HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » D.C. doesn't want anyone ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:03 PM

 

D.C. doesn't want anyone to defend themselves.

In a recent thread, I round-filed someone who claimed to be here for discussion... but refused to acknowledge direct evidence that refuted some of their assertions:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=80413


Well, D.C. continues to play shenanigans. It is quite clear that they are violating the Constitution, and they even admit to it, in public. Even their top Law Enforcement officials. I do hope Alan Gura is paying attention, and making records of this stuff. They couldn't make his job any easier....

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/sep/25/miller-dcs-mace-control/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/sep/27/miller-dcs-mace-control-part-2/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/oct/3/miller-dc-mace-control-part-3/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/oct/25/miller-dc-mace-control-part-4/

Seriously, what is the point in registering "self-defense sprays"? Or limiting the commercial chemicals allowed? The ONLY point can be to discourage The People from claiming their Constitutional Rights. The Gestapo, it seems, have been closely studied, approved of and emulated by "Chief" Lanier. And the D.C. council and Mayor approve.

Sickening.

79 replies, 6668 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 79 replies Author Time Post
Reply D.C. doesn't want anyone to defend themselves. (Original post)
PavePusher Oct 2012 OP
dballance Oct 2012 #1
PavePusher Oct 2012 #24
sarisataka Oct 2012 #30
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2012 #2
George Katona Oct 2012 #3
rrneck Oct 2012 #4
George Katona Oct 2012 #9
rrneck Oct 2012 #10
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2012 #11
rrneck Oct 2012 #12
discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2012 #18
ileus Oct 2012 #13
rrneck Oct 2012 #14
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #55
4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #78
ileus Oct 2012 #6
Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2012 #7
oneshooter Oct 2012 #8
George Katona Oct 2012 #15
Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2012 #16
George Katona Oct 2012 #20
Tuesday Afternoon Oct 2012 #21
George Katona Oct 2012 #32
PavePusher Oct 2012 #62
George Katona Oct 2012 #22
PavePusher Oct 2012 #31
George Katona Oct 2012 #34
rDigital Oct 2012 #47
PavePusher Oct 2012 #61
gejohnston Oct 2012 #17
George Katona Oct 2012 #27
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #33
George Katona Oct 2012 #35
gejohnston Oct 2012 #36
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #38
PavePusher Oct 2012 #63
gejohnston Oct 2012 #37
George Katona Oct 2012 #41
gejohnston Oct 2012 #46
former-republican Oct 2012 #23
Clames Oct 2012 #39
former-republican Oct 2012 #40
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #51
former-republican Oct 2012 #52
PavePusher Oct 2012 #28
Marengo Oct 2012 #53
ProgressiveProfessor Oct 2012 #57
oneshooter Oct 2012 #58
oneshooter Oct 2012 #70
glacierbay Oct 2012 #59
dumbledork Oct 2012 #60
YllwFvr Nov 2012 #74
George Katona Oct 2012 #44
rDigital Oct 2012 #48
oneshooter Oct 2012 #64
glacierbay Oct 2012 #65
oneshooter Oct 2012 #69
glacierbay Oct 2012 #71
oneshooter Oct 2012 #72
glacierbay Oct 2012 #73
rDigital Oct 2012 #66
holdencaufield Oct 2012 #19
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #25
rDigital Oct 2012 #45
holdencaufield Oct 2012 #50
George Katona Oct 2012 #43
holdencaufield Oct 2012 #49
PavePusher Oct 2012 #26
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #29
Jenoch Oct 2012 #42
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #54
EX500rider Oct 2012 #67
glacierbay Oct 2012 #68
ileus Oct 2012 #5
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #56
freedomboogie Nov 2012 #75
oneshooter Nov 2012 #76
PavePusher Nov 2012 #77
4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #79

Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:12 PM

1. Don't trust everything you read in the Washington Times

It is a Moonie RW rag.

Those are probably all BS articles intended to elicit the visceral response you had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:26 AM

24. Please feel free to cite to evidence refuting the linked articles.

 

I'll truely love them to be wrong.... but they don't currently seem to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:33 AM

30. It took all of 10 minutes

On the DC police website http://mpdc.dc.gov/ to verify the points in the article.

Lots of good information on how to be a victim... You can find that in the "Safety and Prevention" tab

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:14 PM

2. I think the government wants to...

...accept the responsibility to protect us all. Some politicians think the government trained are just better at it.
That's why I suggested the idea that a Protective Squadron be formed, maybe under Homeland Security. Guards from the Protective Squadron could stationed in public places to see that nothing goes wrong...

