Defensive Carry banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have been watching the news today (FOX) the report is that, the two bombing suspects killed the MIT officer, just for his gun.
If this is true, what are the liberals thinking about disarming Americans.
This WILL make LE officers even more of a target.

I am not LE and don't aspire to be (too old). but this really stinks that this officer was just sitting in the cruiser at night, alone with his thoughts, killed because of his gun.

All of the new england people, If armed would have put a hole in these guy's head, everyone of these people were on alert already.
Now they are unprotected, legally

This was not funny, and LE guy's watch your six, you never know whats lurking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Being armed and capable of withstanding attack ... remaining aware and alert ... avoiding being caught solo ... avoiding situations that could easily (predictably) be threatening (ie, stupid places/times/people). All good suggestions.

Am assuming the cop shot wasn't with a partner, was caught unawares in the car, but that's an assumption. It's hard with cops, when they're so visible and their job is to be be out there.

But it gets just as hard with citizens of any kind, when they're forcibly disarmed by those they hire, made criminals simply because they also want the ability to make it home that night to their families.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
420 Posts
I have been watching the news today (FOX) the report is that, the two bombing suspects killed the MIT officer, just for his gun.
If this is true, what are the liberals thinking about disarming Americans.
This WILL make LE officers even more of a target.
What will make them more of a target? Criminals are already aware that they can get guns by killing cops.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
What will make them more of a target? Criminals are already aware that they can get guns by killing cops.
As a criminal which would you rather target, an unoccupied home that might have guns or an armed and probably armored (bulletproof vest) officer? If all the citizens are disarmed then the BG's will be forced to take the greater risk of going after LEO's to replenish their supply of illegal guns. At least that's what I take from the OP's comment.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,611 Posts
Heard on that Fox report that even though they killed the cop for his weapon, they couldn't get it because "his holster was locked" ???? What is that all about?
He most likely had a level 3 retention holster. If you dont remove the weapon in a certain way, you cant remove it, Method depends on model. Mant use a push down / forwd, then draw method. it is actually very fast, and aids an officer in maintaining weapon retention during a physical altercation as you cannot just draw the gun from any angle. Or he may have hgad a thumbreak and the suspects did not know it...several possibilities.

..... If this is true, it saddens me, but unfortunately it is not the first time an officer has been killed for his weapon and prob wont be the last.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,268 Posts
I have been watching the news today (FOX) the report is that, the two bombing suspects killed the MIT officer, just for his gun.
If this is true, what are the liberals thinking about disarming Americans.
This WILL make LE officers even more of a target.

I am not LE and don't aspire to be (too old). but this really stinks that this officer was just sitting in the cruiser at night, alone with his thoughts, killed because of his gun.

All of the new england people, If armed would have put a hole in these guy's head, everyone of these people were on alert already.
Now they are unprotected, legally

This was not funny, and LE guy's watch your six, you never know whats lurking.
Unfortunately most people run and hide as we often read about during a shooting or other danger. Most people are afraid of dying and being hurt. They do not want guns. They want cameras on their block so that the police can monitor what is going on. They want someone else to risk their life to protect them. They will give up their rights for this protection. They will allow themselves to be searched when boarding a plane. They will leave their homes when ordered to do so at gunpoint as just happened in Boston and be treated as a suspect until their homes are searched without a warrant or probable cause. It was amazing to watch a section of Boston so easily accept marshal law to catch one person with a pressure cooker bomb and a handgun or two. Many think the end justifies the means but fail to realize that by giving up their rights so easily and placing so much value on life, as precious as it is, that they are showing those in authority how far they can go and how easily our laws can be put aside in the name of security. We have to ask ourselves at what price, security?

What I saw only supported my opinion that we are moving to a society who is more and more willing to give up privacy and freedom in return for a sense of security. I do not see a future where all are armed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
He most likely had a level 3 retention holster. If you dont remove the weapon in a certain way, you cant remove it, Method depends on model. Mant use a push down / forwd, then draw method. it is actually very fast, and aids an officer in maintaining weapon retention during a physical altercation as you cannot just draw the gun from any angle. Or he may have hgad a thumbreak and the suspects did not know it...several possibilities.

..... If this is true, it saddens me, but unfortunately it is not the first time an officer has been killed for his weapon and prob wont be the last.
Thanks for the info TAURAHE. I just wish he could have used it on them. Salute to a fallen one.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top