Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Misc Firearms Crew LXXIV - Cutting ties, but vas deferens does it make?
  1. Results 331 to 360 of 8107
  2. Page 12 of 271
  3. First
  5. 10
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. 14
  11. Last

Thread: Misc Firearms Crew LXXIV - Cutting ties, but vas deferens does it make?

post 1571828681 01-22-2019, 11:36 AM
-
#331
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By benz5521⏩
He’s still pimping that? He has been for yearssss. Did it even come out?

Glock pretty much put him out of business. He kept saying a single stack g19 was the future. And Glock said hold my beer and Pincus is done for before even getting started.

This says it all. Watch the whole thing. Just lol.

https://youtu.be/jOg25HlBNiU
Those KB "swings" are ****ing atrocious my god
post 1571828751 01-22-2019, 11:37 AM
-
#332
  1. spirit750
  2. In Parabellum We Trust
  1. spirit750
  2. In Parabellum We Trust
  3. Join Date: Aug 2009
  4. Location: Kentucky, United States
  5. Posts: 7,307
  6. Rep Power: 58428
Originally Posted By LinuxJon⏩
Listen... to me.... more closely.

My preference would be for the government to be 100% out of what firearms citizens can own/purchase. I just understand that's not going to happen places like CA where 80% of people hate guns. It's stupid, but it's reality. If I had a vote to do so, I'd remove all limitations to the 2A.

You're actually the one advocating for MORE gun control by restricting people who aren't currently restricted.
So you're interested in that magical "compromise" huh?


It makes zero sense. Why should police officers be allowed magazines/accessories/guns that enable them to defend themselves more effectively when other people are not? What makes their life more valuable than mine?
post 1571829201 01-22-2019, 11:42 AM
-
#333
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2008
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 12,742
  6. Rep Power: 84746
post 1571830291 01-22-2019, 11:54 AM
-
#334
  1. RThoe
  2. Registered User
  1. RThoe
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Location: California, United States
  5. Posts: 16,475
  6. Rep Power: 189443
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
The only time a LEO would actually use a "high capacity" magazine would be if they're discharging their weapon in a life or death situation, and the high capacity magazine would benefit the officer (and therefore the public, in theory) in that situation similar to how the vehicle code exemptions help while enroute to an emergency.
wat

That's literally the same for any other civilian, cop or not.

Cops should 100% NOT be exempt from laws. They are civilians and not above the laws. Things like speeding are not exemptions, provided they're performing it during the course of a duty, and not just cruising down the road (think fire trucks or ambulances).

brb a cop is going to use a weapon to put you in prison for using the same weapon he is using on you

copception
Misc Firearms Crew
11B Crew
Beat LA
MAGA
post 1571830751 01-22-2019, 12:00 PM
-
#335
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2008
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 12,742
  6. Rep Power: 84746
Aaron Cowan is advocating for the 6.5 moa RMR too so leaning for that.
post 1571833301 01-22-2019, 12:28 PM
-
#336
  1. ibedanny
  2. Registered User
  1. ibedanny
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Age: 44
  5. Posts: 2,966
  6. Rep Power: 22522
Sold my PMR-30 that sat in the safe catching dust for 300 bucks just in time to wait for the CP33. I am pleased.

Hello MFC
*MFC*

Eat with moderation and variety.
post 1571836631 01-22-2019, 01:07 PM
-
#337
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2008
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 12,742
  6. Rep Power: 84746
I picked up a couple mags and some ammo today on lunch from a dealer near work I use a lot. They still have this 8.5” Zev 300blk pistol. I wanted it bad when I first saw it but then you guys all made fun of me. It still catches my attention when I go there and I want it.
post 1571836951 01-22-2019, 01:11 PM
-
#338
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  3. Join Date: May 2011
  4. Posts: 37,632
  5. Rep Power: 170298
Originally Posted By benz5521⏩
I picked up a couple mags and some ammo today on lunch from a dealer near work I use a lot. They still have this 8.5” Zev 300blk pistol. I wanted it bad when I first saw it but then you guys all made fun of me. It still catches my attention when I go there and I want it.
Because just why? It's all Mega Arms parts with Zev logo on it. You can get a way better quality rifle from someone else for probably less.
post 1571837121 01-22-2019, 01:13 PM
-
#339
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  1. benz5521
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2008
  4. Location: New York, United States
  5. Posts: 12,742
  6. Rep Power: 84746
Originally Posted By R3L3NTL3SS⏩
Because just why? It's all Mega Arms parts with Zev logo on it. You can get a way better quality rifle from someone else for probably less.
It’s got good parts. Nothing special but a chromed milspec BCG, good barrel, etc.

