[neverdem]

OK for me, but not for thee test time. On the other hand, considering the San Fran gun ban, maybe a better analogy is the camel's nose getting under the tent.

[neverdem]

BANG!

[beltfed308]

Richard L. Pinckard, the attorney for the deputies and police officers, says the ban violates federal law, which allows off-duty peace officers to carry their firearms on public property unless a state legislates against it.

Isn't this RP's incorporation bs argument?

Too bad it isn't also argued on straight 2nd Ammendment interprtation but with the 9th circus we know how that would go.

[paul51]

The officers want a “clear statement” that they will not be prohibited from carrying their weapons

Too bad they don't have the same concern for the people they work for. I say shut them down and let them have to go through what everyone else does.

[paul51]

maybe a better analogy is the camel's nose getting under the tent

That's a poor analogy because that camel's nose disconnects from the rest of the body once it's inside.

[joesnuffy]

Some lives are worth more than others...

[ozoneliar]

The Fairgrounds has a decent arguement. I am a HUGE second amendment advocate. But, there must be a balance for property rights. A property owner has vested interest in controlling his property.

One might bring up the failed FL legislation, regarding storing guns in the parking lot. A parking lot is much different from the actual building.

The Fairgrounds should be fairly safe with the large presence of Uniformed police. Andecdotal evidence is replete with instances of uniformed police mistaking off-duty cops for criminals.

One last point. While I like the intent of the resolution allowing off-duty police to carry nationwide. It is another case of the federal goverment legislating in questionable areas. I would have more in favor of legislation pressuring the states to adopt their own version of nationwide carry.

I just hope that in our zeal to defend an issue that is near and dear to us we don't go against conservative principles.

[absolootezer0]

off duty police officers should not carry because they "might be needed" they should carry for protection. a cop is more likely to be assaulted because any given cop likely has jailed at least one violent criminal who is now out and might take a chance at revenge.
of course, cops should not have a different set of laws from teh general populace, and if a cop can be allowed to carry for protection, then every other citizen should be able to as well.

[Redbob]

No cop should have any civil right denied to the rest of us.

[Redcloak]

I guess that they don't like going about unarmed like mere commoners.

[SUSSA]

They should live under the same rules and laws as everyone else. If the citizens can’t carry guns neither should they.

[Mulder]

The clowns need to follow the same edicts as the rest of us. If guns are banned for us peasants, they should be for the elites and their thugs too.

[Dick Vomer]

guns for me.....but not for thee

[Atlas Sneezed]

Some pigs are more equal than others?

[Lancer_N3502A]

When I was a cop in Florida you were practically required to carry your duty weapon EVERYWHERE you went (except airports); banks, bars, fairgrounds, etc.