Even LE are now reduced to smaller magazines, CRAZY!!

[zoostation]

This applies to any cop in the country.



These arrests will happen. If VA State Police will impound a cruiser and arrest the drivwr for speeding (they have), NJ will arrest officers for this.

To add, we are now in the age of body cameras, so even if they want to give a break, they may not be able to. I have found police across the country are pretty much universal in wanting to look out for other police. Except for Virginia's religious war on speed.

 

[rbird7282]

LEOs, as well as the average citizen should have the best available to protect themselves as loved ones. Very few LEOs I know disagree with this.

However, like some non LEOs I know, some have extreme opinions regarding private gun ownership. That includes magazine capacity, types of of guns and carry laws. It's one thing when I have my mother in law giving me a hard time about it. It's a whole different ball game when people in a position of being the exception to the rule try and argue the point.

I had a Moco officer tell me at a party that he firmly believes that citizens shouldn't have access to guns. They should be banned. He would fully support a ban AND enforce it. His words...not mine. He said that many officers that work with him agree with that.

I actually don't believe that last part. I believe the vast majority of LEOs are pro 2A. It is disturbing that he would say it with such conviction. It's a shame.

If he honestly believes that, he shouldn’t be a cop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TexDefender]

You're right, of course. I didn't expect my post would be popular, but I stand by it. LEOs are in what I consider to be a much higher risk category than most of us, and they are expected to intercede in crimes they witness, even if they're off duty.

I agree that we ALL should have the ability to choose what we carry and how we protect ourselves. But until the SC rules that to be the case, we live in a world of double standards. Just because I am denied the right to carry for self defense by my state government, I don't hold it against the LEOs who might one day come to my aid, and who definitely come to the aid of others every day.

I'm with you. If this does pass then they will create a law to drop the civilians max magazine capacities down to 5 or 7 rounds. Because LEO's will have only 10 rounds. Some people are not thinking it out.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[TexDefender]

Seriously, what LEO is going to arrest another LEO for carrying with a standard magazine?

This is Fake News!

They will, if they break the law and get caught.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[TexDefender]

Maybe this will at least slow down some of the police chiefs supporting the BS bills coming up in Analpolis.

Doubt that, as police chief are a reflection of the mayor or city council.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

 

[Schipperke]

I'm with you. If this does pass then they will create a law to drop the civilians max magazine capacities down to 5 or 7 rounds. Because LEO's will have only 10 rounds. Some people are not thinking it out.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

There are some gun control articles with this exact sentiment. Seven appears to be the next favored number to go down to.


https://www.stopthekilling.us/wp-content/themes/stopthek/pdf/petition.pdf

 

[Jim12]

This is where the FBI's 9mm vs. .45 study that even LEOs under pressure in real situations hit their intended target with only 2 out of 10 rounds is useful.

Antis have created the entirely false story that 10 rounds is a lot. It's not.

If well trained cops hit their target with only 2 of 10 shots, a civilian trying to protect herself from a rapist breaking into her house will be less, and doesn't have a chance, even with a gun. It's rendered only marginally useful.

And the rapist knows it.

 

[rbird7282]

This is where the FBI's 9mm vs. .45 study that even LEOs under pressure in real situations hit their intended target with only 2 out of 10 rounds is useful.

Antis have created the entirely false story that 10 rounds is a lot. It's not.

If well trained cops hit their target with only 2 of 10 shots, a civilian trying to protect herself from a rapist breaking into her house will be less, and doesn't have a chance, even with a gun. It's rendered only marginally useful.

And the rapist knows it.

Except the antis don’t care. They’d rather see us completely unarmed no matter how many of us are beaten, robbed, raped, or murdered. They simply don’t care. We are merely an obstacle for them on their way to total gun bans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[omegared24]

If he honestly believes that, he shouldn’t be a cop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He does. He is very firm in his beliefs.

Hopefully his peers aren't in the same boat. Though, talk is cheap. You never know what is in a man's heart until he is in that position to exercise those beliefs.

Our country is the greatest country in the world because of our core values.

 

[Hawkeye]

LEOs are in what I consider to be a much higher risk category than most of us,

And that's EXACTLY how you end up with "Good and Substantial" and other laws like it.

 

[cantstop]

And that's EXACTLY how you end up with "Good and Substantial" and other laws like it.

Bingo!

<rant>
The folks that founded this great country of ours did their best to abolish the Class system that was prevalent in the old world. States like Maryland, California, New York and New Jersey are using their wealth and political strength to reestablish that class system.

Carry restrictions, Purchase restrictions, Gun registrations, Nationwide health databases, Smoker registries, Free Speech Zones, what-have-you, are all creating subordinate classes in our society. Folks like Bloomberg would like nothing less than returning to the Feudal system where only the wealthy can raise armies to protect themselves and their property.