I’m not on the omg PSA for everything train omg you retard phuck why pay more PSA is tier 1.
post 1571838141 01-22-2019, 01:22 PM
-
#340
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  3. Join Date: May 2011
  4. Posts: 37,632
  5. Rep Power: 170298
Originally Posted By benz5521⏩
It’s got good parts. Nothing special but a chromed milspec BCG, good barrel, etc.

I’m not on the omg PSA for everything train omg you retard phuck why pay more PSA is tier 1.
Yes, Mega (or Zev now) makes a fine rifle. Not **** by any means, but not amazing. But for what Zev is charging, you can get a much better rifle is my point.
post 1571838211 01-22-2019, 01:23 PM
-
#341
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  3. Join Date: Oct 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 38
  6. Posts: 26,364
  7. Rep Power: 224904
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
No, what's worse is creating special classes of citizens that are above the law.

If higher capacity magazines or "assault weapon/rifle" features like an adjustable stock or pistol grip are that damn important for effectively using a firearm that the police have to have them, the citizens who are on the front lines and usually targeted BEFORE responding police can be notified and respond...the regular private citizens need that **** too.

The absolute worst laws are those which do not apply to all.
I 100% agree that the firearm restrictions are ridiculous, but two wrongs don't make a right. My department has a whole list of conditions that need to be met before an officer can even unrack his rifle. I personally, think this is a good medium. We can't take our rifles home, can't shoot them for recreation, need signed authorization to practice with them while not at a department mandated training, and can't take them out for just whatever. They're literally there just for emergency situations like active shooters and such. I 100% agree these things should be made available to everyone, but just because they aren't doesn't mean they should be restricted to working police officers too, IMO.

I do think it creates a dumb double standard though, and adds to the whole "cops are above the law" thing which I don't like. I just think certain law enforcement exemptions are the lesser of two evils.
Originally Posted By RThoe⏩
wat

That's literally the same for any other civilian, cop or not.

Cops should 100% NOT be exempt from laws. They are civilians and not above the laws. Things like speeding are not exemptions, provided they're performing it during the course of a duty, and not just cruising down the road (think fire trucks or ambulances).

brb a cop is going to use a weapon to put you in prison for using the same weapon he is using on you

copception
The ONLY time a police officer would discharge his weapon in public during work would be to stop a deadly threat or possibly put down an animal. Cops are not out there committing crimes with their weapons (hopefully), hunting, drive bys, etc. There is a clear difference between a police officer using their firearm during the course of their duties and someone else using their firearm for anything else. Just like you say, provided the police are performing it during the course of a duty, police are exempt from laws, and I believe magazine capacity should be one of those laws, since the only time it would come into play would be in the course of a duty. Police speeding in the course of their duties is 100% an exemption, there's a vehicle code section for it and everything, just like theres a penal code section for high cap mag exemptions.
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
I know what you mean.

But, allowing anybody at any time to drive without a set speed limit for example, or to violate the speed limit when they were in a hurry etc, WOULD cost lives. That would be exceptionally unsafe...allowing citizens to carry a pistol with a 12 round mag is not unsafe and does not cost lives, if anything, quite the contrary.

Additionally, there is no explicit and specific protection in the Constitution or Bill of Rights protecting a Right to operate a vehicle on a public road without infringement or anything of the like as there is with firearms.

So, both from a practical results perspective as well as a letter of the law of the land perspective, not a good comparison (traffic laws vs mag capacity)


Besides, the real main point to applying all gun control laws equally to all LE as well as private citizens, is that without the support of the "we're better than you" police, most of these ridiculous gun control laws would actually go away or not be created to begin with
Traffic laws vs mag capacity laws are not a perfect comparison, but they are both examples of law enforcement exemptions in order to better protect the public. You're preaching to the choir on the issue of magazine capacity and costing lives but that's a whole different topic. Unfortunately the California Court system says the capacity limitation is not infringing on any constitutional rights, which again I disagree with but that's a whole different discussion.

Do you really feel like police are in favor of limited capacity magazines?? Besides, police opinion has pretty much 0 impact on which laws are created.
"If in my say 80 years on earth I do more help than damage, then I feel complete."

"I feel grateful every day I wake up, I know I’m already on borrowed time"

-Snailsrus aka Lauren Kelly RIP
post 1571838911 01-22-2019, 01:30 PM
-
#342
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
The ONLY time a police officer would discharge his weapon in public during work would be to stop a deadly threat or possibly put down an animal.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/botched...ed-49-million/


By far and away the number one murderer is the government on disarmed subjects. These piss ant public shooters aren't even a drop in a drop in a drop in the bucket.

