The Police And Their View Of Assault Weapons
BY Herschel Smith
11 years, 11 months ago
David Codrea has an interesting post on police and their view of assault weapons.
State Police Supt. Col. Steven G. O’Donnell said Monday they’d like to see a reinstatement of the ban on the sale of assault weapons…O’Donnell said assault weapons have one purpose, to kill people in war. He says civilians should not have assault weapons. [More]
So that’s why you guys have them, Steve? To have your standing army make war on and kill “civilians”?
Yet another indication of this elitism is seen up North.
The head of the NYPD’s largest police union yesterday called for an ”absolute ban” on assault weapons — except for cops and members of the military.
“There is no legitimate reason for an assault weapon with their high capacity magazines to ever be in the hands of a private citizen,” said Pat Lynch, head of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.
[ … ]
“There’s no reason for anybody to have those type of weapons,” he added.
Lynch’s comments echoed those of Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly.
If there is no reason for anyone to have these weapons, and if their only purpose is in making war, then why do the police need them? Ah. Here is a key point. The Supreme Court decision in Tennessee versus Garner clearly decided that law enforcement doesn’t have the right to enforce the law by the power of arms. They can only shoot in self defense. If that’s the case – and it is – then why do the police get to defend themselves with their choice of arms and I don’t?
On December 20, 2012 at 1:59 pm, Burk said:
Not true. I am not sure what planet you are on, actually. Under Tennessee versus Garner, police are prohibited from killing people by shooting them in the back. As they are fleeing, and if they are not threatening anyone else. This is a far cry from “no right to enforce the law by power of arms”.
The supreme court never said that Ruby Ridge was improper or unconstitutional. The fact, as you never tire of pointing out, is that the country and its criminals (and its mentally deranged) are awash with guns. Thus the arm of our civil community that enforces the law and fights crime needs to have the firepower to meet all these threats. We hire them to seek out and eliminate these threats. Before they turn into the general anarchy of everyone-has-guns and uses them.
Look to civilized countries like Australia and Britain. The are more free and more secure for having fewer guns in civilian hands.
On December 20, 2012 at 2:19 pm, Herschel Smith said:
You are reading into it what you want to see. Concerning Tenn. v Garner, you are flat out, completely, totally, comprehensively and without equivocation, dead wrong. Period. End of discussion. You’re wrong concerning what the decision held.
Police all over America are now trained to it, and they are trained that the only circumstances under which they can deploy their weapon is in order to defend their own lives.
Again, you’re just dead wrong.
HOWEVER … it’s a good thing that your true colors show. The more you comment, the more we see your views as fascist, statist, and in some sort of mental need to have jackbooted thugs sporting weapons to control your own environment. You are a fearful man, Burk.
I think this points to a much deeper problem with you, Burk. I think you need to see someone (a professional) about your own daddy or mommy complex.
On December 22, 2012 at 10:53 am, Bill said:
“The head of the NYPD’s largest police union yesterday called for an ”absolute ban” on assault weapons — except for cops and members of the military.”
And that, my friends, is exactly why we” need” them.
Mr. Smith, outstanding commentary and keeping busy abreast. Thank you.
On December 2, 2014 at 9:37 pm, LE Trainer said:
Burk, you ate correct, but with great gear comes great responsibility! Since there are no such things as assault weapons, anyone and everyone ( except convicted violent felons) should have unhindered access to semi auto carbines or rifles. Where the system fails is, 99.997% of law enforcement issued semi auto carbines sch as the M-4, or M-16, are denied appropriate training with the weapons. Consider- most law enforcement departments and agencies allow their folks to train with 45 rounds, 4 times a year. -WORTHLESS!- that’s less than 1/2 an afternoons training for most hobby shooters. So 20 minutes per year with a semi auto carbine should reflect directly back on the uneducated, ignorant, sociopath management in LE. Management should be held directly accountable for screw up LE shootings. Take all their undeserved bonuses, and plow it back into training for LE on the street. I say put it back into street training because the sociopathic management don’t even have the brains to understand the need for education and training! The most highly trained gun toters tend to find other ways to deal with threats and use their wrapons less, which is misconstrued by sociopathic management to mean less trainng is necessary!