Skip to comments.Will You Do It?
Posted on 06/12/2012 4:50:56 PM PDT by aimhigh
Ive known anti-gun cops, who seriously said things like, They have no right to own a gun, its my job to protect them. If they have guns, its just a danger to me! . .
So, Ill be blunt and ask you: Would you personally, go out and confiscate firearms from law abiding citizens even if it goes against your personal opinion regarding the constitutional rights of citizens and do it on the order of an administrative leader of your agency?
(Excerpt) Read more at americancopmagazine.com ...
Some certainly would, I have no doubt.
8 PM EDT only 1 comment.
You’ll love this thread. Apparently concealed weapons are OK for some FReepers but exposed weapons not so much.
I used to read an awful lot of military history and my impression was that the police generally go along with whoever is in charge, I either didn’t see, or didn’t notice the new conquerors having to replace the police forces, and we know that in America the police are not known for rebelling against unjust laws or policies during their history, although they do strongly enforce union demands of their own.
My impression is that for the most part, the police will never be a wall of defense for the citizenry, they just aren’t wired that way.
The question to ask them would be if they would understand Americans shooting at them to prevent their weapons from being seized.
I know they are instructed about the 4th and 5th Amends (Search and Seizure and the right against self-incrimination) but sometimes I wonder about the others.
I know they don't learn about the Constitution in school, but one would think that if one is intelligent enough to pass the tests and make it thru LEA schools, they would at least be able to inform themselves about what they will encounter on the streets.
Or could it be they are simply following orders of their superiors?
Or it might be that some are (or become) so self-centered that they actually believe they are the "only" ones who can actually protect we the people thus we don't need to worry; ergo, we don't need weapons of our own?
Never mind the numerous court cases which have ruled that Police have no duty to protect and defend its citizens even if they are called in the middle of a crime being committed and fail to respond.
Whatever it is, those who abuse their authority should beware that some are getting very frustrated over their over-reaching and violations of our rights and if the sheeple ever decide to push back, it could get ugly.
Whether they will obey orders or not is one thing but personal feelings on the issue is another.
Quite a few, I think.
Doesn’t really matter one way or the other. Any police officer who refuses, will quickly find himself unemployed, and as many new “recruits” as needed, will be deputized from the ranks of our urban youth. They will be more than happy to make sure that only the thugs have guns.
“The question to ask them would be if they would understand Americans shooting at them to prevent their weapons from being seized.”
How about “If your pension is threatened by taxpayers, such as what happened in San Diego and San Jose, would you consider taking illegal money to make up for the shortfall?”
Or, “is there anything you wouldn’t do to a citizen if it benefited you or your family if your compensation were impacted by a financial collapse”
Or, just for humors sake, “Have you ever Testi-Lied in a court of law”?
It is not a matter of personal feelings, it is a matter of what constitutes a lawful order.
“My impression is that for the most part, the police will never be a wall of defense for the citizenry, they just arent wired that way.”
The “to serve and protect” line is basically not true; they exist to uphold the law, and people may indirectly benefit or simply be collateral damage during that process.
that... is a LIE!!!
cops have absolutely NO duty to protect me or anybody else and that has been proven and upheld by the court time and time again
the ONLY one that can protect You... is YOU!!!
They already violate written law on open carry, harassing those individuals.
Additionally, they regularly arrest other individuals when they fall afoul of a deliberately trickily written gun law.
My point was that generally speaking, it is universal to all nations that cops feelings don’t amount to much, they not only obey orders, they mostly obey whoever is in charge, I just don’t think that the Soviets or the Germans would have had to do much to change the police in America, the police would mostly just read the new orders and carry on.
There has to be some small/tiny percentage of police who would refuse, resign, or something, but I don’t recall hearing that it is ever a problem for occupation forces and conquerors, or corrupt governments to keep the police dealing with the citizens in whatever manner is required by the bosses.
What is lawful about those "Click It Or Ticket" checkpoints?
You might like this one so, PING!
The public sector will take care of itself, with a vengeance upon the public it serves, if that is what it takes.
If we cut their pay, thin their ranks, lighten their pensions, there WILL be hell to pay.