Link to Article

In this season where we seem to be hearing about another murder by police every week or so, I've read a lot of anti-cop stuff, most of it merely angry and unconsidered.

I certainly understand the anger, but it's unfortunate to see people writing before they think.

Enter Gary North. He's been doing some thinking, and that's refreshing to see. Of course, he's probably a little too innovative for the taste of most of the folks here, but I still find his ideas new and fresh...although they're actually not new at all.

Excerpt:

A policeman would gain obedience, like James Stewart in Destry Rides Again, through judicial empowerment. He would not threaten anyone with immediate violence. He would simply say, �Folks, I�ve got a problem here. This person is resisting arrest. Would three of you accompany me to the local station with this individual?�

He would blow his whistle, and a dozen sawed-off shotguns accompanied by people would be there within 60 seconds.

Every member of society would be trained from an early age to honor the law as an adult by being willing to carry a handgun. Everyone would see himself as a defender of the law and a peace-keeper. Guns would be universal. Every criminal would know that the man or woman next to him is armed and dangerous. He would be surrounded at all times by people who see their task as defending themselves and others against the likes of him.

The only person he could trust not to shoot him dead in his tracks for becoming an aggressor would be the policeman on the beat. The aggressor�s place of safety would be custody.

I like it! Probably impractical in the projects, ghettos, etc.

Even outside these areas it would take a generation at least.

Of course, all the libs would have to die..

Bwahahahaha

Would a cop get to carry a weapon for purely defensive reasons? Seems a line cop, without citizens around to protect him, would make an easy target. Could he enlist citizens to accompany him throughout the day to protect him, like Roman soldiers enlisting citizens to carry their stuff?

In theory, I'm 100% behind the idea. Id just prefer to not get mugged while walking around by myself.

Quite whining. You will have 12 vigilantes with scatterguns to avenge you 59 seconds after you die.

barak: What "weekly murders" (and the corresponding convictions in court!) are you referring to?
It appears you should be very careful to follow EXACTLY the directions on your medications bottles!
Something is dreadfully wrong with you.
I can't figure out who sounds more idiotic YOU or the guilt ridden dimwit you cite???
Sheesh!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Sir Robert Peel felt the same way hence the "Bobbies" in London.

I haven't even started all my whining! My belt is heavy, Barak says I can trade it in for a rape whistle.

Gary North the Y2K huckster? A con artist wanting the police to be made less effective, There's a shock.

Actually, I was thinking it'd probably be most effective in dense population centers, and least effective in rural areas.

The thing that bends my brain is the completely different attitudes and mindsets such a reversal (everybody disarmed except the cops -> everybody armed except the cops) would have to produce in cops, mundanes, and criminals.

I still prefer privatizing the police, but North's idea is even more innovative than that. I like innovation, at least to think about.

There's a word for unarmed people: victims. That would go for unarmed cops as well. Probably more so.

And I'll not entertain anything Great Britain does as an example thank you very much.

How many pullups can you do wearing that belt?

Depends. Is the pull-up bar threaded through a dozen glazed?

If so, I could get up there at least a dozen times.

Even with a 2L of Dr. Pepper in each cargo pocket?

I agree. Never heard of/read this North clown, but not surprised Barak follows his tweets. If we're talking utopia, how about universal concealed carry..........ALL states get the hell outta the way of it's non-felon citizens carrying firearms.

Ditto. It appears they're circling the drain even faster than we are. No need to follow their lead on anything.

Or just once with decent hang time?

Gary North has been around quite a while........

http://www.garynorth.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_North_%28economist%29

quite involved with Christian Reconstruction.........

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=North%2c%20Gary

Best,

GWB

Gary North ? , is he the one that played Dennis the Menace on TV years ago ?


Mike

its a two edged sword, you don't want the cop responding to your wife being raped at knife point by 5 urban children to be unarmed, nor do you want to see little Joey getting killed for holding an airsoft gun. It sucks to be human, I like the body camera's and more tasers ideas but can't see a cop facing lethal force without himself possessing the ability to administer lethal force.

