|
Author
|
Topic: PROTECTING US AGAINST A MAN WITH A COUPLE KNIVES
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 13, 2014 07:30 AM
49, no question I understand why. My hope is to keep the relationship impersonal, call a spade a spade.
my attitude is, cops sign on for the whole nine yards. The citizen deserves superior consideration. We can't have the attitude that ABOVE ALL, THE SAFETY OF THE POLICE IS OUR PRIMARY CONCERN. SO, SHOOT FIRST, LET GOD SORT THEM OUT. (I hope not?)
The objective should be: TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE. PERIOD.
When it comes down to it, police are expen....well not exactly, but the safety of the police officer should NOT trump every other consideration. If otherwise, we don't need them.
I just wish we could keep the issues impersonal. Somehow?
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31492 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Allen
Hi, I'm SUPER DAVE, IN CHARGE OF Q STUFF (and Goat Leader) "I'm really not trying to be a dick".
Member # 3102
|
posted April 13, 2014 07:42 AM
Maybe, I've missed something. When did somebody say they want to shoot cops ?
I can see somebody including myself, indicating they possibly would in a self defense scenario. That's just it self defense !!
Somebody correct me if, I'm mistaken.
Posts: 1986 | From: Jordan Valley Oregon | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted April 13, 2014 10:03 AM
I think 49 may be eluding to my earlier comments on another thread where the discussion turned to the armored assault vehicles being acquired by LEO agencies from the military and I made the statement that these vehicles, as intimidating as they might first appear, have their weaknesses and part of preparing to react to a tyrannical government should involve exploiting those flaws, and I stated that I can't imagine an LEO wanting to be locked down in one of those things when disabled, waiting to die, or the fact that the gunner's "nest" on top has gaps between the protective plates and any good shooter should be able to thread that needle from a long ways off. Maybe it was somewhere else, but my point then was that for almost every advantage the government might bring to bear against us, American citizens, there is a disadvantage if you look closely enough. If push comes to shove, as a matter of self defense- of person, family, community, or Constitution - it's our responsibility to consider these things as part of our pre-planning. Maybe the government expects, and demands, that we sit idly by and just wait to react rather than acting proactively, ergo responsibly, and be prepared to the greatest extent possible. Our own military has reaction plans in place for every possible emergency in the world. We should, as well.
For example, let's say there is a national emergency like a total collapse of the USD or a systemic failure of the power grid. Things are going to get really shitty, really quickly, within 72 hours. I don't expect the government to be of much help at that point. IF this should ever happen ( not saying it will). But, people like me make preparations and are ready to go it alone if we have to, for a time. We make preparations for defense, food, and water. What if the government tries to hand down an Executive Order to collect all firearms in the name of public safety? What if another EO is issued to round up civilians and relocate them to the so-called FEMA Camps? You're prepared and you have everything you need to hold out for, say, six months. You are prepared and it is your preference to stay at home and shelter in place, but the government shows up and tries to force you out of your home at gun point. Do you have the right to refuse to follow that order? Don't you have the right to stay in your home, protect your property, and die doing so if it comes to that? IMO, you do and anyone - LEO's, government agents (same thing), or street thugs - who tries to deprive you of those freedoms is wrong in doing so.
Now, as to 49's reaction to my words, I don't blame him, if he chooses to consider those statements in the general sense. But the world is not a cut and dried place where everything either "is" or "isn't". Wouldn't it be grand if all the guys that looked like "good guys" were actually as they appeared, "good" being a rather subjective term. I recognize and acknowledge that there are those within the LE community who will either defend the citizens and Constitution they're sworn to defend, or they'll follow orders from someone higher up who chooses not to. I know cops who have done things that I refuse to defend. I know medics and firefighters who have done things that I will not defend them for simply because I was one or am an associate of theirs. When the man or woman behind the uni or badge is poisoned and tainted, I owe him or her nothing. If they choose to go outside my rights under the Constitution, it becomes personal - quite personal - and I would never allow them to hide behind the laws they claim to be upholding. If my best friend came to me today and told me that he or she considered the Second Amendment to be outdated and that they didn't like the fact that I was a gun owner and hunter, I would explain to them that I feel bad that our ideologies are so vastly different and that he or she is apparently not the person I thought they were. Then I would ask them to leave and not return. If an LEO who I have known for years does his job on my behalf for all that time, he is my friend and I respect him/ her, and the badge they wear. Now, if that same person comes to knock down my front door and deprive me of my right to self defense without due process because they or the people they take orders from don't think that's my right,... well, I won't be so friendly and bad things might happen. "Just doing my job" won't count at that point. Just my position, and I won't change or apologize for it.
49, if I recall, our attorney advised us that that specific statement may have been written by the officer that headed up this cluster foxtrot during his 45-minute investigation. Doesn't change a thing as far as my wife or the outcome. Our concern, and my point, was that all three meds were written by "the same hand". I appreciate your having this looked at a great deal. Thanks for the clarification.
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5438 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted April 13, 2014 01:25 PM
quote:
49 says: talk of shooting my brothers in blue is in direct conflict with my sense of loyalty.
I do not know that anybody was suggesting open season on cops? That's a stretch. The scenarios I have read concern revolve around citizens being confronted with deadly force. At that point, if the threat comes from some asshole with a badge, that's a big problem.
I figure all the cards are on the side of "them". No Democrat would raise a finger, no Liberal, no Progressive. They expect blind compliance and they are going to get it from just about half of the citizen population.
Thanks for nothing, Democrats! At this point they will be targeting veterans, hunters, conservatives, independents and a few other assorted oddballs unaccustomed to be treated as sheep.
Probably the easiest is to just get in line for the ovens, no talking, nothing to see here. <sigh>
Good hunting. El Bee
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 31492 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