Protective Squadron is a comforting name with such a history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protective_Squadron

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:15 PM

3. The only solution is to

 

repeal the 2nd Amendment. It is seriously outdated to the time of flintlock weapons. Let people have all the flintlocks they want but modern weapons should be limited to the military, police agencies and specially licensed bodyguards for high profile people like celebrities and politicians. For everyone else, make them turn all modern weapons in for destruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:37 PM

4. So

do you have solution for defense against assault by someone wielding a knife, club, fists or feet that works better than a gun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #4)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:20 PM

9. Yeah,

 

If you are so worried at being assaulted, get a big dog like a Rottweiler. If you live in a high crime area like Chicago, just move to a safer place. You can move back when all guns are destroyed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #9)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:31 PM

10. A lot of people

can't own a large aggressive dog because they can't physically control it, can't afford it, or live where a dog is impractical or not allowed.

As for moving, looks like you're a #3.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117277343

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:37 PM

11. I kind of like #3s

As long as they "just move" to some fascist place compatible with their opinions rather than changing our place to fit their needs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:41 PM

12. Yep. Love it or leave it.

If someone wants to stick around they need to deal with the reality that justice is seldom secured without a fight. And never without the prospect of one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #12)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:25 PM

18. I'm not real big on love or leave it...

...but there's folks that need to own up to knowing what protection is all about.
It's a peaceful life when there's someone to look after that for you.
Sooner or later we need to do for ourselves without mommy and daddy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:46 PM

13. Not to mention they bark, poop, chew, and tear shit up.

I want a pet, not a beast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #13)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:49 PM

14. It makes you wonder

if some people actually ever venture outside of that gated community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #9)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:03 PM

55. They shoot dogs, don't they? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 02:24 PM

78. Rottweilers are often used by the military

 

you sure you want people packing assault style dogs? Particularly ones with black coats.

And who knows what sort of futuristic weaponized canines genetic engineering may one day produce.

Some people even have selected for dogs so small they can be easily concealed in a purse or large coat. What are your thoughts on concealed canines? Should it require a license? Should any yahoo off the streets be able to stockpile as many military style dogs as he wishes? How many dogs do you really need? Perhaps we should let people have as many as they like but tax the hell out of dog food.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:01 PM

6. Finally a voice of reason.

However.com I would allow single shot 410 shotguns for home defense and hunting purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:03 PM

7. thank god! I am a celebrity! Pretty sure everyone else is a specially licensed bodyguard

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:05 PM

8. And this is something that you personally are working on?

Please let us know how it goes for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #8)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:49 PM

15. It is working for me fine.

 

I fall in the specially licensed category. I am a retired Chicago PD detective, retired in 2005 after 30 yrs of service and moved to Florida. I still have a badge that identifies me as a retired police officer that allows me to own and carry a firearm in any state, but I have been trained and have practical skills and knowledge far above the average cowboy joe who wants to have a gun. When I retired, I was allowed to keep my S&W model 36 snubby 38 revolver and I still carry it to this day. I think I was one of the last detectives that carried a revolver when I retired, now they all carry automatics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:04 PM

16. "allowed" to keep

ha. good one, dude.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #16)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:32 PM

20. Don't know what the

 

ha good one means. I was issued a pistol, that I did not buy, and was allowed to to keep it as a retired police officer (detective). The CPD still lists the pistol as an issued item to me, they technically still own it. And don't call me dude. It's about my bed time, so good night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #20)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:35 PM

21. you should give it back to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #21)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:41 AM

32. No, I will not.

 

I earned it. What is your viewpoint on private ownership of modern firearms?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #32)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:16 PM

62. For better or worse, we don't have to "earn" our Constitutional Rights in the U.S.

 

The entire point of the Bill of Rights is that those are things the government may not interfere with unless they can prove an immediate and far-reaching danger. And that bar is supposed to be set very high.

You seem to be promoting the idea of an elite, with more Rights than the plebes.

Hopefully, you are simply not being clear in your communication?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #16)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:42 PM

22. Also,

 

my pistol was issued to me as a detective in the '80s. In the '90s, CPD started to require police officers to buy their own guns using a BATF form 4473 (they were reimbursed for the cost) so that the gun was registered in their name and not CPD. The reasons for this is long and complex and boil down to liability and the city's risk management department. For more info, google "Second City Cop", my friends blog and go to the archives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #22)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:34 AM

31. The 4473 is not a registration form. It has no information about the gun being purchased...

 

other than type (rifle, shotgun, handgun).