Got a better idea, why not disarm all the armed protection types for all the governors, the president, etc. for the next ten years and see how that works out.

Jim

Here's a novel idea:

Kill all those that murder, rape, rob, mug, and steal....and we'll be a day ahead in cleaning up society!!

I think that full restoration of 2nd amendment rights to all people in the country would suffice. If people in bad areas such as Chicago were not denied their 2nd Amendment rights by liberal bastards, I have little doubt that they would use them. Over time, the crime problem would be taken care of.

No one back in the frontier days had to be "required" to own firearms. It was obvious that they were needed. The law enforcement people were armed as well.

If you're running for Prez I'll be your hangman.

Damn it! Beat me by 5 minutes, guess I'll be the hangmans bich.

Great idea Barak only one problem, most folks in urban areas are little chickenschits and will not get involved by choice. All throughout history this country and the world for that matter was built by the few brave not the many chickenschits, that is something that will not change.

Ad hominem fallacy:

wouldn't it be easier to just disarm everyone? problem solved. you can thank me later. i'm on to curing cancer.

That is total BS!! It is ok for police to be the only ones armed(they have supported that since their inception after all) but not the other way around. When an officer decides a civilian needs to be raped to keep them inline, do you think they would do that if they were unarmed? Do you think other officers would provide security for that officer to do what needs to be done if they were not armed also?

All these wanna be chanting cop killers best know there's a [bleep]-ker like me around, I don't even have to know the cop or even like him.

I'll rain on fu-ks like that trying to commit that level of tyranny, and I'll gladly rain for weeks, months or even years, they don't want to start this.

Except police/former police need an exemption in most cases!! I can understand how this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoinette_Frank

is on death row since she killed a fellow officer, but this one who was executed makes now sense:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/11/fla-police-pardo-execution/1760473/

He wasn't punished(other than firing) for committing what would have been crimes had he been a civilian, so not sure why they crawfished on him for doing what he thought was right. Just flat out makes no sense.

I remember reading about an armed robbery in London early in the last century. Of course, the Bobbies were unarmed, so the borrowed pistols from three or four pedestrians on the street and apprehended the bad guys.

So a system not too different from the one North postulates has worked in a large EXTREMELY crime ridden city before.

As all the little un-armed euro sheeple march to the kwaynes beat, no thanks.

I'm liking it Barak, good find.....

Casey

I prefer my servants unarmed. It makes them less likely to take on airs they shouldn't.

And if this concept bothers the conscience of any moderates or pseudo libs out there, call me. I'll do it.

This +10, it's real simple if you don't want a problem with the police don't break the law. If you don't want to get in a fight with the police don't resist arrest. I have seen officers assisted by folks on two occasions in both instances turned out the folks were off duty leo.

yup

Brother, I wish I had your courage and resolve on wanting to assist police in doing anything they want to do. Now, it is too late for you to help Pardo:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/11/fla-police-pardo-execution/1760473/

(and I am sure you are sorry you didn't know he was on death row since you would have laid down your own life to help him escape), but their are numerous Oklahome officers who are alive, well, and virile that can use your assistance:

http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/17/rape-culture-among-oklahoma-cops

Yur a fu-kin riot dude. lmmfao

I think Gary North needs to spend 10 seconds rolling in a mat room.

Thanks for the chuckle, Barak. Funny schit.




Travis

Yep, here is Captain George Brown plainly stating that if people do not want to be sexually assaulted by Oklahoma police they best be obeying traffic laws:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DYNdqwx3LU

Why is that? You indicated you were willing to do anything to keep police able to do what they want to do.

Fixt it for you Gunner.

Yer twisting words. He won't stand still for a Cop to be MURDERED!

You need to re-read what I said, I wont witness murderous tyranny on LEO's.

If I could take you out on a little trip with me, when you returned, you'd buy a designer 30 pack of pink lace under shorts, sell your computer, start teaching sunday school and living for christ.

