Should they get an exception?

[Panzercat]

As an officer of the law,

You have chosen a noble profession, for which we should be thankful for.

You cannot always be there in our hour, minute, second of need.

In that time, I will be forced to confront this murder, rapist or gang member by myself and for my family.

Protect me in that hour by allowing me to effectively protect myself. Serve me by allowing me access to the same tools that safeguard your own lives.

You are but a man, as am I.

 

[joeschmoe]

It seems the civilians here are the ones always claiming victim. Do you really think your opinion will change the outcome of what is inevitable.
Just as soon as the ban is announced, I'll sell my soon to be pre-ban mags to eligible civilians at "current market prices" and replace them at 1/3 the cost with restricted hi-cap magazines which will be readily available, cheap, and plentiful to LEO's.
Being a civilian you may not be aware, dedicated LEO's are really never "off duty."
Also, to those citing Israel. Israel is only a plane ride away if you find it a 2A paradise. Let me know how you like it.

Gotta laugh at the LEO's who don't realize they're next. They support this now but soon, like the British police, they won't be allowed to take their duty guns home. What 2nd Amendment? They will be defenseless citizens/peasants like the rest of us.
Mexico is an even shorter plane ride away if you want to find your unarmed paradise. Let me know how you like it.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Well being former military we should be exempt. After all we are trained on multiple weapon platforms.

I guarantee a great many members here are more savvy on ANY platform than a typical soldier or LEO.

Please try again.

 

[r1derbike]

Since LEOs are outgunned in metro areas, and are getting equal firepower to combat the gangs (or should be, if they aren't), why the hell aren't we civilians offered the same luxury when BGs prey on us? We aren't 2nd class citizens, we aren't casualties to be swept under the rug and forgotten. We're on the same side here. Don't go on public record as saying we should be limited in our defensive hardware, only to become dead victims by the very criminals you need your advanced firepower to even your odds with. Very hypocritical. Citizens deserve the right to life, just like brothers-in-blue.

When did our lives become any less precious than yours? And yes, I have many LEO friends here in Northwest Arkansas.

 

[Panzercat]

I guarantee a great many members here are more savvy on ANY platform than a typical soldier or LEO.

Please try again.

Exactly. Because every job in every branch of the military focused on firearms too. ALL THE TIME.

...Which is complete horse manure since anybody in the armed forces can likely tell that there are a multitude of professions where the very last place they laid eye on a firearm was in bootcamp where they barely qual'd as it was if we want to be completely honest about it.

This entire military exemption thing was thrown out there to shut us up, not because we're all expert marksmen sitting behind that desk drinking coffee.

 

[kwguy]

"This entire military exemption thing was thrown out there to shut us up, not because we're all expert marksmen sitting behind that desk drinking coffee."

Exactly. This crap of exempting certain groups has nothing to do with some percieved "extra proficiency". There are plenty of LEO's out there that are NOT particularly savvy with weapons, just like there are many soldiers that aren't.

"Qualification" is not the same as "highly proficient". Some police officer in some tiny force somewhere, that has never even drawn his firearm, can easily be compared to some soldier who spent their service sitting in some office looking at a computer screen. We all know this.

The reason for these exemptions is to divide and conquer. Nothing else. That's their MO. And just like some military members (McCrystal), there are those police folks that have their little facist dreams of power as well. The 'anti' side likes to play to that and use it to divide us. That's all it is. Don't even play that silly game.

 

[HorseSoldier]

First off lets get this cristal clear, you are not the first responder to a criminal act, the victim is, and you are saying that they should respond with a flawed and partial tool kit??

Absolutely not -- as I stated, I oppose all the new gun control silliness on the horizon and much of what is already on the books. I have zero issue with citizens carrying the same firearms I carried as a patrol officer on the street (legally, my dept issue SBS is an issue, but I think the short barrel statutes need to be updated to reflect "in common use" anyway . . .).

That said, however, I don't think the victim of a crime has a defensive need for fully automatic weapons, 37mm less than lethal launchers, armored vehicles, industrial strength OC and CS pumping systems, anti-material rifles and the assorted other goodies that get rolled out when my department's SWAT team show up. (Emphasis on "needs" in that sentence, "legal to own and I want one" being a different topic of discussion.) The tool box a person needs to effectively defend themselves personally or their immediate family from an assailant and the tool box needed to deal with barricaded gunmen or serving high risk warrants, etc., are not the same.

 

[HorseSoldier]

The medical comparison is absolutely apt, though in a way you perhaps didn't intend. Regular people should absolutely have access to the same variety of drugs that doctors do.

