Law Enforcement Exemptions Unconstitutional?

[normiss 867]

My comment was 100% correct and an exact description of what a DD-214 means to obtaining a CWP. Much more well thought out than the stuff you create in your head.
You knowledge of all things military is weak at best.
You seem to be one of the "wanna bees" of the services.

Don't be a dick troll.
I no longer play your games.


Now, back to camping.

[BIGUN 1,434]

cvfd1399

So you are fine with someone with a dd214 after leaving nam in 69' and never picking up a weapon since then to get a CCW in 2016 because they had "weapons training" 40+ years ago??

Louisiana requires a "small arms" qualification endorsement on the DD 214. During Vietnam, military firearms training was aimed at training for basic rifle marksmanship. Military handgun training was largely non-existent.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[cvfd1399 0]

normiss

My comment was 100% correct and an exact description of what a DD-214 means to obtaining a CWP. Much more well thought out than the stuff you create in your head.
You knowledge of all things military is weak at best.
You seem to be one of the "wanna bees" of the services.

Don't be a dick troll.
I no longer play your games.


Now, back to camping.

Don't be butthurt when you don't cover all your bases and a flaw is exposed in your thoughts. Just be honest.

[cvfd1399 0]

BIGUN

***So you are fine with someone with a dd214 after leaving nam in 69' and never picking up a weapon since then to get a CCW in 2016 because they had "weapons training" 40+ years ago??

Louisiana requires a "small arms" qualification endorsement on the DD 214. During Vietnam, military firearms training was aimed at training for basic rifle marksmanship. Military handgun training was largely non-existent.

Whatever call it desert storm, that was 20+ years ago when they did have handguns. The point being was he was shitting on CCW training but implied a dd214 was proof enough of training to be accepted over a current CCW proof of competency shooting course. When I pointed out that it could have been decades ago he got all butthurt, and started with the PA.

[BIGUN 1,434]

Well, I didn't read his missives that way and think you're taking it a bit over the top.

I'm in the camp of a 20+ year old DD-214 is more proof of competency on weapons "Safety & Training" than a more recent four hour range course popping 50 rounds at 7 yards with a semi-auto that qualifies one to carry any type of concealed pistol.

But, I'm also in the camp of carrying is a constitutional right; rather than having to buy my rights and get permission from the government kinda guy.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[cvfd1399 0]

My issue isn't how good you were 20 years ago. It's how good are you are today. A lot can happen in 20+ years mentally, physically etc. I want an updated demonstration of your skills to see if your dexterity, eyesight, and judgement is still at a safe level.

I'm never going to argue against more CCW training time or higher requirements.

Anyways back to the OP's point about law enforcement retirement commissions. In Louisiana at least with the departments in EBRP with a retirement commission to use it for CCW and not just a keepsake of your time served you still have to go the range and qualify once a year. It is not a set it and forget it piece of paper.

[jgoose71 0]

billvon

>You must live in a different universe than most of us.

Give him a few more posts. He will blame Obama and things will be back to normal (Speaker's Corner style.)

Actually, my mood has been less Dem v Repub, rich v poor, or anything else like that. It's been more Gov Officials v people.

Sorry, but big give libs or people that think more gov is the answer to the question just wind up with the shit end of the stick.....

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[jgoose71 0]

cvfd1399

It's not a badge it is a retirement commission and is labeled as such. It is a piece of paper that allows you reciprocity for CCW. You still can't carry in places like New York so it's not some super special thing that allows you to do anything.

So what it allows all 50 states, if you live in my state you get somewhere like 40/50 already due to existing public CCW reciprocity agreements already

Another note is Louisiana CCW accepts a dd214 to exempt prior military from qualifying at the range no matter how long they have been out. This is just as bad and no different than your gripe above and already is law in many states.

It seems you just caught wind of something that ruffeled your feathers before you did some research.

I'm pretty sure it's a 50 state carry. New York AND California both except it. Attempt to arrest people in both states have been thrown out. I know that they are not allowed to carry in federal buildings and some other gun free zones though....
http://www.policemag.com/channel/weapons/articles/2014/01/does-the-leosa-carry-law-apply-to-you.aspx

Another one that I remember from a while back do you think that California police turned in their Glocks while waiting for them to get approved on the California Handgun Safety list? I mean, you don't want police using guns that might accidentally go off, right?

Or do you think all California Police officer pistols will have microstamping?

http://www.dailybreeze.com/opinion/20150213/california-should-drop-certified-handguns-roster-guest-commentary

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/safeguns.asp

Like I said, I'm starting to get real sick of 2 separate standards, one for the government one for the people....

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[BIGUN 1,434]

Quote

My issue isn't how good you were 20 years ago. It's how good are you are today. A lot can happen in 20+ years mentally, physically etc. I want an updated demonstration of your skills to see if your dexterity, eyesight, and judgement is still at a safe level.

And, who are you to judge?