Is there any other way for a police officer to die at the hands of another?

If police cannot break a law when dealing with civilians(as shown by statutory exemptions, police officers assisting fellow officers as the do everything, prosecutors not going after them, and judges handing down token sentences when all other avenues of clearing the officer have failed and they have to keep the peasantry from rioting) then how can anyone end the life of a police officer and have it considered anything other than murder? It certainly couldn't be considered self defense when it happens.

Thanks 'Gwe and ET, I can't seem to communicate plainly with mixed dna of self inflicted estrogen and ignorance.

He sounds like TRH's alter ego. Either way, it is disgusting.

Yes, but easily identifiable as purposeful.

Is there any other kind? Barak's article concerned wanting to disarm police to keep them from raping and things of that nature. No self respecting conservative wants police to stop doing what they are doing now and there is no self defense claims when it comes to dealing with police no matter what they do.

An example. Had one of the whores Holtzclaw in Oklahoma was trying to put on the straight and narrow path killed him while he was doling out justice, every officer in the country would have been trying to kill the little POS slut. Had that failed, the prosecutors and judges would have been trying to strap her down and execute her for thinking she was above the law.

Sorry, not in to cross dressing or man on man sex, but several of the members here have indicated they are Log Cabin Republicans like you seem to be indicating so look for those guys and have fun together.

Disgusting is when someone posts a video of a police officer beating someone in cuffs with other officers assisting the officer administering the corporal punishment and then saying any of those police are in the wrong. You point that out as well, so not sure why you take issue with me doing the same.

On a serious note, I have a suggestion that I think would cut down on a lot of these police shootings. Any cop firing his weapon would face automatic criminal charges. If everything was done legit, then he/she'd beat it in court. Just knowing that they would have to face the music would, I think, cut down on a lot of the trigger happy behavior.

Then you would just have people whining the prosecutors that do not pursue police now would not be going after them in trial. Kind of like the deal out in Ferguson where Wilson was allowed to snatch the guy for filming him in 2013 and then file a false report on the incident without any sanctions. No way the prosecutor(who runs the Grand Jury investigation in MO) is going to do anything different. Just give the officer(s) several months of paid leave plus overtime instead of putting the money in to court proceedings.

You're like, the most amazing legal mind of our century.

You and Gary North should team up with Barak and start writing Use of Force Policies.



Travis

Yeah, I don't know why anyone would want a police officer sent to prison for the same thing a civilian would.

How is your visit a cop in the pen ministry going? Have you started getting pics of kids visiting Santa to the officers you visit like this one:

http://www.ktvq.com/news/former-eastern-montana-police-officer-sentenced-for-child-sex-abuse/


or still using up the playground/coming and going to school pics you already had on hand?

Travis, I'm just making a suggestion here, in order to invite conversation. I'm not anti-police, and actually worked in law enforcement for 10 years. I don't believe all cops are bad, nor even most of them. But something needs to be done to curtail the growing number of wrongful shootings. If you don't like my idea, then what would your suggestion be?

???Whether it is a Cop doing the shooting or an everyday citizen, it goes to a Grand Jury and the applicable laws and evidence are examined. No True Bill or an indictment are the results. Around here there have been a lot of "No True Bill" resulting from citizens killing somebody. It is all in the evdience and applicable statutes. NOT how some idiot "FEELS".

Yes, It's unfair to not take someone seriously just because they believe Government should be old testament law.

Or, that favors capital punishment for a range of offenders; including women who lie about their virginity, blasphemers, nonbelievers, children who curse their parents, male homosexuals, and other people who commit acts deemed capital offenses in the Old Testament. North also favors capital punishment for women who have abortions. North stated that the biblical admonition to kill homosexuals in Leviticus is God's "law and its morally appropriate sanction", arguing that "God is indeed a homophobe" who "hates [homosexuality] and those who practice it" and "hates the sin and hates the sinner."

North has said that capital punishment should be carried out by stoning, because it is the biblical approved method of execution and it is cheap due to the plentiful and convenient supply of stones.

Here's one of his books online if you need a little light reading.
The Sinai Strategy

He's written several other books that are available through his website or wherever The Turner Diaries are sold.

Some jurisdictions are more open about that than others. I was reading this morning about a 2004 Wisconsin case where an officer shot & killed a 22 year old that was scheduled to testify against him in court the next day. His department cleared him of any wrongdoing in 48 hours, before they even received any lab/forensic results back. Here's the story, if you want to read it.

Link

there's the winner on this thread!


sick to death of laws for us but not them.

any politician caught bringing up a bill for further restrictions upon 2nd amendment rights needs to go 10 years without the benefit of any small arms protection before that legislation can be given serious thought.


whaddya bet the ACA website would have worked a bit better if those yahoos were depending upon it for their insurance.


do we get cake next?

There's nothing to suggest. LE are subjected to the same legal proceedings as everybody else.

If a department or agency is corrupt, that is due to an internal problem that typically stems from the elected officials in that area. If a department or agency enforces outlandish laws, that's because the elected officials in that area are telling them to do so.

Use of Force is Use of Force is Use of Force. It's either legal within, or it isn't. Grand Juries decide that. Same as they do for you and me.




Travis

Why would you have any problems with that officer doing what needed to be done?

Sooooo, we can schittcan the whole " Innocent until proven guilty " concept too...?

Have to disagree. That would create strong disincentives to anyone taking the job. Defending a murder case will cost years of a person's life and hundreds of thousands of dollars. And Travis is spot on, police are subject to the same review by a grand jury as every citizen.

Criminal actions should be reserved mostly for those people who present a physical danger to the public such a violent individuals, rapists, burglars, and also for thieves.

Most cases including all of the recent shooting cases receiving attention should be the province of civil cases, where people can be held responsible for actions, but they do not present an ongoing physical danger to the public. Defending a civil action is covered by insurance in most instances and yet the person faces accountability for their conduct.

For the police, make their departments and cities liable for their actions, and budgets for adequate manpower, support, and training will increase. As it stands now in many states, in a civil case the officer faces personal liability, while their employer does not. That puts no incentive on the employer to help improve the skills and performance of their employees.

Yea, but if you give the bobbies crap they call in the Army.

Maybe actual criminal charges wouldn't be necessary, but how about review by an impartial outside agency or commission? Not all cases are reviewed by grand juries, and, in the ones that are, the outcome is mostly decided by how, or if, the DA presents the case.

That is what a grand jury is. They are ordinary citizens off of the street. Size varies by state, but most serve a few months reviewing cases and then go back to their ordinary lives.

You mean something like a Grand Jury.....

Not all cases are reviewed by grand juries, and, in the ones that are, the outcome is mostly decided by how, or if, the DA presents the case. In the link I posted earlier, or one of the links off of that one, it stated that the previous DA had never, in 30 years, charged any officer with any improper use of force, including deadly force.

Oh now, no need to lie about that here because we all think just like you do. Police are exempt, either in the laws/ordinances or in practice.


Common wording included in laws and ordinances:

"B. Subsection A of this section does not apply to:
1. The use of a handheld mobile telephone for the sole purpose of communicating with any of the following regarding an emergency situation:
.....
e. A police department.
2. Any of the following persons while in the performance of their official duties and within the scope of their employment:
a. A public safety officer as defined in section 44-4-401, Montana Code Annotated; and
.... (Ord. 3146, 11-7-2011)


http://sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=401&section_id=771866


Police lobby for exemptions on everything so it doesn't look quite as onerous versus just not applying it to themselves:

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/...w_against_prostitution.html?id=251369561

Great idea. The same people who didn't go after Darren Wilson for false arrest and submitting a false police report in 2013 got to decide what evidence those ordinary citizens got to see during the Grand Jury proceedings:

http://ago.mo.gov/publications/courtprocess.pdf

Sherp, citizens get the government they want and accept. If that is the local attitude, then they are governing themselves and choosing to accept one standard of conduct over another. Juries of ordinary citizens off the street, whether grand or petit, is preferable to a panel of government political appointees making decisions of who to indict and convict, and safer for citizens. Our legal system is highly imperfect, but it affords more rights to more citizens than most any other legal system in the world.