I think you are confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #31)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:45 AM

34. Sorry to say it does...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #34)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 02:27 AM

47. The 4473 stays on file in the FFL's bound book. The identifiying info for the firearm is not

 

transmitted to the BATFE, other than firearm type. The serial number, make and model info is on the form, but does not go the the BATFE under normal circumstances......or the FFL closes up shop and turns in their bound book to the BATFE.

NICS is also not allowed to keep a federal registration of civilians firearms. They have to destroy background check records after a short period of time as well.

There is no federal firearms registration other than NFA items.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #34)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 05:58 PM

61. Whoops, you are correct. Looks like I'm the one confused.

 

Mea Culpa, and you have my apology.

In retrospect, this seems to ba a direct violation of FOPA, 18 U.S.C. 926 (2) (a)): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act#Registry_prohibition



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:20 PM

17. but I have been trained and have practical skills and knowledge far above the average cowboy joe who

funny you should mention that,
it seems that NYPD cops have a problem with trigger discipline, which is why they have modified pistols with 12 pound trigger pulls
then there is this guy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117281112

Perhaps you can teach your fellow big city officers to be at least as responsible and safe with firearms as the average 12 year old in rural Wyoming or Alberta.

I have been shooting handguns and rifles off and on since I was eight years old, what's your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #17)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:31 AM

27. gejohnston it is not my

 

responsibility to teach other police agencies on what service pistols to use. I was just a simple plain clothes detective hunting down bad guys. I was very comfortable and felt very confident with my model 36 .38 cal, I did have to use a few times in my career and it worked in my favor. My pistol does have a heavy 9 lb pull in double action, but only 3 lb in single action (hammer cocked back). But it was only a 2" barrell so accuracy is really not the best at ranges past 10 yards either way. I was always able to empty 5 rounds within 2 seconds into the 5x ring man target at 10 yards. I used to practice with it more than the yearly required pistol qualification.

As far as the NYPD and their risk management required 12 lb trigger pulls is due to lack of training and subsequent lawsuits. Too many cops nowadays are not properly trained with pistol discipline, their main weapon, and put their bugger hook on the bang switch too quickly. When you draw, you don't need to put that bugger hook on the bang switch unless the bad guy is pointing a gun at you. Lack of good training has lead to the NYPD 12 lb trigger pulls in my opinion. I was a training officer for a few years and I would always watch new guys/gals when doing a felony stop, guns drawn. I always had to tell them, take your finger off the trigger and put it on the slide like you were trained. They would respond, "thats not we were trained"! Not to be sexist, but gals always put their bugger hook on the bang switch after drawing without an immediate threat. While a training officer, I had two AD's by my trainies. Both women. One time was a felony stop, all code 4 handcuffed and she accidentally shoots a round into the ground about 3 foot away from an arrested suspect on the ground. The second one was when we were in the locker room gearing up and she fired off a round while holstering.

My point still is to remove all guns from the populace that don't need them. I admit that it looks like NYPD needs more training and 4 or 5 lb triggers to get better accuracy, that still doesn't change the need for disarmament!

Wow, it is really past my bed time. Although, I do enjoy discussing these important issues facing our society!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #27)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:42 AM

33. "My point still is to remove all guns from the populace that don't need them." Wow, you really...

...were a Chicago cop!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #33)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:49 AM

35. Yes I was,

 

and my point cannot be ignored as the Chicago murder rate and gun violence is sky rotting in the past few years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #35)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:53 AM

36. Yet El Paso has the lowest murder rate in North America

Even lower than Toronto's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #35)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:01 AM

38. While similarly-sized Houston (in gun-friendly Texas) has about 1/3 the murder rate.

Admit it, Chicago has a crime problem, not a gun problem.

Restricting legal gun ownership as a response to that is like restricting the sober in order to fight drunk driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #35)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:18 PM

63. All done by the peaceful, lawful, respectably disarmed non-criminal Citizens, amirite? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #27)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:59 AM

37. you made my point.

When you draw, you don't need to put that bugger hook on the bang switch unless the bad guy is pointing a gun at you
Like I said, the average 12 year old in Alberta or Wyoming knows better. The only difference is that the Canadian kid can buy his own ammo at the store.

