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.
We’ve been militarizing the police for decades which doesn’t help. I personally opposed shutting down our local police department because I wanted to keep them close as part of the local community.
Now we pay the county to roll through town once a week which is OK until there’s trouble and they shoot a local because they don’t know the local dynamics.
Keep in mind, I have a Hutaree militia member living less than a mile from me and we never had any problems when our cops were local.
I completely agree with you. The police have always had a tendency to support the guy in charge, whoever he may be.
The exception proves that rule: This guy is somewhat famous. I’m sure he wasn’t totally unique, but he’s the only German police official I know of who stood up to that Nazis.
“If cops start coming around looking for guns, how many people would start going around looking for cops?
Quite a few, I think.”
Bingo, we have a winner.
They did during Katrina.
A certain percentage always will abuse power.
Hence, the need for the new Indiana law.
If fat ass city union cops are given the order to stop a riot, confiscate citizen armaments or go door-to-door and ask for a cup of sugar, they will hop in their squads, drive home and protect their families, just like they did in LA back in 1992. Hell, when a bunch of smelly hippies marched on the Sanford, Florida, police station a few months back, the cops wimpered like whipped dogs and shut the station down.
I prefer not to engage in fantasies about super-hero Rambo cops crushing 100 million armed Americans. They do not exist.
If it involved increasing revenue then YES they would.
Yea, but they sound so confidence inspiring when they say that, don’t they?
“If it involved increasing revenue then YES they would.”
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Who is increasing revenue for what purpose, and yes they would for what? And who is “they?”
Try again, FRiend, and be more clear.
In my area, we don't have very many “fat assed” cops out and about in public.
If the current “rank and file” ever decided to strike or go rogue, they would instantly face ten times their numbers of highly qualified military veterans, who our Sheriff could instantly tap to be volunteer deputies, leading an extensive militia of competent citizens as instant force multipliers.
There are many reasons I have always refused to live in a big city or a blue state...
Survival will become an extremely personal, chaotic and dramatic experience for everyone involved.
Looks like a registration or a subscription is needed to view the comments.
Obama gives the order: seize the weapons of law-abiding Americans in your medium-sized town. Monday morning: 100 cops show up in the squad room for shift change.
The order is executed. Americans resist, 10 Americans die, three police officers die. Next week, 97 officers show up for shift change. The order is executed: 14 Americans die, five police officers die.
Two weeks in and 8 cops are dead, and others are looking around, thinking about getting out. Both sides are organizing, shooting starts earlier each day. After three weeks, the 80 remaining cops quit enforcing the order, unless Barack leads the raid.
The problem with seizing weapons is that you have to seize WEAPONS. Good luck with that, Kenyan.
Congratulations you have totally figured it out. Seizing weapons sounds great around the Whitehouse bar on Wednesday martini night but dying trying to enforce it is a whole nother endeavor.
My fiancee’ says if they start at the top of the block seizing weapons by the time they get to the end of the block there will be a full fledged firefight going on and its going to be real lopsided. We figure that within 48 hours the cops will be refusing to go out on patrol.
Sadly, some would.
Fewer are being taught Peelian principles, and as more LEOs are trained in ignorance of those principles, more of them would be willing to do it.
We need more Peace Officers.