saying we only have two choices: total freedom or authoritarianism, is a very bi-polar and false way of looking at the world. but i understand it corresponds to your political agenda.
Do you think a Government that mostly only allows Police and various LE agencies and Armed Guards to carry firearms, and maybe some others as a Priveledge, not as a Right, where large sums of money, proof of need is more important, than a person not qualifying for a license because they are considered not to need firearms ? Is that a better system ?
Before I carried a gun, I felt I did not know anything, I voluntarily took a class, it was not Manditory, I felt I needed to, I kept on training ending up as a certified instructor, and training others, LE classes etc..... I knew of many that did as I did. The range I worked at had frequent training classes. I did remedial training for Police Officers that had failed to qualify, something your average civilian shooters never failed. Very basic stuff.
I did all that, I was authorized to test LE personnel and participated in FLET as the range had been updated. Nobody got a pass, it was hard work.
Only in certain states, whereas others regard it as a constitutional right held by the people. And since there is no federal standard on the matter, those that qualify it as a privilege cannot be regarded as the only correct standard of approach.
Funny thing, under LEOSA, the Feds told the States to go pound sand as qualified law enforcement officers both current and Retired are exempt from State laws concerning carry of firearms, handguns, as long as they possess badge and credentials, they are good to carry across State lines and in any territory ending long standing State line issues. Ending the N.J. v N.Y.C. law enforcement officers sometimes found carrying in Jersey.
It is not too bad, the worse was an entire series if S&W revolvers just a year or two before the transition, the trigger pull must have been 16 pounds without exaggeration, some Officers could not qualify and had to work on finger strength exercises and shooting techniques in order to qualify.
a smith and wesson DA revolver can be brought to 10 pounds and that is easier to shoot than a 10 pound trigger on an auto my PPC revolvers were set to shoot DA only
if you don't like people responding to your posts, this isn't a good place to be. and my point has merit. I don't hold cops up as superior to other citizens
Excellent post. Here in the U.S. if a smaller Sheriff's department encounters an extraordinary crime, a Serial Killer or other crime requiring advanced investigative techniques, the Sheriff can call the State Police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and within an hour have the most advanced C.S.I. teams at their disposal. The one failure in the equation is not asking for help or cooperation with the current computerized crime reporting system, it is now standard operating procedure to enter all crime reports into the computer and this information is entered into the Federal crime computer reporting system. One really little gem is most crime information has a 20 year shelf life, in 20 years time the average criminal dies due to the combined deleterious aspects of living a life of crime. While crime archives are important study material, crime methods are often repeated or copied.
Ron, non of those measures affected crime or criminal activity as so few people even own guns or have carry permits in New York City. And how does limiting N.Y.P.D to 15 round magazines in a Glock 17 in any way affect or reduce crime ? N.Y.P.D. has reduced crime due to proactive policing policies and by re-defining certain types of crime affecting total crime numbers by precincts. Statistical analysis in most large Police Departments is not as Robust or honest as one would wish for. Hence why crime studies are only as good as the reporting methods of Police Departments and other law enforcement agencies.
Because there are not as many mass killers in Australia and U.K. if someone is really a Serial Killer, guns will not be an issue, guns are very easy to obtain anywhere if a criminal has enough cash. A petrol bomb is easy to make and will take far more lives than a machine gun and in less time. Smart Criminals in U.K. and Australia do not use firearms as much anymore, technical crimes involving computer fraud to steal funds is quite prevalent and illegal drug sales are carried out in a manner not necessarily resulting in violent actions. The idea is to make money, killing people brings down too much heat, this is a trend in the U.S. in some parts, drugs are sold quietly in order to avoid intense Police Murder Investigations and Police actions.
So, you made up your mind at age 10 and decided to stick to that opinion forever. Tell me, why are you on an internet forum in the first place? It does sound like an honest exchange of ideas is literally the last thing you are interested in.
