leo's on here would you confiscate weapons? - Page 6

leo's on here would you confiscate weapons?

This is a discussion on leo's on here would you confiscate weapons? within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by SIXTO While I'm not saying I agree with him it's also not that hard to believe that the majority of LEO's would ...

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 119
Like Tree170Likes

Thread: leo's on here would you confiscate weapons?

  1. #76
    Senior Member Array GoBigOrange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Just far enough outside Orlando
    Posts
    695
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    While I'm not saying I agree with him it's also not that hard to believe that the majority of LEO's would participate in a gun confiscation. He's right that many still have families to feed. Even though they may not agree with their orders I'm assuming many would do as they are told.

    No offense, just my assumption. Let's hope we never have to find out.
    Last edited by GoBigOrange; January 14th, 2013 at 09:13 PM. Reason: grammar


  2. #77
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,838
    Smitty have you even read the responses in this thread? I think it is quite clear that there are several LEOs that will not follow an illegal order. For someone to say that a "majority" would do so is comical. To infer as such one would have to know a majority of the officers and draw conclusions from there.

    I'll also make sure to tell my wife that even though she makes 4 times what I do we wouldn't be able to eat if I quit my job... because this thread has been saying that for several pages now.
    SIXTO, tcox4freedom and 64zebra like this.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  3. #78
    Senior Member Array theskunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by clc View Post
    Leo will do as told.
    But I got a hunch they will send in the new guy. If they came in like storm troopers, and there were a few dead civilians, then people would be on the offensive/protective.

    But if told to start taking away guns, the local sheriffs would have a plan. The ATF showed up at Waco like heroes and few died in the first minutes. But the point of the second amendment, and military type guns, is to resist this type of nonsense. Stalin and his Bolsheviks told the Ukrainians that 'Mother Russia' now owned their land, the Ukrainians told Stalin to get screwed, and he sent in the NKVD (stormtroopers) and took their food - 10 mill starved. But first they Bolsheviks took their guns.

    This gun control is about a coming economic collapse, and today's bolsheviks want your guns.
    Sandpiper, atctimmy and niks like this.

  4. #79
    Member Array Sandpiper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Great Midwest
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    LEO will do as they are told. They will not risk a pension for you. What do they care they have a gun.
    Heck they been doing it already.
    I've already weighed in with my opinion, but a quick scan of the few LE friends and family I have pretty much affirms my suspicions. Contrary to wishful thinking on the part of some members here, not all Leos are gun guys. They don't frequent gun Forums and many of them in high ranking positions would love to see guns outlawed. The real question is this..."How many" in LE would stand where we stand? The answer is impossible to know until its a reality. You don't know what's in a sponge until you squeeze it......Sandpiper

  5. #80
    Senior Member Array DocT65's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    596
    No, as the sworn oath includes a promise to uphold and defend the Constitution. As of this date, the 2A is still law....despite any bogus "Executive Order" that may be forthcoming.
    "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6"

    Flight Surgeon, USAF
    Law Enforcement Tactical Surgeon

    NRA Patron Member

  6. #81
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    20,009
    Which would be more effective for the patriot; Losing a gun battle, or passive resistance? "I'm not giving you my guns, take me to jail"
    "Just blame Sixto"

  7. #82
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    Which would be more effective for the patriot; Losing a gun battle, or passive resistance? "I'm not giving you my guns, take me to jail"
    That works, you go to jail and they tear your house apart looking for firearms..........
    atctimmy likes this.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  8. #83
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    There's a lot more to worry about than the infantry... more to the point your average administrative Marine is going to be better armed and better trained than most citizens- so the infantryman you point to doesn't necessarily matter. More to the point, you're leaving out the people that would be doing most of the actual work. The ATF, FBI, and other federal agencies.

    As I've said on this forum before- the gun community isn't organized like the Colonists were in 1776. .... I simply don't believe that we're going to see the types of things you read about on this forum.
    I agree; I really doubt it would come to that just based on principles. If it did, it would be a horrendous, bloody mess. The attempt would end rather quickly.

    As to the logistics of it:
    You mean the 5000 ATF agents, less those that would refuse to fire, and
    the 36k FBI agents, less those that would refuse, and
    the LEO's that are outnumbered 1000 to 1, less those that would refuse ....

    Still a long way from 3 million.

    The colonists didn't start out organized either. Guerilla warfare favors the natives. I've spoken with quite a few from local and fed agencies that would be tasked with the dirty work while they qualified with their weapons and I seriously doubt most would follow such orders, most that considered it would quickly be dissuaded. There is already an us vs them attitude wrt many gov't agencies.

  9. #84
    VIP Member
    Array WHEC724's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    6,617
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    No. I'll put my money where my mouth is any day, as would any other LEO I work with. As for those who are saying we would when faced with dismissal; poppycock. I can't support my family when given a death sentence either, and that's what it would be. Also, when there is a will, there's a way... Yup you're right. I can't tell you how many people have got verbal warnings vs traffic tickets or how many drunks given rides home instead of rides to jail. There is a lot of discretion to be used.
    I love the pragmatism in SIXTO's comment here. Yes, I do believe that most LEO's would not participate in such activity based on their personal ethics. However, in talking about this with LEO friends, they've all also pointed out that it would be a death sentence as well. However, the bottom line is that we sit next to our LEO's in church. We go to the same grocery stores, and we live in the same neighborhoods. I just don't see that particular scenario ever happening.