It's OT, but I have to disagree with that emphatically. There are about a trillion things that could be fixed (and desperately need to be fixed) with our medical system, but uncontrolling controlled substances doesn't jump out at me as a remotely good idea.

 

[kwguy]

That goes for military members as well. There is plenty of equipment that the military "needs" that go way beyond what one would consider "normal" personal defensive use. I don't need a Hellfire missile or artillery to defend myself, but as a soldier, that stuff is definitely handy, and necessary. Same for machine guns, etc.

What is goofy is the nitpicky nonsense about magazine capacities, and the "scary militant look" of a particular type of weapon. Military and Police folks know that the personal small arms such as pistols and rifles are simply a small part of the arsenal, and usually used in a personal defense role (mostly, lets not nitpick).

But the anti's play on the ignorance of the masses in this matter.

 

[HorseSoldier]

But the anti's play on the ignorance of the masses in this matter.

The people at the head of the anti-2A movement seem to me to mostly be such real-deal hoplophobes that I suspect they are displaying their own ignorance with "assault weapon" bans and such -- I honestly think it is less that they seem weapons like an AR or AK and think "this is a good wedge issue I can employ tactically to advance my agenda" and it is more that when they look at an AR or AK they feel more visceral fear than when they look at a deer gun.

The current rush among those circles for a new AWB targeting the usual scary black suspects despite the massive growth in popularity of those weapons is the tell, to me -- if they were smarter and more aware of their own biases, they would have seized the universal background checks and mental health angle and ran with it hard after the recent shootings. It could have been a pretty easy victory for them, had they played it better and stuck to strictly camel's nose under the tent issues that would play with the public and be hard to counter. But they didn't, they lashed out at the things they fear, and they're risking losing the whole game because of it.

 

[PabloJ]

I want to know, so don't let's all keep to THR rules. DON'T GET THIS THREAD LOCKED!!!!!

I was listening to a podcast earlier this week. One of the co-host was a LEO and he was of the belief if a mag capacity ban happened that LEO should get an exception. One of the other co-host that was non-LEO said that the LEO was being anti-gun and represented the "I support RKBA, but" crowd. The LEO replyed with the " I guess you think anyone should have thermonuclear weapons".
Im not LE but I tend to agree with the non-LEO co-host, they do not deserve any special treatment.
What do you think? Are you LE?

YES. Law enforcement, security services, military,..... should be able to use high capacity magazines. Seven shot max capacity for civilians.

 

[nwilliams]

LE shouldn't have any more privileges than ordinary citizens when it comes to gun rights. Law abiding citizens face the same bad guys as police do and in most cases before police do. Police are there to respond and solve crimes they are not there to protect you or your loved ones.

 

[HOOfan_1]

"The right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

I see nothing in there about Civilians, military, Law Enforcement....just people.

Or let's find the source of the second amendment in the Constitution of Virginia

"That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."

Again...that pesky word people. Nope, I don't see any exceptions anywhere in the Constitution. The people have the right to keep and bear arms whether they are LEO, military or "civilian".

So making laws which infringe those rights and then setting up exceptions is pretty much the work of tyrants.

 

[RiverPerson]

I was under the impression these additional exemptions were proposed by someone against the AWB in order to prove its flaws because Feinstein believes that former and current LEOs are above the people they serve.

I believe an exemption for rural Americans was also proposed.

edit:
Here's the article I read:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2013/mar/14/miller-illogic-feinsteins-assault-weapons-ban/

"The Texas Republican strongly opposes the “assault weapons” ban, but used the amendment process to show the absurdity of only allowing certain Americans use the banned guns for self defense. Mr. Cornyn offered several amendments in committee and will hold the rest for the full Senate floor debate. Mrs. Feinstein said Thursday that this was an effort to “nip it and tuck it” and opposed Mr. Cornyn’s efforts."

 

[Kiln]

What? Cops are above the law. I thought that was common knowledge.

 

[smogmage]

rooter

It seems the civilians here are the ones always claiming victim. Do you really think your opinion will change the outcome of what is inevitable.

Just as soon as the ban is announced, I'll sell my soon to be pre-ban mags to eligible civilians at "current market prices" and replace them at 1/3 the cost with restricted hi-cap magazines which will be readily available, cheap, and plentiful to LEO's.

Last time I checked we are founded as a Government FOR the people, BY THE PEOPLE. OUR OPINION DOES MATTER.

If I'm reading your post correctly, you have no business being a cop just to PROFIT from the unilateral disarmament and ENSLAVEMENT of the population.

