Posted on 02/06/2012 6:01:46 AM PST by marktwain
The last general answer seems to be a popular subject, especially with the new legislative session: laws concerning open carry and carrying concealed weapons. First off, when dealing with police, just notify us of the fact that you have a firearm. I cannot tell you how an individual officer will react, but that's what you do. Let me first say that I believe in gun ownership. I believe in defending yourself if in a life-threatening situation or defending the life of someone else.
I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose. Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.
Next is the open carry. I understand the 2nd Amendment and how states and people interpret it differently. I however see no benefit, unless you're camping, of having a firearm exposed in public. There are a lot of officers in plainclothes, whether undercover or detectives, and the whole point is to not draw attention to themselves, thus giving the element of surprise. That's especially true since they do not wear vests or have the other protective advantages of a uniformed officer.
I have been to restaurants and have seen open carry groups hanging out, and I was amazed at men and women openly carrying their guns in thigh rigs, holding their children, with no sense of their surroundings or weapon retention.
(Excerpt) Read more at ksl.com ...
Must be overdue for a donut fix….. What part of “infringement” does he not understand? He “doesn’t understand” why a citizen would want to possess an (whatever this term means) an “assault rifle”? Does he not understand that the stereotypical hunting rifle, be it Grandpa’s Winchester 94 30-30 or the beautiful walnut stocked, scoped and pampered Model 70 30-06 on Dad’s wall will ALSO slice through “body armor”? He does not understand why a citizen would want to possess a 30 round magazine? Gee, my electric can opener is potentially lethal, but I still want it. Open carry? Well, Barney here obviously doesn’t want citizens (who, by the way pay HIS SALARY) to be on the same level of playing field with him. An armed society is a polite society. I live in the backcountry. I carry – every day. Preferably a 357 Magnum or a 44 Magnum, although I have recently surccumed to the temptation of carrying a high capacity 9mm loaded with +P+’s. Often, there’s a rifle in the truck cab with me – sometimes, horror of horrors, it is a semi auto AR or AK, maybe an SKS on occasion. If a coyote is attacking my livestock, waiting for officer tootie to drop the jelly-filled and come to my rescue (VERY SLOWLY – gotta write those “rolling stop” citations those NASTY criminals are committing) is not an option. And - if I have to run in town for any reason, I’m NOT leaving the ordinance behind - gang members move about freely, thanks to LEO incompetance. I DO, however, try to carry something concealed when in town, so as not to alarm any liberal weenies - a J frame S&W 38 Special in a baggy jacket pocket loaded with 158 grain SWCHP +P’s and a couple of speed loaders in the weak side pocket works well. This guy needs to be reminded that he is to SERVE the public - not strut about like a peacock and “interpret” the Constitution.
Telling a LOE you’re legally carrying concealed is likely to get your firearm taken away.
repeatedly answering “I have a CCW permit for this State” when asked if you have any weapons, drives them nuts.
From the state that has M-16s and tanks.
I bet his polic department has fully automatic weapons. Why?
He thinks an AR-15 is an assault rifle.
Almost forgot - if the “law” (such as it is) where you are does not REQUIRE that you notify an LEO that you’re carrying it is NONE OF HIS BUSINESS. “Than’s what you do”? Really? Wrong answer.
In repsonse to this ridiculous opijion: Who asked you?
Don’t like ARs? Don’t own one. Think urban areas are safe from terror or other mass crime? Don’t prepare yourself.
Mind your own business; I’ll mind mine.
“Don’t Tread on Me” Comes to mind.
“The purpose?
Answer: The Second Amendment is in the Bill of Rights to protect us from the government. Government agents have body armor.”
______________________________________________________________________
Precisely. Thanks.
I think that irrational, lame bit was co-authored by Pelosi and Feinstein.
“A common misconception about the Constitution, is that it grants rights. That could not be further from the truth. It merely recognizes some of your God given rights. The main purpose of the Constitution is to limit the federal government. The Constitution draws heavily upon natural law, and even if the Constitution were amended to eradicate the RTKABAs, that would be in violation of your God given rights. Basically, our natural rights cannot be infringed upon by any organization of men. They simply do not have the authority.”
__________________________________________________________________________
Very Well put. Thank you.
Those two writing such a bit of legislation is entirely understandable.
They consider themselves and others that work in government to be of the special “ruling class” and the rest of us have no business questioning what they do.
Wowzers...talk about having it ass-backwards.
I think an officer did indeed write this. It is a regular column in the newspaper linked. He not only didn’t know the difference between a clip and a handgun, but he thought an AR15 was an assault rifle. It seems he also thought that .223 ammo is some sort of armor piercing powerhouse. I wonder what he would think of 30-06 rounds.
“I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use”
You don’t need to. You are a public employee hired to keep the peace, show up after a crime has been committed and make out a report. Its not your job to philosophize about why the constitution says the general population has the right to bear arms. Its not your job to ascertain what kind of weapon is appropriate for citizens to own and its not your job to wonder why they want to open carry. Just be glad you have a job and that these good folks would be the ones backing you up if you got into a situation you could not handle.
This guy apparently thinks he should decide what weapons, ammo and size magazines we are "allowed" to own.
The way I read the second amendment I should be able to buy/own an Appache assault helicopter or an M1A1 Abrams if I can afford it.
I respectfully disagree. This officer took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It appears to me that he should be using his forum to defend the Constitution, rather than denigrate it.
Funny, I know of at least two incidents where crooks had body armor.
Once case was in the People’s Democratic Republic of Kalifornia. The cops’ pistols couldn’t do the job, so they looted a nearby gun store or sporting goods store for hunting rifles that WOULD shoot through body armor.
Another case was in Florida. The FBI tried to take them down, and lost several agents before managing to kill them.
So yes, armor piercing capacity is useful for self defense.
And, of course, you might need it to deal with anonymous black-suited armored home invaders.
{Andy Rooney Voice} I believe in the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.
Except for really useful rifles with scary features..or around children.. or anywhere outdoors. Besides, who needs the rapid fire capabilities of fixed cartridges? They shoot one right after another..bam-bam-bam. Flintlocks are okay, though. And why carry indoors where your neighbors can see in your windows and be scared? I’m all for the right to carry flintlock rifles in a box inside your home. Well, rifling gives too much accuracy.. maybe a flintlock smoothbore. And don’t forget the box, it has to be inside a box..” {/Andy Rooney Voice}
My point is that the LEO’s are hired to do a specific job. They have no higher level of authority or moral certitude to be speculating on our 2nd ammendment rights just because they carry a weapon in the course of their everyday duties.
Its just a personal peeve of mine because if the SHTF at the Waffle House I would much rather be with my fiancee’ a shooter and weapons expert who turns down offers from Front Sight every other day than the sweet 23 year old cop who wrote up the robbery report for my Mom’s break in. We personally only CC but if people want to open carry thats their business.
And you are right if anybody should be defending our right to carry its the cops. In fairness a lot of them do.
I am thinking police explorer. They do stupid things like this.
Or if he is on the job, he is brand new probe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.