Disarming the subjects while continuing to arm the government is the worst possible answer.

Anybody who has taken a look around the world, or into history...any history recent or past, will recognize the extraordinary danger of an armed government and disarmed populace...and anybody how is honest will admit that governments are not trustworthy and can change quickly for the worse...it doesn't even have to be the genocidal gov that strips away Rights and Liberties and arms...that one can just come in and take advantage of the situation already created.

It's asinine to have civilians using small arms in our communities when The People go to prison if they possess the same damn thing.

If access to those arms is so crucial...The People need that access more than the police do...both as the typical front line target of the criminals, and because of the .gov
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
Do you really feel like police are in favor of limited capacity magazines??
They are clearly in favor of gun control laws enough to enforce them. There are some exceptions, generally for newly passed laws in rural areas dealing with elected Sheriffs, but as a general rule, the police are all too happy to enforce all of the gun control laws.

Unless it's another cop or a politician or a celebrity or a rich or famous person or a judge or a national news figure or or, then they are exempt, even if they commit the felony on national TV or a courthouse surveillance camera




Saying "But Cali would never let its People have Rights and Liberties" doesn't change any of this.
post 1571840381 01-22-2019, 01:46 PM
-
#343
  1. NuggzTheNinja
  2. Exotic Game Hunter
  1. NuggzTheNinja
  2. Exotic Game Hunter
  3. Join Date: Oct 2004
  4. Posts: 31,871
  5. Rep Power: 237953
Originally Posted By LinuxJon⏩
Folding stocks aren't a big deal. Being allowed to have more than 10 rounds, a detachable mag, and (less so) a pistol grip are big things if you're walking into an active shooter type scenario. Especially if there's more than one shooter, which has certainly happened before.

Look, I'm a huge 2A advocate and really don't agree with any restrictions on gun possession. But limiting the police is just an emotional argument based on a really nice idea that isn't going to be implemented the way you're thinking. CA will never give citizens back fully featured AR rifles. They likely will at some point yank the best weapons from law enforcement, and that's going to lead to people dying.
It's not about limiting police. Did you even read Farley's post? Here's the cliffs:

If a feature is so important that the police NEED it, citizens NEED it as well.
This account was created for the purpose of roleplaying and satire. All posts, messages, images, or other media produced by this Bodybuilding.com profile, including stories, names, references to characters and incidents, and views expressed, are fictitious and intended as parody. No identification or association with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, or products is intended or should be inferred.
post 1571841371 01-22-2019, 01:54 PM
-
#344
  1. OfficerJimLahey
  2. don't **** up
  1. OfficerJimLahey
  2. don't **** up
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Posts: 21,630
  5. Rep Power: 156166
Originally Posted By Raxys⏩
Supreme Court will hear New York gun rights case on transporting unloaded handguns

The case concerns a New York City ban on transporting handguns except directly to and from shooting ranges, and requires the weapon to be unloaded and stored in a locked container.

Three handgun owners and the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association challenged the ban, arguing that it unconstitutionally interfered with their right to gun ownership, as well as their right to travel.

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the gun owners' claims, and in February of last year the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.

The gun owns brought their case to the high court in June and asked the justices to reverse the second circuit's ruling.



The justices' decision to take the case marks the first time in nearly a decade that it will delve into 2nd Amendment law.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/22/supr...-handguns.html
pissening, thanks for sharing, hon.
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
No, what's worse is creating special classes of citizens that are above the law.

If higher capacity magazines or "assault weapon/rifle" features like an adjustable stock or pistol grip are that damn important for effectively using a firearm that the police have to have them, the citizens who are on the front lines and usually targeted BEFORE responding police can be notified and respond...the regular private citizens need that **** too.

The absolute worst laws are those which do not apply to all.
quality post
Originally Posted By benz5521⏩
He’s still pimping that? He has been for yearssss. Did it even come out?

Glock pretty much put him out of business. He kept saying a single stack g19 was the future. And Glock said hold my beer and Pincus is done for before even getting started.

This says it all. Watch the whole thing. Just lol.

https://youtu.be/jOg25HlBNiU
Hard to take someone serious with all the flaws in the short description that goes along with the video.
"Rob Pincus and a couple of friends combined there Workout with some shooting and skill sharpening at the range. All participants are experienced shooters. Do not try this without EXTREME Safety Precautions and a high level of skill and training in safe, efficient weapons handling."
Originally Posted By RThoe⏩
wat

That's literally the same for any other civilian, cop or not.