Someone once said, freedom comes from three boxes, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box. Watch for efforts to restrict and alter the right to those three.

There is no barrier to filing a civil case by a citizen. In a civil case, the lawyers will go after the defendant vigorously, no need to worry about that, but even then, a jury of local citizens will have to make the final decision.

And the problem with satire is that about half of the audience does not recognize it as such.

Since you must like Voltaire, an interesting thought of his: "Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do."

See if your local department allows for ride alongs. If so, go try that for a few days. It will add some interesting perspective.

Dude, not every case for citizens goes before a GJ either. Unless the state law mandates it. And if the state law mandates it, the same goes for LE.

Again, if the DA is dirty, he's dirty. New policy and changes in law shouldn't have to take place because somebody is dirty. Get his ass removed (if you can prove it) or start changing your local elections.

Don't drink the "broken legal system kool aid" that is being poured down everybody's throats right now.



Travis

sherp,

We all know the only reason you come here is to suck on Bluedreaux's COCK.




Travis

Truth.

But, how is it? Is he a scraper?

I think we should have a tag system. Three tags and your career is done. If you make it 'til retirement without using any, you get to cull whatever you want.

I wasn't complaining at all since I am just like you. I want police in the Aloha State to be able to have sex with prostitutes without fear of penalty then arrest the whores if they complain too much about not getting paid for their services.

Nope, keep telling you I am just a plain, straight Republican and not a member of the Log Cabin Wing like you and several others are.

Removing everyone's arms and legs would help end violence.

Yeah. You just magically created your account the same day Bluedreaux started using an actual picture of himself for his avatar.

You're gayer than AIDS.



Clark

If that were the case I would have given in to your multiple advances and we wouldn't be seeing your frequent negative comments. Like many other militant homosexuals, you just can't take no for an answer.

I'm not the one hanging off Bluedreaux's dong on every thread.

You are.



Travis

You keep mentioning him by name, not me.

You keep bringing up sex between men, not me.

Kind of narrows down who is what there doesn't it.

Seems to be a lot of repressed sexual tension in this thread...

why is Blue the only one getting his cock sucked?

I printed and read ALL of North's article and it has some merit but probably would not fly here in the US do to the size of the US. Here in Montana there is so much territory where there is no back up for police neither from citizens or other police that unarmed police would amount to passive suicide for the police.

I too like the idea of my servants not being armed but one does have to pragmatic.

Ask deflave since he seems to be providing that service.

False.

How many working the street officers would continue to work without being armed? No longer in the field, but wouldn't report for duty the first day I was disarmed. Disarm the police and Ferguson' riots would look like child's play. People who are wanting to disarm the populace should be required to post signs in front of their home's. "No firearms inside." GW

Not the way I read it.

Yer good at makin' schit up a little transparent though, you should work on that.

Not so. Every cop wants to go home at night, so he would be very careful when deciding to confront a perp. He would wait for assistance from the trained citizens. He would not have to come flying up in a patrol car to within feet of a suspected perp and open his door and come out shooting, (ensuring he goes home at night,) even though the 12-year old child he gunned down won't be going home at night ever again.

TFF. A dream world where everybody but the cops are armed and ready to shoot some crook for reasons unknown...for free.

How let the mental patients (Barak and sherp) back in?

Thanks to Skeeter the ACA act.

I love watching sherp blush every time I call him out on his man-crush.




Travis

Sounds like we can add another author to the new Use of Force manual that's going to be instituted nationwide.

Hope you gals speak legal jargon really well.



Travis

Bull Schit.

