Closing the Police Loophole. Support list. Refusing LEO sales.

[joeschmoe]

Looks like we can add Magpul to the nice list. Seems a bunch of people badgered them into compliance. I'd prefer we just support the ones on the nice list and "encourage" others to join, maybe by not buying from them and letting them know.. Not aggressively beat up on those who don't.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=706060

 

[HorseSoldier]

People like Wilson and LaRue may not do mass sales to LE agencies, but I think there is a certain psychological impact for the guys who are boots on the ground, even if the politicians are too oblivious, stupid, or uninterested to notice or care.

As I noted in the the thread about Wilson opting out, I carried one of their pistols and a bunch (9) of their mags when I was a cop on the street, because if I'm betting my life on it I want the best. Had I been in a state where LE is now cut off and I was shopping for a high end 1911, a ultra-high quality scope mount for an optic for my carbine or shotgun, some PMags, etc., and I got informed I was working for an agency on the banned list -- that would annoy the hell out of me and that, in turn, might make me get out and vote against the morons whose irresponsible actions were putting my life at greater risk when I clocked in every day.

 

[powder]

..."police loophole"?

It is important to note that we are against gun control; we are not against any particular government agency or individuals.

Then why use the word police in your activist movement?

Municipal, County, State, and Federal LEOs are sworn to uphold the Constitution-right out of the box.

You don't get to even hit the street or your first pile of HR paperwork before we take that oath. So, why in the world do you believe that applying imaginary pressure to
LEOs and agencies is going to change anything?

In borrowing an anti-gunners' term like "loophole" (2) things are done: you show that desperation is your best friend in a time of need, and blanket pairing it with law enforcement officers? For every agency in the United States? You harken back to the NRA of the early 90s in their stance against LEOs.

Sad days for ALL who own firearms and those who NEED them in duty. I can certainly appreciate the emotional sentiment behind this. However, if you want the austerity of UK-style bobbies who just walk around with hickory sticks, you're headed in the right direction with these companies. Criminals love it and so do the antis.

 

[Sam1911]

Surely powder, all of us understand what you're saying. However, it is not "our" side that creates the "us-vs-them" mentality. When civilian peace officers are granted the right to own and carry weapons with which to defend themselves, that are illegal for the rest of the citizens to own and carry -- THAT creates and/or fosters the "us-vs-them" view.

Truth is, when facing criminals we're all in this together with much the same risks and dangers, and we should be afforded the same RIGHTS. If the world was fair and logical, police officers would stand with the non-sworn citizens in this (and many, MANY of them DO!). But that is unfortunately not universal.

One good way to encourage the enlightenment of sworn police officers to the plight of their non-sworn neighbors is to hold them to the same standard. To REMOVE that "they're different from us" condition. Police officers don't like it any more than the rest of us, and that gets them putting pressure on their higher-ups, and gets them voting for freedom.

Of course, some never will get this, never will understand why a citizen needs or should be allowed the special tools they are granted. But such troglodytes always have existed and always will.

 

[Sam1911]

And why call it a "police loophole?" Specifically because the POLICE are those exempted from the draconian new restrictions. Again, us the citizens didn't come up with that. The OTHER side did.

We say, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," and if defending yourself with a 7-round weapon and/or with a shotgun instead of an AR-15 is good enough for Joe Homeowner, then it surely is good enough for Jim State Trooper.

If you feel it ISN'T good enough ... put pressure where you can to change that.

 

[powder]

My idea of "pressure" is actually taking action, in being a multi-disciplined NRA Instructor, and teaching the safe use of firearms. Particularly to kids.

It is a horrible day in RKBA history to see us eating ourselves.

Another aspect of being a LEO is to never aid/train an individual or group, who is actively against the U.S. Government. I do NOT stand with the POTUS on these issues, as one photo above would have you believe represents all LEOs. Nor am I against free speech or dissent, but to put such a blanket on all LEOs and their agencies? Insane. Yes, you have now breached back into the US history of the 1980s, Posse-Commitatus style, et al..

I don't have a more reasonable solution than to train America's youth in safe firearms use, but it looks like those credentials and ideals can be burned with your other bridges. Good day.

 

[PedalBiker]

Then why use the word police in your activist movement?


Sad days for ALL who own firearms and those who NEED them in duty. I can certainly appreciate the emotional sentiment behind this. However, if you want the austerity of UK-style bobbies who just walk around with hickory sticks, you're headed in the right direction with these companies. Criminals love it and so do the antis.

In Colorado who were the LE officials who spoke out in our favor? I heard Justin Smith, Larmier County Sheriff did a good job. Who else stood with him - were there any police willing to stand for us?

