Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians? - Page 4

Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians?

This is a discussion on Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by AnthonyC Fair enough. Good to know oaths are meaningless then. I wonder if those same military members and LEOs would have a ...

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 69
Like Tree173Likes

Thread: Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians?

  1. #46
    Member Array TGbow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by AnthonyC View Post
    Fair enough. Good to know oaths are meaningless then. I wonder if those same military members and LEOs would have a problem with someone confiscating their FATHER'S gun or their SISTER'S or BROTHER'S, their SON'S and DAUGHTER'S gun. Because if their just going to do what they are told so will the cops in the towns where their families live.
    Quote Originally Posted by PPS1980 View Post
    Just look to the Red Flag "laws" for your answer. All too many "LEOs" are enforcing that violation of several US Constitutional protections. Just sayin'.
    That is disturbing.
    AnthonyC likes this.

  2. #47
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,398
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    I find people who make absurd statements of future events that will never happen to be something to ignore, not discuss. It becomes an exercise in futility and a waste of bandwidth/breath
    And when those feelings are ignored, things like red flag laws become a thing. Even even though nuking his own citizens is unrealistic, the mindset is still there, and will do what it can get away with.
    ugh762x39 and AnthonyC like this.
    We get the government we deserve.

  3. #48
    Member Array retired badge 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    389
    Quote Originally Posted by OldChap View Post
    @retired badge 1 Excellent post sir. My experience with the officers in my department hinted to me that a lot of their response would fall into whether or not they felt it was a heavy handed way to control law-abiding citizens. The vast majority have a great respect for the law and the Constitution and simply wouldn't tolerate orders to go door to door - even if nobody resisted.

    After all, does anyone think an officer, who lived in a neighborhood, would go door to door in their neighborhood confiscating private property without due process and expect their home and family to continue to live there? I sure wouldn't. That is what many here seem to not realize. Maybe they believe police officers are all bused in every day to work from far away.

    Police have spent a great deal of time trying to gain the respect of the communities they serve. Throwing all that away would make policing what? Easier? Hardly. Cooperation would probably evaporate from a significant portion of law abiding citizens who would otherwise support the police.

    One prediction is, I fear, dead on. If a significant portion of police get involved with dealing with otherwise law-abiding citizens and their guns, the CRIMINALS ARE GOING TO HAVE A FIELD DAY. I don't know of any major police departments in Texas who are anywhere near fully staffed. Seems no one wants to be a cop any more. Less police presence = more crime. Guaranteed.

    And one issue you forgot to mention is that if we start imprisoning a million or two more people, the already busted state and federal budgets are going to hemorrhage to such an extent that every state and municipality will go bankrupt. More people in jail = more money to support them = more taxes. Isn't that what finally broke King George's plan up?

    And all that might take place prior to a 1776 response. I pray some fools wake up before anyone strikes that match.
    A minor correction, if I may be permitted to do so. 1776 was the year of the Declaration of Independence. April 19, 1775 was the date that British troops, under Governor General Gage, marched into Lexington and Concord for the specific purpose of seizing stores of arms and ammunition in militia control. Those British troops were met by citizen-militia forces at The Old Stone Bridge where the "shot heard around the world" was fired, and British troops failed in their mission.

    Over the next several years the American Revolution evolved. As stated earlier, no more than 2% of the population were actively engaged at any time. Public support was minimal, with at least half of the population continuing to support the colonial administration under King George. Citizen-soldiers typically enlisted in local or state militia units for periods of 3 to 6 months, returning to their homes for necessary work in planting, harvesting, etc. A hard-core resistance movement existed in many areas of the American colonies, and terroristic acts were not uncommon. More than a few "Tories" (supporters of British rule) left for Canada. Business establishments that continued to provide sustenance or supplies to British forces were frequently attacked or burned out. At the risk of sounding critical of American patriots of the period, I must observe that a great deal of thuggish and criminal behavior accompanied the American revolt.

    I would not like to see a repeat of the American revolutionary experience. Our population has become deeply divided in many ways, and one can expect that insurrectionary activity would fuel many fires, some of which could easily grow out of control. I would much prefer that any effort to subvert our Constitution be met with widespread peaceful civil disobedience, forcing the powers that be to either back down or publicly acknowledge their evil intent.

    Along the same lines, I have made it clear over the years in dealing with my congress critters that anytime they want to pick up all the guns and ammunition they can just stop by the house, and I will give them the ammunition first. Haven't had any takers yet, and I doubt that the "exalted leader" class will do any of the dirty work themselves; they will hire it done by young thugs willing to do whatever it takes to gain favor with the regime.