My point still is to remove all guns from the populace that don't need them.
Since you are retired and living in Florida, which is much safer than Chicago, that should include you. Since I retired from the military, I should be able to keep my select fire rifle too. You have less need for one than anyone living in, say, Granger, Wyoming, where 911 response is about 90 minutes. If this is a liberal democracy, there is no, and there should never be some functionary of the state or self appointed crusader telling anyone what they "need".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #37)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:18 AM

41. you bring up a good point.

 

My wife is Swiss and most of her family have been required to be in the military (males only and you can opt out by paying a higher tax rate). They keep full auto weapons at their house. I have a bunch of cousins that will be keeping SIG 550 full autos at their house.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #41)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 02:19 AM

46. of course that doesn't count whatever personal weapons they may have.

Interesting thing about your female cops not keeping the finger off the trigger. My mom and older brothers taught me all of that wen I was in grade school. I learned it with not only my single shot rifle, but also a revolver my brother bought in Germany. Of course, the Army and Air Force re enforced that, but still.
Funny thing, although gun ownership is pretty high where I grew up, we really didn't keep our guns loaded around the house. Didn't lock our doors either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:59 PM

23. lol

 

"but I have been trained and have practical skills and knowledge far above the average cowboy joe "


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #23)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:09 AM

39. Hilarious isn't it?

 

There are millions of "average joes" like myself with military training that positively craps on the training the vast majority of LEO's receive. Many serious CCW holders go to the range more often than the average cop who only goes to meet his/her yearly minimum requirement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #39)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:17 AM

40. Sad thing is he sounds like he really believes it.

 

I have rifles and handguns in my safe I've had to replace barrels in after being shot out.
I wonder how many barrel replacements he's had to do on all his firearms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #23)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 07:43 AM

51. You might want to write that down

It's sounds like a good choice for your next user name - "average cowboy joe"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #51)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:22 AM

52. Sounds like SecularMotion finally found a friend on this forum

 











Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:31 AM

28. Ah, one of the elites, here to teach us our station in life.

 

We bow to your munificence, good sirah!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 11:29 AM

53. Why should you fall into a specially licensed category?

As you are retired, you are not longer engaged in active law enforcement and no longer receiving regular firearms training. Are you currently providing protection for a celebrity or politician? If not, I see not logical reason why you should feel justified to include yourself into a special catagory superior to the avergage citizen.

You are just another citizen now, nothing special about you. Whatever status permitted you access to a "modern" arm is now in the past. Or, is it that you afraid to surrender your modern weapon and revert to a firelock?

At this point in your life, your modern firearm serves little pratical purpose other than to defend yourself, something you seem eager to deny others.

What of military veterans? Have they not been trained as well?

Oh, and I would like to see proof of your 3-star CAR (that which doesn't betry your personal identity of course), or at least some detailed descriptions of the actions for which you were awarded the CAR.

I know what this means, so pony up.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:51 PM

57. I would not be so sure about your special license or superior skills

States may not recognize your Chicago PD credentials, NY and CA come to mind there. Not a worry for retired Feds, but for local yokels it is not universal.

Without regular practice shooting skills wither. That you carried and kept a belly gun does not speak well to your prowess.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 03:17 PM

58. What I was referring to was this :

"The only solution is to

repeal the 2nd Amendment. It is seriously outdated to the time of flintlock weapons"

What are you doing on repealing the second Amendment? Are you making any progress? What members of Congress do you have supporting your cause?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #58)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:31 PM

70. No answer, typical of the gun banners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 05:25 PM

59. Chicago PD?

 

Well, that explains your dislike of citizens RKBA, I take it you're a protege of King Daly?
I've been a cop for almost 30 years now, not terribly far from where you were and I'm 180 degrees opposite of you, I happen to believe that citizens should be able to CC if they're qualified, I don't believe cops are any better than the average citizen, I also happen to believe that citizens are responsible for their own personal safety, not cops unless someone is in our custody.