 

[powder]

Who else stood with him - were there any police willing to stand for us?

Everyday, they all do when they put on that uniform.

Inside every one of the most seasoned and cynical LE veterans is still the rookie that just wants to help the people in their community. Turn your back on them all, now?

You cannot un-ring this bell, just as it is still ringing from from the early 90s, when the NRA lead that anti-LE charge. Try to paint it as anything else you might want to, with colorful words and phrases, but hedging away from it only highlights it more as being anti-LE.

 

[ilbob]

It is time to close ALL of the police loopholes.

 

[Sam1911]

My idea of "pressure" is actually taking action, in being a multi-disciplined NRA Instructor, and teaching the safe use of firearms. Particularly to kids.

I'm not sure I gather what kind of "pressure" that brings? How does that encourage law enforcement officers to add their voices to ours in opposing these laws?

 

[Sam1911]

It is a horrible day in RKBA history to see us eating ourselves.

Is it "eating ourselves" to say that a rule applied to one law-abiding citizen must apply to all law-abiding citizens? I don't agree with that. A standard is a standard. Why is one "class" of citizen to be granted more ability to defend themselves than others?

I'm sure you don't believe that a police officer has more right to defensive arms than any other citizen, but that's what these laws are saying. All these companies are saying in reply is, "let us then apply a consistent standard."

 

[walking arsenal]

Sheep in wolf's clothing.

Are police just normal guys like us doing a tough job or are they a special class of citizen that deserves special treatment because of a job they chose to do?

All these companies are doing is causing the police to think and remember that they're just normal men and women. Just like us. Not special. Not privileged. Not different. Not elite. Just like us. Just regular people doing a tough job.

Same with politicians.

Just regular people who need to be held to the same laws and standards that we are.

 

[Sam1911]

Another aspect of being a LEO is to never aid/train an individual or group, who is actively against the U.S. Government. I do NOT stand with the POTUS on these issues, as one photo above would have you believe represents all LEOs. Nor am I against free speech or dissent, but to put such a blanket on all LEOs and their agencies? Insane. Yes, you have now breached back into the US history of the 1980s, Posse-Commitatus style, et al..

Well I think you need to explain this better. I'm not sure I see all how these concepts all mesh.

No one in these companies, or the groups and individuals calling them to action, is "against the US government." We/they are merely opposed to one policy of various state governments, and a policy that is being considered by the federal government. We are not (YET) in open revolt. We surely, SURELY, hope and pray never to be so.

I'm not understanding applying a "blanket on all LEOs and their agencies." These company statements ONLY apply to agencies and officers who are under very specific jurisdictions which have passed blanket laws to restrict their citizens' rights. They have added exemptions for one special class of citizen. These companies and individuals are merely saying, "NO" to such exemptions. Surely you'd agree that this is utterly fair and righteous.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't have a more reasonable solution than to train America's youth in safe firearms use, but it looks like those credentials and ideals can be burned with your other bridges. Good day.

What? I'm sorry, I don't follow this paragraph at all. Who's burning someone's credentials and ideals?

 

[Sam1911]

were there any police willing to stand for us?

Everyday, they all do when they put on that uniform.

Well, not really. We thank the officers who put on the uniform and go out to do their jobs, sincerely. However, that is not at all the same thing as standing up for the rights of their fellow citizens -- nor is it rejecting the idea that they are above the law that applies to a law-abiding citizen of their state. Going to work every day is a good thing. But it doesn't offer the hand of support and equality to those neighbors held under oppression by these laws. And that's what we're asking for.

Inside every one of the most seasoned and cynical LE veterans is still the rookie that just wants to help the people in their community. Turn your back on them all, now?

Not in any way. As I said, these measures do NOT say "cops don't need ARs," or "cops don't need high-cap mags." They say, "We are all equal. Restrict one of us, restrict ALL of us. We stand together."

 

[itsa pain]

Sam you are doing a good job laying out what has to be done. one guy here said would you like the cops to be like bobbies with no guns. I say yes I would. this fantasy of cops risking their lives makes me laugh. tell that to a 17 year old girl in a 7-11 at 3AM or a cab driver in the hood a bridge or steel worker hell walk with me 40 ft in the air 20 mph wind on icy rafters. a flagmans job is more dangerous then leos

 

[Deanimator]

Sad days for ALL who own firearms and those who NEED them in duty. I can certainly appreciate the emotional sentiment behind this. However, if you want the austerity of UK-style bobbies who just walk around with hickory sticks, you're headed in the right direction with these companies. Criminals love it and so do the antis.

• Police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
• Police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
• Police have virtually no physical ability to protect individuals.