    I could go on for pages and pages, but I think I have made my points here.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #49
    Distinguished Member Array 1MoreFord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    AR
    Posts
    1,362
    Once upon a time when I asked an ole, gun shootin', gun game playin', buddy of mine who happened to be an Arkansas State police officer what he'd do when his superiors told him to confiscate my guns what he'd do he told me he'd come take them.

    Haven't had much use for cops ever since. YMMV!
    Joe

  6. #50
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,556
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    And when those feelings are ignored, things like red flag laws become a thing. Even even though nuking his own citizens is unrealistic, the mindset is still there, and will do what it can get away with.
    There's a world of difference between suggesting mental health red flag issues and nuking americans. One is doable and should be discussed, the other isn't doable and is a waste of time thinking about it every happening
    OldChap likes this.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    The lion does not even bother to turn his head when he hears the small dog barking.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  7. #51
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,398
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    There's a world of difference between suggesting mental health red flag issues and nuking americans. One is doable and should be discussed, the other isn't doable and is a waste of time thinking about it every happening
    One is a way of slowly introducing door to door gun confiscation disguised as safety. The other is just saying what the same people really wish they could do. The only thing that should be discussed about red flag laws is that they are a threat to freedom.
    We get the government we deserve.

  8. #52
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,374
    @retired badge 1 I always say 1776 because I fear a great many Americans have never been taught about the Revolutionary War in the public indoctrination camps.

    I agree with everything you're saying...except for this:

    I would not like to see a repeat of the American revolutionary experience. Our population has become deeply divided in many ways, and one can expect that insurrectionary activity would fuel many fires, some of which could easily grow out of control. I would much prefer that any effort to subvert our Constitution be met with widespread peaceful civil disobedience, forcing the powers that be to either back down or publicly acknowledge their evil intent.
    Based on my observations of politicians over the last 7 decades and 2 centuries, that belief that politicians, who seek power and wealth at public expense, will ever relinquish it once they make a desperation move like openly subverting the Constitution, went out a long time ago. There is much too much arrogant ego today. There are some honorable politicians, but they are getting few and far between. JMHO.

    And yes, an open "hot" civil war would be a major catastrophe. I owe it to my kids, grandkids, and great grandkids to do everything in my power to prevent such a thing. Not on our watch.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  9. #53
    VIP Member Array ColoradoDiablo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,025
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreFord View Post
    Once upon a time when I asked an ole, gun shootin', gun game playin', buddy of mine who happened to be an Arkansas State police officer what he'd do when his superiors told him to confiscate my guns what he'd do he told me he'd come take them.

    Haven't had much use for cops ever since. YMMV!
    I hope you haven't had much use for him since as well.
    1MoreFord and AnthonyC like this.
    U.S. Army, Retired (1986 to 2014)
    Life Member, Veterans of Foreign Wars

  10. #54
    Member Array tnsoldier4fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Arlington, TN
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    Cops and military members, by and large, do whatever those above them, and those writing their paychecks tell them to do.
    You are correct in that both military members and cops take orders and execute them. What you aren't factoring in, though, is that it is beat into the heads of both groups that you follow those orders until that order is an illegal order. Examples would be the CO of a military unit that ordered the massacre of a town's residents or a chief telling his officers to just go kick down the door of someone and beat the snot out of them because that person wrote an op-ed piece critical of the chief. Personally, I have to question the legality of the door-to-door searches that the Boston PD and FBI did while looking for the marathon bombers. From what I understand, they never did have search warrants or any other authority to do that.
    The Old Anglo likes this.

  11. #55
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,557
    Quote Originally Posted by tnsoldier4fun View Post
    You are correct in that both military members and cops take orders and execute them. What you aren't factoring in, though, is that it is beat into the heads of both groups that you follow those orders until that order is an illegal order. Examples would be the CO of a military unit that ordered the massacre of a town's residents or a chief telling his officers to just go kick down the door of someone and beat the snot out of them because that person wrote an op-ed piece critical of the chief. Personally, I have to question the legality of the door-to-door searches that the Boston PD and FBI did while looking for the marathon bombers. From what I understand, they never did have search warrants or any other authority to do that.
    The phrase "illegal order" keeps getting mentioned in these discussions. The legality of an order isn't determined by the grunt on the street, particularly when it is accompanied by a no-knock or red-flag confiscation decree.