Cops should 100% NOT be exempt from laws. They are civilians and not above the laws. Things like speeding are not exemptions, provided they're performing it during the course of a duty, and not just cruising down the road (think fire trucks or ambulances).

brb a cop is going to use a weapon to put you in prison for using the same weapon he is using on you

copception
i like you
Originally Posted By ibedanny⏩
Sold my PMR-30 that sat in the safe catching dust for 300 bucks just in time to wait for the CP33. I am pleased.

Hello MFC
hello
Originally Posted By benz5521⏩
I picked up a couple mags and some ammo today on lunch from a dealer near work I use a lot. They still have this 8.5” Zev 300blk pistol. I wanted it bad when I first saw it but then you guys all made fun of me. It still catches my attention when I go there and I want it.
wait, you didn't let the opinion of some in here stop you from buying a gun you wanted, did you?

just throw out rule 4
Rule 4: DON'T BASH OTHER POSTERS ABOUT THEIR PURCHASES.
Baltimore Orioles
Most positive poster in this thread.


MFC Poor Crew President and Founder.
post 1571842041 01-22-2019, 02:01 PM
-
#345
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Age: 37
  5. Posts: 16,732
  6. Rep Power: 208258
Aimpoint ACRO

tickle me interadasted.... damb!

1.5 year on setting 7/10 brightness... and thats constantly turned on.

May just use this on a ROLAND special once it gets rolled out
6 scoops of xf up2.0 a day
post 1571842971 01-22-2019, 02:11 PM
-
#346
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  3. Join Date: Oct 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 38
  6. Posts: 26,364
  7. Rep Power: 224904
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
By far and away the number one murderer is the government on disarmed subjects. These piss ant public shooters aren't even a drop in a drop in a drop in the bucket.

Disarming the subjects while continuing to arm the government is the worst possible answer.

Anybody who has taken a look around the world, or into history...any history recent or past, will recognize the extraordinary danger of an armed government and disarmed populace...and anybody how is honest will admit that governments are not trustworthy and can change quickly for the worse...it doesn't even have to be the genocidal gov that strips away Rights and Liberties and arms...that one can just come in and take advantage of the situation already created.

It's asinine to have civilians using small arms in our communities when The People go to prison if they possess the same damn thing.

If access to those arms is so crucial...The People need that access more than the police do...both as the typical front line target of the criminals, and because of the .gov



They are clearly in favor of gun control laws enough to enforce them. There are some exceptions, generally for newly passed laws in rural areas dealing with elected Sheriffs, but as a general rule, the police are all too happy to enforce all of the gun control laws.

Unless it's another cop or a politician or a celebrity or a rich or famous person or a judge or a national news figure or or, then they are exempt, even if they commit the felony on national TV or a courthouse surveillance camera



Saying "But Cali would never let its People have Rights and Liberties" doesn't change any of this.
So which one is it? Are police part of the civilian population or are they part of the government that can't be trusted? You can't have it both ways depending on how you want to frame your argument. And there's been exponentially more gang shootings every single year ever than police shootings (justified or otherwise). And now you're saying the police should be less armed than the general public? I agreed with most of what you were saying up until this post, but saying the government is the #1 killer of disarmed subjects and the general population should be more well armed than the police are just things I don't agree with at all (police and civilians should be equally armed IMO).

Where are you getting this that police are clearly in favor of gun control laws? I don't think that's the case, but haven't looked into it at all, just going off experiences. Enforcement is a whole different topic and even then I personally have only seen (while working) firearm laws enforced on people who were restricted from having firearms all together, or had them in commission of another crime, stuff like that.
"If in my say 80 years on earth I do more help than damage, then I feel complete."

"I feel grateful every day I wake up, I know I’m already on borrowed time"

