Quote Glen Bartley
Dave Pro2A,
Oh please, TICSMYD!
Such an, in my opinion, amount to little more that blabbering. What, first of all, makes you think that these groups represent police officers as a whole.
Maybe you should read the names of the groups before making what I find to be such offensively assinine statements as your quoted above.aybe there is some clue in their names as to whom they represent:
I have read countless incidents of RANK AND FILE police officers LYING about firearm laws on the open carry forum.
Yes most cops are anti gun. They fear encounters with armed citizens, and every citizen is viewed as a enemy until proven otherwise (thin blue line bull crap and 1* garbage, etc.).
But in my post here, since you have a reading comprehension problem, I did draw a small deliniation between rank and file versus those that run the unions/Association (the politically appointed or elected sworn officers).
It's a small deliniation. Those in appointed positions almost always are anti gun, depending on the political view of the mayor, govenor, et cetera. While those in the rank and file are just 'most likely' anti-gun.
Of course it goes without saying that the attitude of leo in Montana will be slightly different than the attitude of those on either coast (and major metropolitan areas).
Oh here's my data: I have had several police officers lie to me about the law, and lie about me under oath. I have also heard some lie about gun laws.
I know of several other people who have had the exact same experience, people I know and trust explicitly.
On opencarry.org I have read countless examples of rank and file cops lying about gun laws in order to try and change behavior, acting under color of authority, harrassing people who were peacefully going about their personal business.
I have read countless examples (as in, I have personally read the email responses) from police higher on the food chain who backed up the ANTI-GUN intimidation tactics of the rank and file... going so far as to seemily cover up lies, instances of false imprisonment, illegal search & seizures, harassment, intimidation, etc.
So yes, I feel very confident in my opinion that *most police are antigun on some level. As a 'political force' they (for the most part) actively campaigh against the Second Amendment.
Just ask Ronnie Barret.
http://www.thegunzone.com/shot/barrett.html
"I was very surprised to see an
LAPD officer seated front and center with a Barrett 82A1 .50 cal rifle.
It was the centerpiece of the discussion. As you know, there have been no crimes committed with these rifles, and most importantly, current California law does not allow the sale of the M82AI in the state because of its detachable magazine and features that make it an "assault weapon."
This rifle was being
deceptively used by your department.
The officer portrayed it as a sample of a currently available .50 cal rifle, available for sale to the civilians of Los Angeles.
Your officer, speaking for the LAPD, endorsed the banning of this rifle and its ammunition. Then he used the rifle for photo ops with the Councilmen each of whom, in handling the firearm, may have been committing a felony. I was amazed."
So go ahead and call me assinine Glen buddy, but go look in a mirror before you do so you can check the definition of the word.
Just imagine if you call 911 and they're like "Sorry, we're on donut break! We don't want to help you at this time. We'll arrest the murderer after it's done, because that's our legal duty. By the way, it should be illegal for anyone but us to have guns and to protect themselves." :banghead: I wish someone would make a cartoon like that to put in the newspapers, although a lot of police officers I know don't like donut jokes and may become offended.