Bread and circuses are winning over common sense. No one needs a gun. The police aren't going to shoot you if you don't have a gun. This message is repeated daily on the liberal news feeds. It is a conditioning paid for by a bunch of folks that have their own vested interest in mind and broadcast by a media that are frankly too stupid to realize they are being manipulated.
</rant>

 

[swinokur]

A society based on different classes is the foundation of the Democrat party and the statierist agenda.

Gotta have victims or no show.

 

[tjohn55]

Seriously, what LEO is going to arrest another LEO for carrying with a standard magazine?

This is Fake News!

A trooper from the Berlin Barracks was handcuffed and detained in NJ by a NJ trooper after a traffic stop. MD trooper identified himself as a MD LEO, NJ trooper asked if he was carrying. MD trooper replied in the affirmative and was handcuffed and detained for carrying a handgun in NJ.

 

[cantstop]

A trooper from the Berlin Barracks was handcuffed and detained in NJ by a NJ trooper after a traffic stop. MD trooper identified himself as a MD LEO, NJ trooper asked if he was carrying. MD trooper replied in the affirmative and was handcuffed and detained for carrying a handgun in NJ.

Broken tail light?

 

[East2West]

I'm with you. If this does pass then they will create a law to drop the civilians max magazine capacities down to 5 or 7 rounds. Because LEO's will have only 10 rounds. Some people are not thinking it out.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Tapatalk

Oh, you think that's why they'll pass a law later on decreasing the magazine limit even further??

So if people don't resist this, and just be happy with unequal application of the law, they'll stop at 10 rounds?

 

[East2West]

You're right, of course. I didn't expect my post would be popular, but I stand by it. LEOs are in what I consider to be a much higher risk category than most of us, and they are expected to intercede in crimes they witness, even if they're off duty.

I agree that we ALL should have the ability to choose what we carry and how we protect ourselves. But until the SC rules that to be the case, we live in a world of double standards. Just because I am denied the right to carry for self defense by my state government, I don't hold it against the LEOs who might one day come to my aid, and who definitely come to the aid of others every day.

I'd love to see a study done, using this logic, to see who has more of a "good and substantial" reason. Who statistically is more likely to fall victim to violence where having a weapon would provide life saving self defense, an off duty LEO somewhere like Garrett or Allegheny county, or your average law abiding citizen living in West Baltimore?

If we're splitting citizens into groups how intricate do we get?

 

[TexDefender]

Oh, you think that's why they'll pass a law later on decreasing the magazine limit even further??

So if people don't resist this, and just be happy with unequal application of the law, they'll stop at 10 rounds?

No. What I think is the left will do their very best to split up the Pro 2A block and there seems to be a few here that are falling for it.

 

[ironpony]

Is there a way for the citizens and the LEOs to come to an agreement on any such limiting Bill before it comes to a vote? Are there Law Enforcement agencies that would have a wider view on where they stand on such infringements? Can we talk to them and possibly understand how we may avoid such a conflicting law? Only other choice I see is to visit SCOTUS in far future? Best to just wait?
Do communities talk to their LEOs?


Until then I will spend as little time in Glen Burnie as possible.

 

[East2West]

No. What I think is the left will do their very best to split up the Pro 2A block and there seems to be a few here that are falling for it.

It's not the left that is enforcing these laws. I really truly do not get this logic.

Are we the "2A Advocates" just supposed to stand idly by and ignore the people who are the ones enforcing these laws? Why is it not possible to ostracize those who create these unjust laws as much as those who enforce these unjust laws?

Why is it that we must sacrifice our RIGHTS to maintain a relationship with those who would take away our rights? Why should LEOs get a pass? Why can't we praise the officers who refuse to carry out these gun laws and isolate the ones who do enforce them?

I don't see how people who would enforce some of these egregious laws can be considered in the "2A Block", and I don't see how pointing out their tyrannical ways is falling for the lefts trickery.

 

[TexDefender]

It's not the left that is enforcing these laws. I really truly do not get this logic.

Are we the "2A Advocates" just supposed to stand idly by and ignore the people who are the ones enforcing these laws? Why is it not possible to ostracize those who create these unjust laws as much as those who enforce these unjust laws?

Why is it that we must sacrifice our RIGHTS to maintain a relationship with those who would take away our rights? Why should LEOs get a pass? Why can't we praise the officers who refuse to carry out these gun laws and isolate the ones who do enforce them?

I don't see how people who would enforce some of these egregious laws can be considered in the "2A Block", and I don't see how pointing out their tyrannical ways is falling for the lefts trickery.

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. I however oppose your point of view.