-Snailsrus aka Lauren Kelly RIP
post 1571843151 01-22-2019, 02:13 PM
-
#347
  1. OrificeSpunk
  2. Registered User
  1. OrificeSpunk
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2010
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 9,380
  6. Rep Power: 66911
post 1571843501 01-22-2019, 02:16 PM
-
#348
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
So which one is it? Are police part of the civilian population or are they part of the government that can't be trusted? You can't have it both ways depending on how you want to frame your argument.
Then drop the part about police being civilians and replace it with 'law enforcement of civilians' without regard to whether the armed government enforcers are civilians or military as that really matters not.
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
And there's been exponentially more gang shootings every single year ever than police shootings (justified or otherwise). And now you're saying the police should be less armed than the general public?
Uh no I didn't say that, I said exactly the opposite, that it should be the same for all.
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
I agreed with most of what you were saying up until this post, but saying the government is the #1 killer of disarmed subjects and the general population should be more well armed than the police are just things I don't agree with at all (police and civilians should be equally armed IMO).
Where did I say The People should be more armed than the government?
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
Where are you getting this that police are clearly in favor of gun control laws?
"They are clearly in favor of gun control laws enough to enforce them. There are some exceptions, generally for newly passed laws in rural areas dealing with elected Sheriffs, but as a general rule, the police are all too happy to enforce all of the gun control laws."
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
I don't think that's the case, but haven't looked into it at all, just going off experiences. Enforcement is a whole different topic and even then I personally have only seen (while working) firearm laws enforced on people who were restricted from having firearms all together, or had them in commission of another crime, stuff like that.
How many otherwise law abiding folks have professionally encountered who were known to be violating gun laws but no action was taken? Not counting current or former cops, politicians, news media employees who were using them as an argument for gun control...






I said The People need that access more than the police do...which would be because random individual people, taking the street crime or active shooter angle, aren't going to have a whole bunch of buddies show up at 90 MPH from everywhere all armed and running to their rescue at the push of a button on their radio from behind bullet resistant vests, the lone victim private citizen needs those super effective firearms even more.

That doesn't mean the police should not also have access to what The People have access to. I think I've been pretty consistent, these restrictions should apply equally to all.
post 1571843531 01-22-2019, 02:17 PM
-
#349
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  3. Join Date: May 2011
  4. Posts: 37,632
  5. Rep Power: 170298
[QUOTE=Meatie post_id=1571842041]Aimpoint ACRO

tickle me interadasted.... damb!

1.5 year on setting 7/10 brightness... and thats constantly turned on.

May just use this on a ROLAND special once it gets rolled out[/QUOTE]Sure....if Aimpoint ever releases it. We've been knowing about it since last year not long after SHOT.

Last I was told by Aimpoint, they were fighting a legal issue with the acronym ACRO being trademarked by another company or some **** and[i]supposedly[/i]that was holding up the product launch.

At the end of the day, it's one and only advantage will be that the emitter and all is sealed. So not fogged lenses or starburst if water drop gets on emitter like other optics.

[QUOTE=OrificeSpunk post_id=1571843151][img]http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180609/e1357b70d87836a463d4188492ad3905.jpg[/ig][/QUOTE]After having one in person, they aren't that big. It's about the same overall size as a Deltapoint Pro, just box shaped obviously.
post 1571844841 01-22-2019, 02:30 PM
-
#350
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Age: 37
  5. Posts: 16,732
  6. Rep Power: 208258


gun jesus likes it. the guy said availability is "imminent" whatever that means lol

price point sounds competitive with those dumb TRIJICONS or LOOPOLDS

@relent will you do cuts for it? Well, will ya?!??!!?!
6 scoops of xf up2.0 a day
post 1571845431 01-22-2019, 02:35 PM
-
#351
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  3. Join Date: May 2011
  4. Posts: 37,632
  5. Rep Power: 170298
[QUOTE=Meatie post_id=1571844841][youtube]78jCaIF1OMI[/yutube]

gun jesus likes it. the guy said availability is "imminent" whatever that means lol

price point sounds competitive with those dumb TRIJICONS or LOOPOLDS

@relent will you do cuts for it? Well, will ya?!??!!?![/QUOTE]We've already had one in hand and have programs done for it.
post 1571846821 01-22-2019, 02:49 PM
-
#352
  1. RThoe
  2. Registered User
  1. RThoe
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Location: California, United States
  5. Posts: 16,475
  6. Rep Power: 189443
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
The ONLY time a police officer would discharge his weapon in public during work would be to stop a deadly threat or possibly put down an animal. Cops are not out there committing crimes with their weapons (hopefully), hunting, drive bys, etc. There is a clear difference between a police officer using their firearm during the course of their duties and someone else using their firearm for anything else. Just like you say, provided the police are performing it during the course of a duty, police are exempt from laws, and I believe magazine capacity should be one of those laws, since the only time it would come into play would be in the course of a duty. Police speeding in the course of their duties is 100% an exemption, there's a vehicle code section for it and everything, just like theres a penal code section for high cap mag exemptions.
I don't understand how it's any different...

The only time anyone would discharge their weapon in public is to stop a deadly threat. Of course, this doesn't mean there aren't violent attackers out there that use guns to shoot people, just like your statement doesn't mean that there haven't been cops that have used guns to shoot innocent people.

What if someone carries a handgun on them solely for self protection? How is that any different from a cop? How is a cop justified from being exempt from gun laws when he's off duty? Should he have to turn in his weapon/mags once he clocks out if he lives in a restricted state?

A cop (or firefighter or EMT) speeding to get to a scene to perform their duty is not the same as them having a blanket exemption from gun laws (that they will ironically throw you in prison for). I won't get ticketed for speeding if I'm fleeing from a fire, or fleeing from a violent attacker.

You think cops should be exempt from gun laws, fine. Again, why don't they check them in when they clock out then?

Cops are civilians and the idea that they should be allowed to throw you in jail for using the exact same mag/weapon they have on them is insane.

Now, I don't think there should be any of these gun laws to begin with, but there is absolutely no way I support a cop being exempt from them.
Misc Firearms Crew
11B Crew
Beat LA
MAGA
post 1571847591 01-22-2019, 02:55 PM
-
#353
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  1. R3L3NTL3SS
  2. Is a Czechnologist.
  3. Join Date: May 2011
  4. Posts: 37,632
  5. Rep Power: 170298
Lmao, NJ homeboy is still insisting that he can have the mags. I really don't GAF if he can or not. I'm not shipping them out of principal.
post 1571848661 01-22-2019, 03:07 PM
-
#354
  1. Murk Mags
  2. Registered Nurse
  1. Murk Mags
  2. Registered Nurse
  3. Join Date: Dec 2005
  4. Location: Connecticut, United States
  5. Posts: 2,645
  6. Rep Power: 25090
Originally Posted By RThoe⏩
I don't understand how it's any different...

The only time anyone would discharge their weapon in public is to stop a deadly threat. Of course, this doesn't mean there aren't violent attackers out there that use guns to shoot people, just like your statement doesn't mean that there haven't been cops that have used guns to shoot innocent people.

What if someone carries a handgun on them solely for self protection? How is that any different from a cop? How is a cop justified from being exempt from gun laws when he's off duty? Should he have to turn in his weapon/mags once he clocks out if he lives in a restricted state?

A cop (or firefighter or EMT) speeding to get to a scene to perform their duty is not the same as them having a blanket exemption from gun laws (that they will ironically throw you in prison for). I won't get ticketed for speeding if I'm fleeing from a fire, or fleeing from a violent attacker.

You think cops should be exempt from gun laws, fine. Again, why don't they check them in when they clock out then?

Cops are civilians and the idea that they should be allowed to throw you in jail for using the exact same mag/weapon they have on them is insane.

Now, I don't think there should be any of these gun laws to begin with, but there is absolutely no way I support a cop being exempt from them.
Agreed, nobody should have mag limits. Here in my shythole state, the cops are of course exempt from gun laws, just as the bodyguards of my senators murphy and blumenthal... two proponents for strict "gun control" (not capitalized on purpose).
Experience is the hardest teacher you will ever have in your life. Experience likes to give the test before the lesson.

Shall Not be infringed...
How many god given and personal freedoms are you willing to forfeit to feel "secure"?

RN here, PM any health questions. Also, if you need somebody to talk to in a time of need, send a PM! Always willing to help others.
post 1571855791 01-22-2019, 04:41 PM
-
#355
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  1. AgRyan
  2. Bangarang.
  3. Join Date: Oct 2010
  4. Location: United States
  5. Age: 38
  6. Posts: 26,364
  7. Rep Power: 224904
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
"They are clearly in favor of gun control laws enough to enforce them. There are some exceptions, generally for newly passed laws in rural areas dealing with elected Sheriffs, but as a general rule, the police are all too happy to enforce all of the gun control laws."

How many otherwise law abiding folks have professionally encountered who were known to be violating gun laws but no action was taken? Not counting current or former cops, politicians, news media employees who were using them as an argument for gun control...

It going to have a whole bunch of buddies show up at 90 MPH from everywhere all armed and running to their rescue at the push of a button on their radio from behind bullet resistant vests, the lone victim private citizen needs those super effective firearms even more.

That doesn't mean the police should not also have access to what The People have access to. I think I've been pretty consistent, these restrictions should apply equally to all.
Misunderstood your line about the general population needing more access than the police, my bad.

Most cops I know DGAF about gun laws unless they're on someone who is committing a crime or is somewhere in that nexus. I've personally pulled over and spoken to plenty of people who have told me they were armed. Not a single time did I ask any questions relating to gun laws if they weren't relevant to some sort of investigation. So I don't know actually how many were violating any laws. Oh I can think of one time the Fire Department called us during one of their calls because they noticed someone had a large collection of guns, they thought it was suspicious and reported it to us. We came over to the house, ran the dude's name to make sure he had a bunch of firearms registered to him and called it a day. Pretty sure there were some high cap mags and ARs with banned features in that group, I wasn't a ranking officer out there so I didn't make the call, but we didn't do a single thing. Another time I was talking to a 82nd Airborne Vet who brought out a rifle with a high cap mag, I thought it was weird and made a mental note because we got a ton of calls on that street and he seemed a little off, but didn't do anything.

Agree that people should have access to firearms. Also don't agree with the nonsense CA gun laws. I just think limiting police magazine capacity is dumb. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Originally Posted By RThoe⏩
I don't understand how it's any different...

The only time anyone would discharge their weapon in public is to stop a deadly threat. Of course, this doesn't mean there aren't violent attackers out there that use guns to shoot people, just like your statement doesn't mean that there haven't been cops that have used guns to shoot innocent people.

What if someone carries a handgun on them solely for self protection? How is that any different from a cop? How is a cop justified from being exempt from gun laws when he's off duty? Should he have to turn in his weapon/mags once he clocks out if he lives in a restricted state?

A cop (or firefighter or EMT) speeding to get to a scene to perform their duty is not the same as them having a blanket exemption from gun laws (that they will ironically throw you in prison for). I won't get ticketed for speeding if I'm fleeing from a fire, or fleeing from a violent attacker.

You think cops should be exempt from gun laws, fine. Again, why don't they check them in when they clock out then?

Cops are civilians and the idea that they should be allowed to throw you in jail for using the exact same mag/weapon they have on them is insane.

Now, I don't think there should be any of these gun laws to begin with, but there is absolutely no way I support a cop being exempt from them.
There's plenty of people who discharge their weapon in public when there is no deadly threat. It's not extremely common but it's not surprising at all when it happens. The amount of times an on duty cop has actually murdered someone is pretty much 0 compared to the amount of times a random person has murdered someone with a handgun.

I've been consistent in saying cops should not be exempt from any gun laws when off duty, only been talking about on duty when I believe they should be exempt from certain gun laws, mainly the magazine cap, which I disagree with in the first place.
"If in my say 80 years on earth I do more help than damage, then I feel complete."

"I feel grateful every day I wake up, I know I’m already on borrowed time"

-Snailsrus aka Lauren Kelly RIP
post 1571856081 01-22-2019, 04:46 PM
-
#356
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
Misunderstood your line about the general population needing more access than the police, my bad.

Most cops I know DGAF about gun laws unless they're on someone who is committing a crime or is somewhere in that nexus. I've personally pulled over and spoken to plenty of people who have told me they were armed. Not a single time did I ask any questions relating to gun laws if they weren't relevant to some sort of investigation. So I don't know actually how many were violating any laws. Oh I can think of one time the Fire Department called us during one of their calls because they noticed someone had a large collection of guns, they thought it was suspicious and reported it to us. We came over to the house, ran the dude's name to make sure he had a bunch of firearms registered to him and called it a day. Pretty sure there were some high cap mags and ARs with banned features in that group, I wasn't a ranking officer out there so I didn't make the call, but we didn't do a single thing. Another time I was talking to a 82nd Airborne Vet who brought out a rifle with a high cap mag, I thought it was weird and made a mental note because we got a ton of calls on that street and he seemed a little off, but didn't do anything.

Agree that people should have access to firearms. Also don't agree with the nonsense CA gun laws. I just think limiting police magazine capacity is dumb. Two wrongs don't make a right.



There's plenty of people who discharge their weapon in public when there is no deadly threat. It's not extremely common but it's not surprising at all when it happens. The amount of times an on duty cop has actually murdered someone is pretty much 0 compared to the amount of times a random person has murdered someone with a handgun.