BTW, there's nothing special about being able to carry when retired, that's pretty standard for retired LE. Every retired LEO has a badge and ID that allows them to still carry.
Don't even try to say that you're specially licensed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 05:55 PM

60. "Average Cowboy Joe"...sung, no doubt, to the tune of

 

&feature=related

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #15)

Thu Nov 1, 2012, 01:08 PM

74. good for you

And in my own law enforcement exerience I would trust a private gun owner over my fellow LEOs to shoot straight. I was a carrier before I went into law enforcement and I easily out shoot every cop ive qualified with.
Perhaps you have much better training than the average patrolman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #8)


Response to George Katona (Reply #44)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 02:30 AM

48. PROVE IT. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Reply #48)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:41 PM

64. WTF is a CAR with ribbons? And why should I care?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #64)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:46 PM

65. Combat Action Ribbon

 

I earned mine in Vietnam in 1969. Each star represents each time it's awarded which would be each combat tour.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #65)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:27 PM

69. Never heard them called that. We called them "overseas campaign bars"

They are part of the fruit salad on the Marine class A's. Worn on the left side. Mine has 2 stars, but no ribbons . Got two real pretty purple ribbons though Wrong place at the wrong time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #69)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:35 PM

71. It was originally a Navy/Marine Corps ribbon but Army personell could also wear it

 

if certain conditions were met.

Personnel who earned the Combat Infantryman Badge or Combat Medical Badge while a member of the United States Army may be authorized to wear the Combat Action Ribbon upon application to the Department of the Navy. As of May 2005, the United States Army has created a new decoration known as the Combat Action Badge (previously known as the Combat Recognition Ribbon) which is considered the direct Army equivalent to the Combat Action Ribbon, though the CAB is not available to infantry or medical Soldiers who are in combat arms units, and is available to officers at or below the rank of Colonel.

This is what the new Army Combat Action Badge looks like'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #71)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:39 PM

72. The Greenjeans just had to change the name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #72)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 09:43 PM

73. Correct.

 

Military can't make anything simple can they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #64)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:46 PM

66. I guess we'll have to wait for another thread for that answer. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 11:31 PM

19. As a courtesy ...

 

... if you're going to be sarcastic, please label your post as such.

You'd be surprised at the number of nutters who actually believe in the things you're posting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #19)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:29 AM

25. He *is* good- had me going until post #15...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #25)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 02:14 AM

45. He didn't have me going... sure he carries a gun because Chicago Badge.....right!! nt

 

de

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Reply #45)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 06:39 AM

50. If this guy is a Chicago cop ...

 

... I'm a cardinal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #19)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:43 AM

43. Sorry, the post was not

 

meant to be sarcastic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #43)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 02:32 AM

49. Gee ... ya think?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:29 AM

26. Why did you not post this on a hand-powered-press-printed broad-sheet, and travel by horse...

 

to your nearest town hall to nail it to the wall?

You should immediately turn in all your electronic communications equipment, it should be limited to "the military, police agencies and specially licensed bodyguards for high profile people like celebrities and politicians".

Dueling sarcasm is fun, no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:32 AM

29. The only solution is to

repeal the 1st Amendment. It is seriously outdated to the time of quill pens. Let people have all the quill pens they want but modern media should be limited to the military, police agencies and specially licensed representatives of high profile people like celebrities and politicians. For everyone else, make them turn all word processing equipment in for destruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 01:41 AM

42. Do you also wish to repeal

the 1st Amendment? It is outdated to the time of the printing press and and to speaking out on street corners. Let people print all the notices they wish to or to speak out on the public square but do not allow them them to speak on radio, television, telephones, texting, tweeting, the internet in any way, or any other electronic device. Those electronic devices should be limited to the military, police agencies and specially licensed bodyguards (and I suppose you would also include the government).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 11:59 AM

54. How did your wooden "press" morph into the Web?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George Katona (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 08:08 PM

67. So "celebrities and politicians" get protection, SOL for everybody else?

How very egalitarian of you...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #67)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 08:11 PM

68. Chicago PD......

 

Did you really expect anything less from someone who worked for one of the most corrupt PD's in the nation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:00 PM

5. Victims make better stats...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Sun Oct 28, 2012, 12:44 PM

56. Anyone who has studied D.C.'s history of hostility to self-defense

Will conclude that it can be summed up in one word: Luridness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Original post)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 06:01 AM

75. Outside of law enforcement

people should only have flintlocks. I like it. :Grin:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freedomboogie (Reply #75)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 09:40 AM

76. Why should law enforcement be exempt?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freedomboogie (Reply #75)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 10:19 AM

77. What guarantees or compensation do you offer in return?

 

Last edited Wed Nov 7, 2012, 01:34 PM - Edit history (1)

And why do you want to create a priviliged class?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freedomboogie (Reply #75)

Wed Nov 7, 2012, 02:26 PM

79. Why would law enforcement need to carry?

 

Guns are useless for self-defense.

All they're doing by carrying is giving criminals a free gun since the moment the draw the criminal will simply snatch it away and use it on them.

Give cops a whistle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread