Gun Control

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I thought BRI was a desk jockey. If he's in SWAT or something I could see why he might need an AR-15, but if he's patrolling the streets, he doesn't need this:

 

I hope you're joking when you say I don't need an AR-15 to patrol the streets? If you aren't joking you need to explain to me why I don't need such a thing considering the nature of my job. Yes, I'll be using it for work................yes, I WAS on SWAT, but it doesn't matter if you are a SWAT officer or not. Every patrol car should have an AR-15 in it and I'm not getting into a debate as to why. Do the job and then folks will understand why we need them.

I thought most cars had something along the lines of an AR-15 in them now. I know a big push for them to replace shotguns took place after the Cali bank robbers who had body armor years ago. I would hope a gang banger wouldn't have the option of being better armed than the police.

Most of the police cars out there either have a rifle in them, or the officers are allowed to bring their own rifle to work. There are some departments out there that don't have a rifle in every car and there are some cops out there that have just their pistol for defense. I have my pistol, a Mossberg 590A1 12 gauge pump and a Rock River AR-15 in my vehicle now. I don't have an individual rifle assigned to me so that's why I'm buying my own rifle. That way if we have an active shooter situation anywhere in our city I can respond to it even if I'm off. I'm the active shooter instructor for the department so I will respond to make sure my guys are doing what they need to do and I'm there with them when the proverbial $hit hits the fan. I am not a desk jockey, I'm a patrol Sergeant so I'm right there with my guys and I'll go through hell with them.

 

So people know, we can't always wait for "SWAT" to show up. In an active shooter situation we turn into SWAT. We are there to "stop the killing" and neutralize the threat as quickly as possible. I'm highly trained in the use of my rifle, along with my other weapons systems, and I know that if I get to my rifle or have my rifle, bad guy is screwed. I'm surgical with it and have the utmost confidence in my ability with the rifle. I also support people's rights to keep and bear arms...............I'm not worried about the legal gun owners out there. I'm worried about our broken mental health care system and those individuals that have mental issues getting these weapons. I took an oath, part of that oath is to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America. I believe in the constitution and the 2nd amendment. If given an order by the federal government to seize citizens firearms, I will not follow this order as my oath is unclear at that point. It will contradict itself because I'm supposed to enforce all laws and also protect and defend the constitution of the United States....................how can I do both when the law, if passed, violates the constitution and the 2nd amendment? At that point I'd probably have to hang it up and find a new job, trouble is I have two kids to feed.

 

I do need my rifle on my day-to-day patrol duties as we prepare for the worst and hope for the best. If I need to deploy out of my vehicle and I even think there is a small chance I'll get in a gun fight, I sling my rifle and go with it. My pistol is only a weapon to help me fight to get to my rifle and I'll use it in that manner unless there is no possible way for me to get to my rifle. I use my rifle on felony stops as I don't know what the criminal in front of me has in his vehicle as far as weapons go and if he pops out with an AK-47 I'm going to have something comparable and even the playing field. There is no time to say, "timeout, I need to go to the office to get my rifle, can you wait for just a second?" I would caution in folks in saying that law enforcement doesn't need this or need that.................I understand what you're saying, but it's dangerous thinking.

[knapplc]

OK, that's a pretty good explanation BRI. You caught me not thinking that one through. Would you think I need one of those, though? Joe Citizen doesn't, right?

[carlfense]

Really do not think it is radicalization. I think it is that some companies are now trying to send a message that they will not do business with states that infringe on the right to bear arms. I actually admire them for sacrificing the all mighty dollar in an attempt to make a statement.

Sacrificing the all mighty dollar? Seems like quite a sound business strategy on my part. I'm sure you've seen the backlash against firearm manufacturers/retailers for any sort of squishy behavior. Cabela's sponsorship of a gun show comes to mind . . . as does Smith and Wesson from about a decade ago . . . Jim Zumbo at Outdoor Life . . . the gun nuts (distinguished from all gun owners) do not tolerate different opinions.

 

Just because a business entity takes a "conservative" approach does not mean it is any more "radical" than the banks or other companies.

Conservative? How is withdrawing from existing markets conservative?

 

I also think that it is quickly becoming such a polarizing issue that people won't have a choice but to choose sides. Pro-gun or anti-gun. No middle ground. One "extreme" or the other.

For the sake of my right to own guns I hope that you are wrong. The majority of the country does not own guns.

 

What you're describing is intellectually lazy.

[carlfense]

I just hope my AR-15 gets here in June before all these changes happen. Don't think it'll be that soon, but they'll get something taken away on some level. I can't get my hands on any .223 right now...............I tried to order some for our department the other day, it'll be a year before we get it, if we're lucky. Thankfully we have some in reserve just for this reason.

Regarding the bold: I doubt it. The issue is already fading away. At this point I'd be surprised at even minor changes to background checks and there is virtually no chance that any AWB is passed. The votes just aren't there and the public is already losing interest again.

[knapplc]

I don't think the issue is fading away. I think people are really, really tired of wanton gun violence, and I think that if the politicians in Washington don't get their sh#t straight pretty soon, they're going to be finding themselves out of jobs.

 

Sandy Hook was a last straw for people. I'll vote anti-gun from now on based on that incident. I think we should have guns, but I think we're finding that we're not responsible enough to have guns. I'm 100% fine with guns going away. We don't need them, no matter how cool they are.

[carlfense]

I don't think the issue is fading away. I think people are really, really tired of wanton gun violence, and I think that if the politicians in Washington don't get their sh#t straight pretty soon, they're going to be finding themselves out of jobs.

We'll see. I stand by my predictions.

 

Sandy Hook was a last straw for people. I'll vote anti-gun from now on based on that incident. I think we should have guns, but I think we're finding that we're not responsible enough to have guns. I'm 100% fine with guns going away. We don't need them, no matter how cool they are.

I strongly disagree but I can understand how these incidents can sway opinions.

 

(Also, saying we shouldn't be able to have any guns is no more extreme than saying that the government shouldn't be allowed to regulate guns . . . but you sure don't see many people saying the former . . .)

[BIGREDIOWAN]

OK, that's a pretty good explanation BRI. You caught me not thinking that one through. Would you think I need one of those, though? Joe Citizen doesn't, right?

If Joe Citizen goes through the process to get said weapon and the process says they're good to go I would contradict myself if I said I wasn't okay with it, so I'm fine with it. Again, I'm not worried about the average law abiding citizen, I'm worried about the nut cases and bad guys out there that get the weapons in other ways. If you look at all the active shooter situations that have occured since the 1960's most, if not all, those individuals had mental health issues. We've had something like 280 some active shooter situations where one or more persons died since the 1960's. The second closest country.................Canada with either 6 or 8! I guarantee you that if you look at their mental health care system, their's is much better than ours. That's just a guess on my part and I'm looking further into it..........I'll give you that they very well might have tighter gun laws as well, but tighter gun laws isn't the answer to this problem by itself and that seems to be where the gun limiting advocates seem to be doing things wrong.

[The Dude]

I don't think the issue is fading away. I think people are really, really tired of wanton gun violence, and I think that if the politicians in Washington don't get their sh#t straight pretty soon, they're going to be finding themselves out of jobs.

 

Sandy Hook was a last straw for people. I'll vote anti-gun from now on based on that incident. I think we should have guns, but I think we're finding that we're not responsible enough to have guns. I'm 100% fine with guns going away. We don't need them, no matter how cool they are.

Worked out for Brazil. I'm all in.

[knapplc]

The "mental health care" thing is a boondoggle. People lose their minds in every country, top-notch mental health care or not. The key factor is availability of guns. There are simply more guns in American than anywhere else, and it's not even close.

 

 

This is from Wikipedia and I believe these are 2007 numbers, but it's either the same today or America has pulled even further out in front.

 

Availability plays a MUCH greater role in gun deaths than mental health. Nutjobs are everywhere. Guns aren't.

[knapplc]

Worked out for Brazil. I'm all in.

 

Worked out for England. Worked out for Australia.

[Junior]

I don't think the issue is fading away. I think people are really, really tired of wanton gun violence, and I think that if the politicians in Washington don't get their sh#t straight pretty soon, they're going to be finding themselves out of jobs.

 

Sandy Hook was a last straw for people. I'll vote anti-gun from now on based on that incident. I think we should have guns, but I think we're finding that we're not responsible enough to have guns. I'm 100% fine with guns going away. We don't need them, no matter how cool they are.

 

I agree. The part that always makes me laugh is the people that think they are going to fight off "government tyranny" and fighter jets with their super cool looking AR15s. I think people forget that Red Dawn was just a movie.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

The "mental health care" thing is a boondoggle. People lose their minds in every country, top-notch mental health care or not. The key factor is availability of guns. There are simply more guns in American than anywhere else, and it's not even close.