    Questioning the legality of the Boston PD and FBI doesn't seem to have prevented them from doing as they did. No warrants, no other authority, yet they behaved as they did.
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

  12. #56
    VIP Member Array craze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,113
    I view the growing number of "red flag" laws as little more than a small scale siezeure scheme of lawfully owned civilian firearms. The answer to the question posed by the op is playing out right now, and it's not the one I hopped to see.
    Mike1956, AnthonyC and viney266 like this.
    "Some people go to bed with Lucifer..........then cry, cry, cry when they don't greet the day with God."

  13. #57
    Member Array tnsoldier4fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Arlington, TN
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The phrase "illegal order" keeps getting mentioned in these discussions. The legality of an order isn't determined by the grunt on the street, particularly when it is accompanied by a no-knock or red-flag confiscation decree.
    I disagree.

    Questioning the legality of the Boston PD and FBI doesn't seem to have prevented them from doing as they did. No warrants, no other authority, yet they behaved as they did.
    That is true. I believe it to be the result of several things, including the liberal mind-washing that says the state is allowed to do what it wants. You find that kind of thinking much more in the northeast of the country, along with the left coast. However, classes such as Civics have been thrown out the window and replaced with more PC courses across the country, so that kind of thinking is growing. At this point, however, I think there are still enough military personnel and cops who take their oaths seriously that the enforcement of those kind of laws will not be a nation-wide normality....at least yet.
    ugh762x39 and Merovius like this.

  14. #58
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,556
    Quote Originally Posted by tnsoldier4fun View Post
    You are correct in that both military members and cops take orders and execute them. What you aren't factoring in, though, is that it is beat into the heads of both groups that you follow those orders until that order is an illegal order. Examples would be the CO of a military unit that ordered the massacre of a town's residents or a chief telling his officers to just go kick down the door of someone and beat the snot out of them because that person wrote an op-ed piece critical of the chief. Personally, I have to question the legality of the door-to-door searches that the Boston PD and FBI did while looking for the marathon bombers. From what I understand, they never did have search warrants or any other authority to do that.
    It's called exigent circumstances, and fully legal according to SCOTUS. Decades now.
    OldVet and Mike1956 like this.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    The lion does not even bother to turn his head when he hears the small dog barking.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  15. #59
    Member Array tnsoldier4fun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Arlington, TN
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    It's called exigent circumstances, and fully legal according to SCOTUS. Decades now.
    The definition of "exigent" does get modified from time to time. So do many other words, phrases and concepts. However, I believe that SCOTUS would not likely buy the argument that you can go through a whole neighborhood, kicking in doors as you please without a warrant, even with a terrorist on the loose. That would hark back to the days of when Red-Coats were in charge of Boston. What I do not see happening right now is us finding out how they would rule. If a law-suit were going to be filed about it, it would have already have been filed long ago. Most people in the New England area, especially in a liberal bastion such as Boston, are too eat up with the PC mindset that the state can do pretty much as it pleases to even think about filing a suit like that.
    Havok and Snub44 like this.

  16. #60
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,556
    Quote Originally Posted by tnsoldier4fun View Post
    The definition of "exigent" does get modified from time to time. So do many other words, phrases and concepts. However, I believe that SCOTUS would not likely buy the argument that you can go through a whole neighborhood, kicking in doors as you please without a warrant, even with a terrorist on the loose.

    The search for Dzhokhar in Boston [ Watertown and surrounding communities ] didn't require "kicking in doors".

    That would hark back to the days of when Red-Coats were in charge of Boston. What I do not see happening right now is us finding out how they would rule.

    I'm unaware of any law suits pending or having been brought before the courts in Boston against the Commonwealth nor any of the federal agencies or their agents for violations of the 4th amendment. In the world we live in today, surely if law enforcement agencies were deemed violating residents 4th in their search for Dzhokhar, we'd have witnessed many such suits filed. If a law-suit were going to be filed about it, it would have already have been filed long ago. Most people in the New England area, especially in a liberal bastion such as Boston, are too eat up with the PC mindset that the state can do pretty much as it pleases to even think about filing a suit like that.
    Have you ever lived in New England? Mass.? and specifically Boston to make such statements through experience and living there?

    And just for clarity, it wasn't just Boston PD and FBI that were involved in the search. Mass. State police; Suffolk County Sheriffs officers, Middlesex County sheriffs officers, atf, Watertown PD, Arlington PD and a few other dept's assisting.

    Exigency existed in this case which allowed them to search door to door for the remaining terrorist brother. NO lawsuits have been successfully adjudicated against any of the above regarding their action that day/night in several communities. What's that tell YOU? I know what it tells me, whether you agree with their actions or not.
    Last edited by AzQkr; December 23rd, 2018 at 08:52 AM.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    The lion does not even bother to turn his head when he hears the small dog barking.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •