Why are some law-enforcement against the Second Amendment?

[gregr]

Gabby Giffords' gun-control group gets new law enforcement allies

 

[5.56'aholic]

Gabby Giffords' gun-control group gets new law enforcement allies

Because some people have no problem bearing false witness when they are paid to do so. When the LEO's turn their own guns in and carry only a flashlight then i'll believe them.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

 

[hoosierdoc]

I don't know, I can see the appeal of an "unarmed" citizenry if I was an officer

 

[gregr]

I don't know, I can see the appeal of an "unarmed" citizenry if I was an officer

Really? If you were an officer, you`d have no use for the Constitution?

 

[Woobie]

Why are some gun owners against cops? The answer to both questions is the same: some people are too dumb to know who their friends are. Either that or they have been biased by a negative interaction with an individual they perceive as representative of the group.

 

[Woobie]

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-walks-into-police-station-carrying-ak47.html

 

[gregr]

Why are some gun owners against cops? The answer to both questions is the same: some people are too dumb to know who their friends are. Either that or they have been biased by a negative interaction with an individual they perceive as representative of the group.

You are opening a can of worms here. I`m not going to bite, but my question still the same: Why are some law-enforcement against the Second Amendment?

 

[gregr]

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-walks-into-police-station-carrying-ak47.html

Just as we do not dismiss the majority of the professionals in law-enforcement due to the few jack-booted thugs, and murderers, police may not dismiss all gun owners due to the few dimwits. Not to mention, the Second Amendment is our constitutionally protected right.

 

[KellyinAvon]

“It’s harder to get a driver’s license sometimes than it is to get a concealed weapons permit and that just seems a little off balance,” said Kalamazoo Chief Public Safety Officer Jeffrey Hadley, who will participate in the panel discussion.

Yes because convicted felons and domestic abusers are barred from driving or even possessing cars and everyone gets multiple background checks when getting a drivers license. OH WAIT!!

 

[Thor]

I don't know, I can see the appeal of an "unarmed" citizenry if I was an officer

Only if I wasn't willing to look too deep into the outcome of that reality. It rarely turns out well.

 

[gregr]

“It’s harder to get a driver’s license sometimes than it is to get a concealed weapons permit and that just seems a little off balance,” said Kalamazoo Chief Public Safety Officer Jeffrey Hadley, who will participate in the panel discussion.

Yes because convicted felons and domestic abusers are barred from driving or even possessing cars and everyone gets multiple background checks when getting a drivers license. OH WAIT!!

The caveat is, driving is not a constitutionally protected right...keeping and bearing arms is! Why do many not grasp that law-abiding citizens are no threat to innocents? And that those intent on evil just aren`t going to obey ANY law?

 

[gregr]

Only if I wasn't willing to look too deep into the outcome of that reality. It rarely turns out well.

The so called, supreme court has ruled numerous times that police have no constitutional duty to protect you or your loved ones. Obviously then, you, and only you bear responsibility for the defense and well-being of your loved ones. Police are only there, best, case, to draw chalk outlines and interview potential witnesses. I have complete contempt for anyone, whatever their title, position, or uniform, who think they may usurp my right to keep and bear arms. Is "shall not be infringed" ambiguous in the least?

 

[HoughMade]

Really? If you were an officer, you`d have no use for the Constitution?

You're thinking that the analysis goes any deeper than perceived self-interest?

How many non-cops have you heard say "I believe people should have the right to own guns, but....." Why would the population of police be any different? You also seem to be assuming that everyone agrees what the 2d Amendment means. These are the answers to your original question. You can argue with this all day long, but those are the answers.

 

[actaeon277]

Why?
Because "the police" are not monolithic. They come from all walks of life, and they have different viewpoints.

 

[Woobie]

Just as we do not dismiss the majority of the professionals in law-enforcement due to the few jack-booted thugs, and murderers, police may not dismiss all gun owners due to the few dimwits. Not to mention, the Second Amendment is our constitutionally protected right.

I'm not excusing the attitude, I'm just answering your question. Why are some cops against citizens owning guns? Well they're wrong, but there it is.

 

[gregr]

You're thinking that the analysis goes any deeper than perceived self-interest?

How many non-cops have you heard say "I believe people should have the right to own guns, but....." Why would the population of police be any different? You also seem to be assuming that everyone agrees what the 2d Amendment means. These are the answers to your original question. You can argue with this all day long, but those are the answers.

Again, are the words: "shall not be infringed" ambiguous in the least? As to the other part of your post, after Katrina in New Orleans, when jack-booted thugs went through and forcibly disarmed citizens when they needed their weapons the most, some of these law-enforcement folks afterwards stated they would never do that again. In that instance, they simply followed orders without thinking through exactly what they were doing. Good for the ones who saw the error of what they took part in. Likely, there are those who feel that they would do it again, and screw the Constitution. I can only say this: Regardless of title, position, or uniform, it is treason, and therefore illegal to usurp constitutional rights, and anyone who attempts to do so, is not protected by their title, position, or uniform, and would most likely face resistance.

 

[gregr]

Why?
Because "the police" are not monolithic. They come from all walks of life, and they have different viewpoints.

As the Constitution is the law of the land, it is the ONLY viewpoint that carry`s any weight.

 

[gregr]

I'm not excusing the attitude, I'm just answering your question. Why are some cops against citizens owning guns? Well they're wrong, but there it is.

 

[Woobie]

I'm just saying you might as well ask "why do people suck?" or "why do certain folks break the law?" Some people just don't get it right. And no one has the same values as anyone else.