 

 

This is from Wikipedia and I believe these are 2007 numbers, but it's either the same today or America has pulled even further out in front.

 

Availability plays a MUCH greater role in gun deaths than mental health. Nutjobs are everywhere. Guns aren't.

It doesn't matter if it's a gun, or a knife, or a bat..................we shouldn't have to deal with nutbags in our society. I'll give you an example:

 

I had to deal with a lady that was completely bat $hit crazy, had no idea as they had just moved into the city. So I get called there one day on a "domestic disturbance" I show up there and try to deal with the problem. Eventually this lady decided to assault me, was taking to the ground fairly quickly by me, handcuffed, taken to the hospital and then jail. During my discussions with her it became painfully obvious she was completely gone, crazy, etc. There was zero reason a person like that should be in society, whether her meds bring her closer to center or not doesn't matter, she refuses to take them. We get called there several times over the next few months and finally ask for the state to intervene and get her some help. She's ordered to be held for mental health evaluation in one of the local hospitals. She's there for only 30 days....................

 

I get called back there a few months later and she's back, I ask why? Husband says that it's the hospitals policy to send these mental subjects back home to "see how they do." That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, she's just as crazy before and nevermind there is a court order in place that "forces" her to take her meds. I don't see anyone there from the courts or state "forcing" her to take those meds. I leave as this isn't a police matter and I'm not getting assaulted again.

 

There is zero reason law enforcement should be dealing with these nut cases. We aren't mental health professionals and we shouldn't have to be. Folks like this should be locked up in a mental health facility and that would help A LOT with the issues that society faces with crazy people on a daily basis. You're trying to use the access to guns issue as the core issue when it isn't, it comes down to mental health..............period. I'm not saying it may not be an issue, it might be and I'm all for tighten background checks up and things like that, but I'm not for taking guns away from people.

[T_O_Bull]

One of the problems in this country is the high price of health care. You can buy meds outside the country for 10% of what you pay here, and from reputable businesses that sell the exact same thing you can buy here from Walgreens,Rite Aid, ect., ect. Why are we being gouged in such an egregeous manner?

T_O_B

[carlfense]

One of the problems in this country is the high price of health care. You can buy meds outside the country for 10% of what you pay here, and from reputable businesses that sell the exact same thing you can buy here from Walgreens,Rite Aid, ect., ect. Why are we being gouged in such an egregeous manner?

T_O_B

[knapplc]

The "mental health care" thing is a boondoggle. People lose their minds in every country, top-notch mental health care or not. The key factor is availability of guns. There are simply more guns in American than anywhere else, and it's not even close.

 

 

This is from Wikipedia and I believe these are 2007 numbers, but it's either the same today or America has pulled even further out in front.

 

Availability plays a MUCH greater role in gun deaths than mental health. Nutjobs are everywhere. Guns aren't.

It doesn't matter if it's a gun, or a knife, or a bat..................we shouldn't have to deal with nutbags in our society. I'll give you an example:

 

I had to deal with a lady that was completely bat $hit crazy, had no idea as they had just moved into the city. So I get called there one day on a "domestic disturbance" I show up there and try to deal with the problem. Eventually this lady decided to assault me, was taking to the ground fairly quickly by me, handcuffed, taken to the hospital and then jail. During my discussions with her it became painfully obvious she was completely gone, crazy, etc. There was zero reason a person like that should be in society, whether her meds bring her closer to center or not doesn't matter, she refuses to take them. We get called there several times over the next few months and finally ask for the state to intervene and get her some help. She's ordered to be held for mental health evaluation in one of the local hospitals. She's there for only 30 days....................

 

I get called back there a few months later and she's back, I ask why? Husband says that it's the hospitals policy to send these mental subjects back home to "see how they do." That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, she's just as crazy before and nevermind there is a court order in place that "forces" her to take her meds. I don't see anyone there from the courts or state "forcing" her to take those meds. I leave as this isn't a police matter and I'm not getting assaulted again.

 

There is zero reason law enforcement should be dealing with these nut cases. We aren't mental health professionals and we shouldn't have to be. Folks like this should be locked up in a mental health facility and that would help A LOT with the issues that society faces with crazy people on a daily basis. You're trying to use the access to guns issue as the core issue when it isn't, it comes down to mental health..............period. I'm not saying it may not be an issue, it might be and I'm all for tighten background checks up and things like that, but I'm not for taking guns away from people.

 

There are nutbags in every society. America doesn't have a monopoly on people who need mental health care. What we have is too many guns. The numbers are quite clear on that.