The ideal this country was founded upon was (and is) that every citizen is responsible for all of the laws, including confronting those who are breaking them. People seem to have given up this responsibility, and police seem to be monopolizing it, but without accountability. It seems the opinions of most on this thread fall within the idea that nothing that is going with the police and the way they are managed is amiss. Certainly, the problems that occur are not solely with police, but they should also be held to a higher standard under the law, because they do have leeway given them to infringe on the rights of others.

I see a perfect society in similar fashion to Jefferson, where each citizen is a free sovereign, and has and uses ALL of his inherent rights to the betterment of himself, his own domain, and the larger society. The righteous sovereign does step in when another is in peril, and assists to his or her full capacity. Civilization requires no less.

If all were responsible for the laws that regulate them, there would likely be much fewer laws and police officers. It seems cops are quickly becoming Enforcers for the governing Elite, and continue to be revenue collectors for local municipalities, or Highway Robbers, as they used to be called.

Apparently, you didn't watch the video.

Since a fairly large number of citizens can't be bothered to get off their ass to go to work or vote, I don't have a lot of faith in them coming to a cop's aid in the middle of the night.

As a taxpayer, I love it. Awesome idea. Barney can blow the whistle at WalMart. When the five guys show up with sawed off shotguns in less than a minute, Barney can simply say, �Folks, I�ve got a problem here. WalMart cannot keep rolling back the prices if too many people are walking out without paying. The loss prevention officer has a shoplifter in the office. Ladies and gentlemen, I need your help. One of you can hold the contact citizen�s shotgun while s/he confronts the misguided citizen. Somebody else can cover the misguided citizen in case things get hinky." If the amount in question is a felony, Barney can throw the violator in one person�s mini-van to run the guy down to the lockup and start a booking sheet while he gets the information.

If, instead of a shoplifter, it turns out to be an active shooter, Barney can act as a facilitator and give pointers to the entry team, suggest a formation, maybe suggest a decent way to deal with hallways and doors. I�m sure these hard charging citizens are going to take on the task like it�s Omaha Beach. (Just like they did at the Batman movie, etc.)

People who are interested in helping can put light bars on their cars (and sirens) so everyone will know they are the good guys and a part of the ready reserve.

Think of the savings. No salary, no sick pay, no hospital bills, no worker�s comp, no public expenditure of funds for legal expenses defending these people or the civil suits. It�s a dream come true. Also, you can�t beat a response time for backup of 5 people in one minute in the middle of a deserted downtown in a big city at 3 a.m.

Also, if it is not state action, the constitution doesn�t even apply. What could go wrong? If it is state action and the government is responsible for the actions of the �folks,� what could go wrong?



You threw in the word �training.� What kind of training? Many police departments are willing to welcome people willing to go to a police academy for many months and to work for free. There are not that many takers compared to the general population.

Carry on.

Yes it is a terrible idea for police/retired police to be disarmed ever for any reason, but police support for various disarmament schemes for civilians is completely reasonable.

Where do you live? I'm guessing it is not Wyoming.

I don't think you have anything to worry about it ever happening. If it ever did happen, police still would not have to worry. No doubt conservatives would be more than willing to assist LE in whatever they wanted to do so Officers like Daniel Holtzclaw

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...nce-victims-list-grows-article-1.2000120

would still be able to take the fight to the enemy with the comforting knowledge that his back up would cheerfully put one behind any whore's ear that got the idea she was going to bite down on little Daniel as he was ejacu...I mean, executing his official duties.

I don't live in Wyoming, but police are basically like any other chain with little variation from store to store. They want(and should be able to) decide who may do what.

http://wyofile.com/ruffin/wyoming-guns-without-permit/

"Some in law enforcement had opposed the bill, saying the state�s existing permitting system worked well by allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons after they prove proficiency in using firearms and pass a background check."

"Casper Police Chief Tom Pagel and others in law enforcement cautioned during testimony on the bill that changing the law would mean police would not have a chance to review applications first. A small fraction of candidates are rejected under the existing process."