I've been consistent in saying cops should not be exempt from any gun laws when off duty, only been talking about on duty when I believe they should be exempt from certain gun laws, mainly the magazine cap, which I disagree with in the first place.
This isn't a "two wrongs don't make a right", so much as it is "more wrong to segregate people and restrict the Rights of some more than others, than it is to equally restrict everybody"
post 1571856341 01-22-2019, 04:48 PM
-
#357
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Age: 37
  5. Posts: 16,732
  6. Rep Power: 208258
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
Oh I can think of one time the Fire Department called us during one of their calls because they noticed someone had a large collection of guns, they thought it was suspicious and reported it to us.
.
I would've told those firemen to fuk off and put 'um in handcuffs for a few minutes until they say they're sorry


"Yes 911"

"Our neighbor has 2 AR15's and a few handguns. Why would he need that MANY of them"

"We'll send the gun violence TASK FORCE right over"

*Swat team suits up* "hope you guys are ready to shoot some family pets"
6 scoops of xf up2.0 a day
post 1571857871 01-22-2019, 05:05 PM
-
#358
  1. LinuxJon
  1. LinuxJon
  3. Join Date: Apr 2014
  4. Location: California, United States
  5. Posts: 49,073
  6. Rep Power: 325966
[QUOTE=Farley1324 post_id=1571828191]...restricting the government. Which, you know, is what the Bill of Rights and Second Amendment is about...restricting the government.

You keep arguing against the core concept of the Second Amendment while proclaiming to support it though[img]//assets.bodybuilding.com/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]just another "I support the 2A but [I don't]"

That's, you know, why the Second Amendment refers to the Right[i]of the people[/i]...government enforcers are not who is being protected here[/QUOTE]We're in agreement that it's a right that the government has no right to infringe. They've infringed it. I choose to acknowledge the current reality and function as best I can within that framework. If you want to go the whole sovereign-citizen route and pretend the current real world state of law and politics doesn't matter b/c principle, I guess go ahead.

[QUOTE=spirit750 post_id=1571828751]So you're interested in that magical "compromise" huh?

It makes zero sense.[b]Why should police officers be allowed magazines/accessories/guns that enable them to defend themselves more effectively when other people are not?[/b]What makes their life more valuable than mine?[/QUOTE]OFF DUTY they shouldn't be allowed anything normal civilians are not.

ON DUTY they absolutely shouldn't be limited by normal firearms restrictions for their jurisdiction. Why? Because other people aren't being tasked with injecting themselves into dangerous situations that they are not otherwise involved in. If someone takes a bunch of hostages at the 7/Eleven down the street, the guy who lives across the way doesn't have an obligation to enter that situation. The cop on duty does. Is this really that difficult of concept?

Also, no, I don't want a compromise. I just don't want even MORE gun laws. Not aimed at civilians, not aimed at cops, none of it. Arguing to limit cops as some sort of payback for our current bad gun laws is stupid and isn't going to help anything.
480s / 370b / 495d / 235 x 2 SOHP

Trump 2020
DeSantis 2024
Catbrah 2032

Misc Firearms Crew
Misc Wristwatch Crew
Will sell wife's foot pics for watch/gun money crew
Definitely not a fed crew
post 1571858361 01-22-2019, 05:10 PM
-
#359
  1. NuggzTheNinja
  2. Exotic Game Hunter
  1. NuggzTheNinja
  2. Exotic Game Hunter
  3. Join Date: Oct 2004
  4. Posts: 31,871
  5. Rep Power: 237953
Originally Posted By AgRyan⏩
There's plenty of people who discharge their weapon in public when there is no deadly threat. It's not extremely common but it's not surprising at all when it happens. The amount of times an on duty cop has actually murdered someone is pretty much 0 compared to the amount of times a random person has murdered someone with a handgun.
If we are talking legal gun owners carrying lawfully, and define "murder" in a way that describes the act and not the court's finding (which almost always favors law enforcement), I'd be willing to bet the numbers are pretty much equal.

If we are talking ghetto goblins who buy stolen guns, sure, that number is high as **** compared to cops. "Pretty much 0" for the law enforcement side is not really defensible unless you define "murder" as a conviction - we all know that cops can (and frequently do) kick the wrong door, murder someone, and not even be charged for property damage.
This account was created for the purpose of roleplaying and satire. All posts, messages, images, or other media produced by this Bodybuilding.com profile, including stories, names, references to characters and incidents, and views expressed, are fictitious and intended as parody. No identification or association with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, or products is intended or should be inferred.
post 1571858561 01-22-2019, 05:14 PM
-
#360
  1. fmylife4real
  2. I am the liquor
  1. fmylife4real
  2. I am the liquor
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Location: Columbia, South Carolina, United States
  5. Age: 46
  6. Posts: 5,925
  7. Rep Power: 42912
I really didn't feel like spending any time checking to see if anybody has posted this yet but..............................


Who's ready for the new TACTICAL Hi-Point?



Spoiler!
It's okay to be white
MFC #33
*reminder to neg mysterylifter on sight because he thinks it's NOT okay to be white*
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts