Cops Get National Gun Carry

[cvfd1399 0]

It doesn't matter if you draw your weapon one or 100 times every time you unsnap, un hood, or un velcro a holster you should be ready for the fight.

I agree alot of cops are not "crack shots" after the media has gotten all of their information and molded it the way they wanted it. Be in the officers shoes at the time of some incidents and I bet not but the luckiest or the war hardend veterans could have pulled some of them off. Their training may or may not have "kicked in", but I would hate to see the same from someone with NO training.

Point is that the departments that follow the laws and rules do train more than the public, and things still go bad. Put your CCW in the same situation that has only fired 50 rounds into a stationary target at 5 yds in the last 4 years and lets see what happens.

Everyone needs to train more!!! Period You should not judge a persons actions when he only had fractions of a second sometimes to decide what you have years to do.

[Kennedy 0]

I have one question.

Why should cops be allowed to protect themselves when out of state, but not Joe or Jane citizen?

Sure, cops have training. So do most CCW holders.

Here's one issue: cops tend to want to do something, to "act," when faced with a situation. How long will it take before a cop acts, and because he did so without backup and the support network of a department, he acts wrongly? Any guesses on when the first wrongful shooting out of state by a cop will be?

When cops take off the uniform and travel on their own time, what makes them different from you and me? Really, the qualification for many (all?) departments is so easy that the vast majority of CCW holders could pass. Maybe they should have to open their facilities to the public, and allow any citizens who pass to carry nationwide. That would sove complaints, right, because the only "difference" anyone has pointed out has been the recurring qualifications. If citizens pass the quals for their local PD, shouldn't they be allowed to carry, as well?

Or are we still working against the mystic "but their cops, so they can do more" fallacy (which I call idiocy).

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

I saw this article, which quoted the FOP pres, and well, I'lll et you decide for yourselves.

Quote

"The president has truly made this country a safer place," said Fraternal Order of Police President Chuck Canterbury in a prepared statement.

"By enacting this legislation, President Bush has ensured that when officers are confronted with a situation to which they must react, they have the tools necessary to ensure their own safety, and the safety of their families and the public they have been sworn to protect."

And when Joe and Jane Citizen are confronted with a situation to which they must react......what, use spit balls and harsh language?

Also, as far as I know, officers are not sworn to protect the public across the nation. Generally, they swear to uphold the laws of their state and the constitution of the USA. There might be a clause for the citizens under their jurisdiction, but does anyone know of a department that swears to protect all citizens of the US?

Officers in Mississippi or Georgia are no more sworn to protect my neighbor here in Birmingham, AL, than I am.

So, again, why should they be priviledged to "have the tools necessary to ensure their own safety, and the safety of their families and the public" while Joe and Jane are still out in the cold?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*