No doubt the majority of WY LEO's support the various prohibited places on the following list(it certainly would be news if LE groups lobbied for the repeal on these)

http://wyomingdci.wyo.gov/dci-crimi...ction/concealed-firearms-permits/cfp-faq

5. Where is my permit not valid for purposes of carrying a concealed firearm?

No permit issued pursuant to Wyoming law or any permit issued from any other state shall authorize any person to carry a concealed firearm into:
o Any facility used primarily for law enforcement operations or administration without the written consent of the chief administrator;
o Any detention facility, prison or jail;
o Any courtroom, except that nothing in this section shall preclude a judge from carrying a concealed weapon or determining who will carry a concealed weapon in the courtroom;
o Any meeting of a governmental entity;
o Any meeting of the legislature or a committee thereof;
o Any school, college or professional athletic event not related to firearms;
o Any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic liquor and malt beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to that purpose;
o Any place where persons are assembled for public worship, without the written consent of the chief administrator of that place;
o Any elementary or secondary school facility;
o Any college or university facility without the written consent of the security service of the college or university; or
o Any place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law or regulation or state law.


No officer wants to run the risk that some lady they are wanting to grope in a court house or other safe area could retaliate against them.

If everyone was disarmed it would probably work out great.

Those words my friend came from your keyboard not mine. Suspect the programs that you speak of come from liberal politicians and their appointed lackey chiefs, not the patriot officers working the streets. GW

Neither do liberals. And Hitler. And blah blah blah.

It's just another form of the same thing. Everyone has the right to self defense and firearm ownership/possession in America. With certain very narrow exceptions. We've been fighting our various governments for restrictions on these rights for years. Now some here want to do the SAME? Just because it's a different group of people don't make it right. I can't believe anyone here even entertains this notion. Pathetic.

The recent shootings are a diversion. Gov is using them to distract you from real issues. They were convenient. The vast majority of cops do their job every day without even thinking of violating anyone's rights. Some are criminals. Most of those get fired and prosecuted. Just had a few of my cohorts arrested, so don't tell me it don't happen. And you know who investigated and arrested them? WE did.

These recent events in the news were completely justified events. Political figures and the media are playing you. And you are all falling for it.

It's a travesty, a sham, and a mockery. It's a travelshamockery.

DD, this was just directed at you. I just plucked a line from your post for illustration

sherp, you really need to ask Santa to give you �a life� for Christmas. You can�t seem to see goodness in anything, and you really cherry pick stuff to fit your world view. You can turn �some in law enforcement� on an issue dealing with constitutional concealed carry (open carry was never an issue) into �no doubt the majority� on a different subject. BTW, the will of the people as expressed by their elected representatives WON on that issue notwithstanding the view of "some."

I can find �some� who will stand for any proposition, no matter how ridiculous.

If you won the lottery you probably would figure out a way to gripe about something.

That dickhead doesn't espouse his "view" here. He is nothing but a liberal queer playing games with the guys who are too innocent to see it.

I think he is TRH

Nope. I have had a bunch of phone chats with THR over the years. He is a good guy not an ass hole like Sherp.

Where did he go? He's been here but not posting for almost a week.

He was arrested by a citizen, concealed nunchaku without a carry permit

didn't read it all, as I came in late, but this sure smacks of the type of utopian fantasy construct world that Barak likes to live in. Long on dreams, short on reality.

The "some" were police officers who knew what was best for civilians.

Still don't see any news about police lobbying for repealing firearms safety laws that limit where civilians may have arms in their possession, but do see where police lobby for further limitations.

Not sure why Santa would need to bring me anything so I would not be able to notice those two points.

Why do you get upset at people for noticing police just doing what they think is right?

I thought Audie Murphy was the Sheriff in "Destry Rides Again"?

I am not a liberal unless you are. I support the same actions by police that you do. Every time someone posts a story about an officer committing an assault and then wanting that officer punished, you and I are there together chastising the person and showing our support for the officers mentioned in the story to keep on doing what they want to do.