You were once one of us, deserve to be held to the same standard as us, and one day you will return to being one of us.

 

[CapnMac]

Well, to my thinking there's yet another fly in the ointment.

All of this presumption of a "military & LE" exemption fails to keep reading the way the laws are actually written. DiFi's current bill and the expired Fed AWB made no provision for military or for LE personnel to buy the banned items; but their employing agencies could.

With apologies for arguing from the specific to the general, I find it distressing the number of LEO who remain confident that all they'll need is a badge to buy everyday things like spare magazines or patrol arms. Instead, they'll go to the LE supply house and be asked for that approved purchase form on Department Letterhead.

The hearsay I have from NY (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that the NYAG basically sent out a statement that being "on the job" was to be treated as an affirmative defense vis-a-vis SAFE.

But, then again, I'm not sure if I'm a civilian or not. Spent some time, ages ago (before Win 3.x) as a Deputy Sheriff; I'm a USNR O-5; I've been to HM-8403 school, I've taught Dynamic Entry, and my day day is being an unemployed architect. So, I'm not sure which part of "...[E]very terrible implement of the soldier..." I ought be denied.

 

[firesky101]

Here is what IMO it comes right down to. I don't think anyone here really wants LEO's to be subjected to 5 round magazines, and single action revolvers. The bigger issue is letting the politicians go after one group at a time. Don't let them feed you their BS that it will not effect you. Make them stand up and say what their real goal is... 100% civilian turn in of firearms. Yes that includes all the "exempted" people. Stand together everyone. This is why we don't want a LEO exemption, we need the LEO's to stand and fight now. When they have taken all of ours away, and start coming after yours then who will stand with you? Be united!!!

 

[kwguy]

^^Exactly. Don't let them divide and conquer.

 

[lechiffre]

I think that "off duty" LEOs should be subject to the same rules as the rest of us.

I think that "on duty" LEOs should get a break on magazine capacity laws, just like they do on traffic laws.

It is often pointed out that cars are more dangerous than guns. If police can speed through a red light, then they should also have full magazines.

 

[joeschmoe]

They have always been against us. Every national LEO organization has supported every gun grabbing bill and has been holding hands with the gun grabbers. They are there for every photo shoot, committee hearing and press conference to disarm Americans. They are after the same thing; civilian disarmament.

Maybe if LEO's aren't allowed to take their duty weapons home, like other countries, they might join us. No private weapons, no off duty possession. Let's add that amendment to any gun grabbing bill. See if they change their tune and suddenly support the Constitution they swore to uphold.

 

[itsa pain]

Feinstein said assault rifles are weapons of war. if cops can have them means they are at war with us

 

[Panzercat]

I think that "off duty" LEOs should be subject to the same rules as the rest of us.

I think that "on duty" LEOs should get a break on magazine capacity laws, just like they do on traffic laws.

It is often pointed out that cars are more dangerous than guns. If police can speed through a red light, then they should also have full magazines.

Until law enforcement can be everywhere at once, I deserve to be afforded the same options to protect myself as they do, nothing more, nothing less. If crime is so violent and rampant that they require an AR as backup, then denying me the same option in lieu of their presence is criminal and elitist. Their job is to get to where they are going fast, mine isn't so they can run red lights all day long. The right to protect ones life and property, however, is a universal constant regardless of the profession.

And this is speaking as former military and current government. I'm covered two ways by this bill and still find little to no justice in it. These exemptions are not being pushed out of fairness to any one group or because we're all highly skilled operators deserving of said privilege. They only exist to shut us up as a demographic.

And then when they're done turning the USA into Europe, they'll turn on these sectors as well. Military? Well, you're separated now and there's that potential for PTSD, so, sorry guys. Mental health, you know. Government? Jeez, why does a postman need carte blanche to carry anyway? In fact most government doesn't need a gun, so lets get rid of that. Police? how long has it been since you retired? Look, let the guys that are still employed handle that."

Sorry, peeps, but this has bad idea written all over it and if you can't see the writing on the wall from the Clinton admin, nothing's going to convince you.

 

[itsa pain]

one guy here said leos need tanks explosives etc. that is a bunch of bull.they never had them before. they have gotten around the posse comtiminus act by turning the police into the military

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I also object to military or police exemption from training required to get a civil carry permit.

The 4 hour class on state self defense law was nothing like what I was taught in basic training on military rules of engagement.

And I suspect anyone who does a NYPD style magazine dump, rather than minimum lethal force necessary, would face a skeptical prosecutor and grand jury, even with stand-you-guard, castle law and the Tennessee "good samaritan" law butt coverage.