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[normiss 867]

An expert cop wanna be apparently.
But, "what do I know"?

[cvfd1399 0]

A bullet trap for some old man with dementia that got a CCW with his dd214 and is blind with cataracts trying to shoot at something he is hallucinating about.

Don't come at me with that who are you to judge mess. We all have the right to request reasonable qualification limits for those who are licensed by the state to carry a firearm for the safety of us and our families.

Allowing some document that said you were good to go from 20-30 years ago is ignorant no matter who trained you.

[cvfd1399 0]

normiss

An expert cop wanna be apparently.
But, "what do I know"?

SMH

[billvon 3,085]

Your one warning. Cut it out.

[normiss 867]

Fair enough, but I fail to see his favorable support of cops with a lifetime of weapons experience over a military member's lifetime of experience.
It's the same blind blue line support he repeats here.

I'll try harder to not play the player.

[Coreeece 2]

normiss

Don't be a dick troll.

Aren't you the one always whining when people don't get banned for PA's and posting objectionable material?

normiss

Now, back to camping.

Maybe camping isn't your thing anymore - you seem a bit grumpy lately.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[cvfd1399 0]

normiss

Fair enough, but I fail to see his favorable support of cops with a lifetime of weapons experience over a military member's lifetime of experience.
It's the same blind blue line support he repeats here.

I'll try harder to not play the player.

Did you even read??

I don't support the dd214 route because it allows a potentially 30-40 year old doccument to satisfy the "can you shoot" competency portion of a CCW course.

I do support the retired and active law enforcement commission CCW law brcause it goes above and beyond the dd214 and regular CCW requirements in that the federal law says they have to qualify annually.

So let's see. A CCW permit requires you to attend a refresher and shoot an undefined but satisfactory number of holes on a target at short range while standing under no duress every 4-5 years.

The law enforcement federal law says you have to shoot the POST ANNUALLY a course that is more demanding from 50ft to 6ft distance in different positions, barricades, draw types, and under time with forced reloads.

You are essentially arguing against a higher level of qualification for someone to carry a gun near you in public just to argue with me. You are ignoring and abandoning your liberal ideas for the sake of an arguement and its funny as hell. Smh

[BIGUN 1,434]

Well, the bottom line for me is that "old" Vietnam Vet has a constitutional right to carry with no training.

In other words, all Americans have the right to carry without yours or any State regulation at all. No one need buy their birth rights back from the State and be subject to yours or anyone else's sense of "criteria."

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[cvfd1399 0]

I agree and that is a completely different argument.

[GD64 1]

BIGUN

Well, the bottom line for me is that "old" Vietnam Vet has a constitutional right to carry with no training.

In other words, all Americans have the right to carry without yours or any State regulation at all. No one need buy their birth rights back from the State and be subject to yours or anyone else's sense of "criteria."

x zillion

[normiss 867]

Telling someone to not act in a certain manner isn't a PA, it's advice.

[normiss 867]

I know a number of SF retirees that retired with a full kit, trained from handguns to rocket launchers, EOD, explosives, battery of ordinance launchers, I even know some nuke weapons experts I served with.
I'd like to meet a career cop that isn't former military with anywhere near that experience.

You surely realize the benefits a Veteran presents to a police force after they leave service, including fire fighting, EMS, weapons, tactics, chain of command training and experience, don't you?
But yet you think they aren't qualified to carry??

Talk about a not thought out response.

[Coreeece 2]

normiss

Telling someone to not act in a certain manner isn't a PA, it's advice.

Yes, that's typically how hypocrisy takes form...

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[cvfd1399 0]

You still miss the fucking point that no matter the level of training someone may have had decades ago people's dexterity, eyesight, reaction time, mental capacity, saneness, and other things relevant to the safety of the carrying and using a firearm could have degraded past the point of being reasonably safe.

A doccument(dd214) at this time is currently allowing this to happen. And you are fucking arguing for its existence because I said it. Had Kallend or someone else been posting this you would be shouting touché or some other add on comment as if it were your own stating it was unsafe for us not to have an updated test of these individuals skills.

SMH

[gowlerk 2,255]

cvfd1399

You still miss the fucking point that no matter the level of training someone may have had decades ago people's dexterity, eyesight, reaction time, mental capacity, saneness, and other things relevant to the safety of the carrying and using a firearm could have degraded past the point of being reasonably safe.

A doccument(dd214) at this time is currently allowing this to happen. And you are fucking arguing for its existence because I said it. Had Kallend or someone else been posting this you would be shouting touché or some other add on comment as if it were your own stating it was unsafe for us not to have an updated test of these individuals skills.

SMH

You do anger so well. That might be why you get treated differently than Kallend and some others.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[cvfd1399 0]

I am not angry at all just perplexed at how a person could flip their stated beliefs just to argue with someone for the other side who is posting for INCREASED measures of gun safety. This dude is posting against them just to argue! The same dude who any other day is crying about gun deaths and shootings.