    Our dictator building up his own security force, where they are vetted for the job? Now that I can see. That's how a dictator builds up a loyal police force, and it's been done time and time again.

    However, the most realistic scenario that I see is a "boil the frog" where we are slowly stripped law by law, executive order by executive order.
    atctimmy likes this.
    __________________________________
    'Clinging to my guns and religion

  10. #85
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    Smitty have you even read the responses in this thread? I think it is quite clear that there are several LEOs that will not follow an illegal order. For someone to say that a "majority" would do so is comical. To infer as such one would have to know a majority of the officers and draw conclusions from there.

    I'll also make sure to tell my wife that even though she makes 4 times what I do we wouldn't be able to eat if I quit my job... because this thread has been saying that for several pages now.
    I was the chairperson of my local PD's retirement pension investment fund for many years and by being in the position I was privy to the salaries of every officer on the force, down to the penny. Based on some of the officers gross income it would be very hard for them to not carry out any order and be faced with possible termination. I also doubt that any of these officers have wives that make four times their salaries, twice maybe but not four times.

    Bottom line; IMO, some my elect to not violate our rights but not the majority.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  11. #86
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by DocT65 View Post
    As of this date, the 2A is still law....despite any bogus "Executive Order" that may be forthcoming.
    Yes the 2nd amendment is still law however the Supreme Court does not see the amendment as 2nd amendment advocates see it as the below 2nd amendment violations show:

    Due to the violence perpetrated during the Capone, etc., years the public became outraged.
    Outcome: National Firearms Act 1934 Supreme Court silent

    Due to the assassination of JFK the public became outraged.
    Outcome: Gun Control Act of 1968 (This Act was revised in 1986 by the Firearm Owners Protection Act) and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968(The 1968 Gun Control Act was supported by America’s old school manufacturers (Colt, S&W, etc.) in an effort to forestall even greater restrictions which were feared in response to recent domestic violence.) Supreme Court silent

    Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 and 1995. Reason for the two dates is the Supreme Court ruled the 1990 act as an unconstitutional exercise of Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). Law was amended in 1995. The amended act has never been challenged in the United States Supreme Court.

    Due to the assassination attempt on President Regan and the shooting of Mr. Brady the public became outraged:
    Outcome: Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act 1993 and Federal Assault Weapons Ban 1994-2004 Supreme Court silent

    Without the Supreme Court we are doomed to the "theys" whittling away at the 2nd amendment until hardly any rights will be left.

    Also, many laws in various stated violate the 2nd amendment. Supreme Court silent
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  12. #87
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,838
    Since I'm around the guys every day I feel confident in disagreeing. Some will go along with the crap, most will not. If for no other reason, most cops aren't hardened combat vets (yes, some are- not most) and don't want to go into that situation. While random organized attacks against police aren't something I'd expect to see I would be shocked it there weren't cases where strong opposition was found inside homes. The cops would win in the end, but the home owner could make them pay the price.

    As we talk about salaries there's another way to view the whole situation. Chief law enforcement officers are usually either elected or put into place by someone that is elected (or by the person that was picked by those elected in the case of a city manager). As long as the head guy in charge must answer to voters and his job security depends, at least in part, on those voters being happy many areas won't see this happen. I know I wouldn't be given this order. The head of my agency wouldn't agree to such a measure and if he did he would be out of a job shortly thereafter. When talking about a salary that is hard to walk away from, the chief's would be much more difficult to leave behind than the patrol officer's.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  13. #88
    Senior Member Array Tala's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Benton, AR
    Posts
    716
    Once gun owners become criminalized, you're no longer talking about "law abiding citizens" are you?
    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them. -- John Wayne as John B. Books in "The Shootist"

  14. #89
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,838
    See my earlier post. At least in my opinion being in possession of a firearm would not remove you from the category of law abiding citizen since a law claiming you couldn't have the firearm would be in violation of the Constitution.

    (Of course, I'm a bit of a stickler for that shall not be infringed clause. No need to get into it in detail other than to say that there are plenty of people that are not allowed to own firearms now that I feel should be.)
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  15. #90
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    20,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowman View Post
    That works, you go to jail and they tear your house apart looking for firearms..........
    And now weigh the alternative....

    All the LEOs are really boogeymen controlled by RFIDs implanted in their paychecks.
    Naufragia likes this.
    "Just blame Sixto"

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

confiscate this
,
cops won't confiscate weapons
,
dhs wants to confiscate all guns
,

firearms lost by leo

,

gun confiscation

,
leo enforce confiscation
,
magazine ban compensation confiscate
,
oath keepers indiana
,
reserve sheriff deputy indiana
,
sheriff deputies confiscate guns after hurricane katrina
,
will local law enforcement obey gun confication orders?
,
will the military obey gun confiscation orders
,
would it be legal to confiscate my weapons
,
would you confiscate guns leo forum
,
would you obey confiscation order
Click on a term to search for related topics.