When your life is in danger RIGHT NOW, you're either going to protect YOURSELF, or you're just not going to get "protected" AT ALL. Anybody who tells you different is a liar.

You could arm my local police force with Louisville sluggers and it wouldn't affect my personal safety in any meaningful way. They're not "protecting" me as an individual. The ONLY person doing that is ME. Them not having firearms would only affect their ability to enforce certain laws, which I may or may not support.

 

[Deanimator]

I don't have a more reasonable solution than to train America's youth in safe firearms use, but it looks like those credentials and ideals can be burned with your other bridges.

And when there are no firearms to train them to safely use?

You'll still have yours, so no harm no foul?

 

[Deanimator]

Municipal, County, State, and Federal LEOs are sworn to uphold the Constitution-right out of the box.

And did the municipal, county, state and federal LEOs who unlawfully confiscated firearms during and after Katrina do that?

 

[Deanimator]

Inside every one of the most seasoned and cynical LE veterans is still the rookie that just wants to help the people in their community. Turn your back on them all, now?

You first sentence implies a power of telepathy which I doubt you possess.

Any cop who confiscated guns during Katrina or who enforces ANY laws like those just passed in New York has turned his back on the United States constitution and his fellow Americans.

 

[joeschmoe]

I do NOT stand with the POTUS on these issues, as one photo above would have you believe represents all LEOs. Nor am I against free speech or dissent, but to put such a blanket on all LEOs and their agencies? Insane. Yes, you have now breached back into the US history of the 1980s, Posse-Commitatus style, et al.

You seem to be missing the important issue here. That these laws have been supported by LEO's and their organizations. They have gotten special exemptions from them that make them immune from the laws they are supporting and enforcing against the citizens at large. They chose to publicly support these laws. They should have remained neutral or come out against them. Instead they chose to publicly support these laws. They were wrong to do that, now they deserve the same rules they advocate for others.
As I posted with the photo above, many individual officers often claim they don't support these laws, but their official organizations very publicly do support them. Why should the officers in the photo above not be subject to the same rules they are advocating for everyone else?
I don't see how you can draw an analogy between treating LEO's the same as citizens is somehow hateful of LEO's. The point is to eliminate the hypocrisy (double standard), but to you that is "anti-LE". :banghead: Then that is exactly what we intend to change by this. If those officers and their organizations support these rules, then let them live by it as well. Since they have chosen sides already, then they must be shown to be on the wrong side.
They polarized this and choose sides first. We hope to make them change sides. They don't get to abuse their influence politically then ask to be immune from the politics.

Don't like it? Then stop publicly supporting these laws or taste your own medicine.

"VP Biden Says He Needs Cops’ Help to Reinstate ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban and Much More"

representing law enforcement were
-the leaders of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association,
-the Fraternal Order of Police,
-the International Association of Chiefs of Police,
-the Major County Sheriffs’ Association,
-the National Association of Police Organizations,
-the National Latino Peace Officers Association,
-the National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence,
-the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives,
-the National Sheriffs’ Association,
-the National Troopers Coalition,
-the Police Executive Research Forum &
-the Major Cities Chiefs Association, and
-the Police Executive Research Forum.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...-reinstate-assault-weapons-ban-and-much-more/

 

[Sam1911]

It IS important not to be (or to be thought to be) "Anti-L.E."

But that isn't what's happening here.

Cast your mind back to the Jim Crow laws of the post-Civil War Reconstruction era.

Now the black community says, "If you want to pass a law that say we may not have guns, at the very least you must require that white folks don't have guns either."

Is this "anti-white?"

If not, then what these companies and groups and individuals are saying is not at all "anti-LE."

 

[Skylerbone]

LEO stands for Law Enforcement Officer. Law Enforcement has nothing to do with being a friend to the Community you live in. You're sworn to serve and protect the Law, not citizens, unless or until a law is broken. To assume any law is for protection of citizens and is therefore worthy of enforcement implies anything put to paper is inherently good. Seeing the Officer who enforces such law as a person worthy of absolute support is equivalent to commending SS Troops for what they did in Nazi Germany. Enforcing Law for a living does not make the individual any more important or moral a man than any other.

 

[OldMac]

Some of the statements from these companies are inspiring and a sign that true patriots are everywhere and these companies should be supported over any of the greedy boot lickers. Individual officers do have influence in their cities and states. If they cant get their prefered arms/ammo they are unhappy. They vote and have families and friends that vote. Their bosses are either elected or appointed by elected officials. The fop and those elected officials have a lot of influence over lawmakers. Grass root movements in the system work.

 

[joeschmoe]

The nice list is now up to 113 companies who have publicly stated policies to support this movement.