IS worth more than mine...nice to know. I can tell by you overly simplistic view of public service that you have no concept of "public servant". Just because I use tactics to stay alive doesn't mean your not getting your tax dollars worth (you could be 100% wrong about taxes paying for me anyway Its wrong to tell a Police Officer that your tax dollars pay their salary!, page 1). Should I do the job with a death wish? I go into burglaries in progress all the time, I run to shots fired while the public is running away pissing their pants, I fight the felon while passerby's just watch or run the other way. I put myself in harms way all the time. But I have to do it smartly or get killed for nothing. But to say I'm not a "true public servant" is an ignorant statement because I cannot equate my life to be less valuable than yours.

Then just what do I need you for? If you're not going to do the above, then I have no use for your "services," and taking taxes from me to pay for your salary is done completely against my will.

You are paid to go into harm's way for my benefit. Let's all hope you never have to do that, but if that's the current call, by accepting my money, you have agreed to risk your life to protect mine.

Kinda like the SS detail protecting the POTUS? I'll jump in front of the bullet for you. Like I said before, I do that all the time. I clear the business/home that has been burglarized because the residence are to frightened to do so. I fight the crazy person, I chase the thief, I run to the guy firing his gun at the neighbors, I take the calls that could easily lead to my death or injury. If someone is trying to kill you, my objective to to neutralize the threat (lethal force if required). However, if I get myself killed without doing that then I have killed 2 people...me and after I'm dead, you will still face the same threat to your life. What have I accomplished then? The deadliest tool I carry is my brain, not my pistol.

Weak. How many crimes do I need to publish?

Well you want to say most are bad and there are 90,000 to 100,000 LEO's in California, I would need to see 51% to say that MOST are bad. 51% DOES = most does it not? You have a LONG way to meet that standard.

 

[Gpfury86]

I would like to ask the Supreme Court just what I'm paying for. You must understand why the SC held suchly. As the police are really ineffective at protecting people, indeed, we gun owners call 911 "government-sponsored Dial-a-Prayer," the SC intervened to protect every government from being sued out of existence for breaching a duty to every citizen who came to harm.

The ruling, as are so many, was reverse engineered.

I don't mind the Police, as long as I don't have to pay for them or listen to them. If I am forced to pay for PoliceCare, the only thing I want them to do is protect me. If they don't have a duty to do that, I'm not getting my money's worth, and we need to ask ourselves some deep questions about the purposes for which the government uses them.

I'm glad you don't mind them, because I think you are unaware of how much different your life would be if there was no type of police force/ swat, no they are not army rangers or navy seals, but they do what they are trained to do protect and serve..... Most of them don't do it for the huge salary I'm pretty sure most like helping and protecting the community.

 

[smoking357]

I run to shots fired while the public is running away pissing their pants, I fight the felon while passerby's just watch or run the other way. I put myself in harms way all the time. But I have to do it smartly or get killed for nothing. Etc.

Overall, a decent post and a professional attitude.

If you would have dispensed with that "your life isn't worth more than mine," business in a prior post, my post would have been unnecessary.

 

[smoking357]

I think you are unaware of how much different your life would be if there was no type of police force/ swat,

If we believe in free markets, and if we don't like big government, how about letting me opt out of PoliceCare? I'll stick a little sticker on my car that lets the cops know they can't pull me over, and I'll get a tax rebate for not using PoliceCare services.

no they are not army rangers or navy seals, but they do what they are trained to do protect and serve..... Most of them don't do it for the huge salary I'm pretty sure most like helping and protecting the community.

Well, their salaries, union benefits and pensions are quite huge.

 

[Gpfury86]

If we believe in free markets, and if we don't like big government, how about letting me opt out of PoliceCare? I'll stick a little sticker on my car that lets the cops know they can't pull me over, and I'll get a tax rebate for not using PoliceCare services.

I agree with you on small government, but that does not mean we can opt out of "police car" and do what we want, I don't want the government any bigger, but to say that we need 0 police force, sorry to say that's a fail....

Well, their salaries, union benefits and pensions are quite huge.

Lmao..... They must be hiding their huge salaries pretty well, cause all the cops I know live an honest working mans life no frills etc....

 

[jsx1043]

Well, their salaries, union benefits and pensions are quite huge.

Dude, tell me where those departments are...I need to get hired by one of them so I can afford to get my wife health insurance...and quit working my other two jobs..and will they let me recall my bankruptcy?

 

[smoking357]

I agree with you on small government, but that does not mean we can opt out of "PoliceCare" and do what we want, I don't want the government any bigger, but to say that we need 0 police force, sorry to say that's a fail....

I'm an advocate of doing what I want. No man is fit to tell me otherwise.

I agree with you on small government, but that does not mean we can opt out of "ObamaCare" and do what we want. I don't want the government any bigger, but to say that we need 0 national health care, sorry to say that's a 'fail'.

 

[9lock]

From my experience, it is an odd feeling to talk to someone with an exposed pistol. The majority of my experiences have been good, leading somehow or another back to INGO. It is the officer's experience and training that leads them to be on alert for threats to them. It is their common-sense however, that defines the threat. I think if more officers used some common sense in establishing their criteria for the percieved threat, their response would not be as negative.

JSX, that is interesting you say that and I have often wondered why police officers immediately go into defensive mode "period" when a firearm is present -vs- seeing one being used illegally in a crime. One would assume on a causual encounter the first thing to pop into your mind would be A2. From what you wrote it sounds like something in the training of ( and I hate this title) Law "Enforcement" is persistantly instilled in the minds officers to trigger that defensive mode, the same way the media forms Americans opinion on elections, guns, etc. Also I have read some of your other post's an you seem like a honest stand up guy, I appreciate that