I caught that too. No one in his department should be allowed to touch a firearm.
.
.
.
.
Posted on 02/06/2012 6:01:46 AM PST by marktwain
The last general answer seems to be a popular subject, especially with the new legislative session: laws concerning open carry and carrying concealed weapons. First off, when dealing with police, just notify us of the fact that you have a firearm. I cannot tell you how an individual officer will react, but that's what you do. Let me first say that I believe in gun ownership. I believe in defending yourself if in a life-threatening situation or defending the life of someone else.
I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose. Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.
Next is the open carry. I understand the 2nd Amendment and how states and people interpret it differently. I however see no benefit, unless you're camping, of having a firearm exposed in public. There are a lot of officers in plainclothes, whether undercover or detectives, and the whole point is to not draw attention to themselves, thus giving the element of surprise. That's especially true since they do not wear vests or have the other protective advantages of a uniformed officer.
I have been to restaurants and have seen open carry groups hanging out, and I was amazed at men and women openly carrying their guns in thigh rigs, holding their children, with no sense of their surroundings or weapon retention.
(Excerpt) Read more at ksl.com ...
>but he thought an AR15 was an assault rifle.
Well, doesn’t the AR stand for Assault Rifle? (Regardless of whatever the pop-culture or legal definition may be, the name itself is different; somewhat like the 1911 being named an “automatic pistol” which references the loading-action, not the firing-action.)
It’s Bill of {God-given} Rights, not Wants or Needs.
Do we really want the government telling a free-citizenry what they Need to defend themselves?
I’m picking up a strong hint of a conflict of interest there, does anyone else get that impression?
“Well, doesn’t the AR stand for Assault Rifle?”
Armalite Rifle, I believe. Armalite developed Eugene Stoner’s design.
I caught that too. No one in his department should be allowed to touch a firearm.
.
.
.
.
I gave him a handful of these:
CC
Is the rotary cooling device similar to a rotational oscillating unit? And when the feces makes high velocity contact with it are the results the same?
Or maybe 7mm-08 , 300 win mag ,.308.7mm magnum,350 whelan etc, etc ,etc.
“Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what?”
From you, moron, from you.
I do not believe that the government, in the form of the military and police, should be in sole possession of the means of deadly force.
We lost a Police Sergeant killed last year in Chattanooga TN. Perp wore body armor
CC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.