Cops for gun control - article

[Truebeliever]

The only cops that are worth a shit are the Sheriff's and their deputies. Everything else are just a bunch of useless, cowardly, nazi jackboot pigs. Fuck em all, municipal cops are the enemy of liberty loving people. That goes for all the state and federal whore pigs too.

You have no clue.
Scott Peterson was a sheriff’s deputy, Coral Springs PD was municipal .
Corruption? Especially political corruption, a sheriffs department is more rampant than municipal. Municipal cops still have a job no matter who becomes the mayor, the deputies can’t say the same. Do you think a deputy often bucks the system if the sheriff is wrong? Nope.
Go look up the deputy who was fired for picking up the wrong political sign. Or the deputy who was fired for politics. You will find plenty of it.
Go look up the sheriff who was elected but who can’t legally touch a gun. Or the sheriffs who support gun control

 

[GOPerfect]

It’s written into the law. And most cops in New York can’t get a separate gun permit due to an agreement between licensing agencies so if their department decides to take their guns for a disciplinary reason, they can.

Maybe in that crappy are of NY City. This kind of policy does not exist in much of the State.

 

[GOPerfect]

The only cops that are worth a shit are the Sheriff's and their deputies. Everything else are just a bunch of useless, cowardly, nazi jackboot pigs. Fuck em all, municipal cops are the enemy of liberty loving people. That goes for all the state and federal whore pigs too.

I will take the Local Sheriff and his Deputies any day of the week.

 

[spat]

It’s written into the law. And most cops in New York can’t get a separate gun permit due to an agreement between licensing agencies so if their department decides to take their guns for a disciplinary reason, they can.

I know it's written into law. They question is *why* is it written into law.

Imagine doing that for drivers licenses.

"Officer stompy was put on desk duty, so now his wife has to drop him off at work because he can't drive.. "

There is no good reason for it.

 

[BerettaGuy]

Here in NY, we have several tiers of the citizenry.
Elite Democrats, Police, and the rest of us.
Why are the Police always protecting the elite democrats?

 

[RedBreast21]

I've always wondered why cops don't need pistol permits.

They need drivers licenses, so why not pistol permits ?

They do need a permit once retired but while on the job, no.

 

[GOPerfect]

I know it's written into law. They question is *why* is it written into law.

Imagine doing that for drivers licenses.

"Officer stompy was put on desk duty, so now his wife has to drop him off at work because he can't drive.. "

There is no good reason for it.

Not sure what the actual reason is, I can guess only.

The same reason we have the Permit process in this State.

More than likely, something political from a very long time ago.

 

[GOPerfect]

Here in NY, we have several tiers of the citizenry.
Elite Democrats, Police, and the rest of us.
Why are the Police always protecting the elite democrats?

View attachment 163049

Most cops carry a gun to protect themselves. I know I do.

 

[GOPerfect]

They do need a permit once retired but while on the job, no.

This statement is not true.

 

[Truebeliever]

Maybe in that crappy are of NY City. This kind of policy does not exist in much of the State.

Downstate it certainly does. And the licensing authorities here won’t issue separate permits to cops either no matter what department you work for until you retire. It’s a quick process but you have to put your papers in first.
City cops come in to get the permit because they are retiring, they will start the process but the permit isn’t issued until retirement. It helps to have worked with the people who are issuing the permit. Most city cops don’t have that personal relationship with the guys/gals who work there.
I actually met the guy ( retired cop) who says he was the reason for the policies/agreement between departments/licensing authorities at a shooting range. He got suspended and they asked for his gun and shield. He told them no, presented his pistol permit and slammed the door.

 

[Truebeliever]

I know it's written into law. They question is *why* is it written into law.

Imagine doing that for drivers licenses.

"Officer stompy was put on desk duty, so now his wife has to drop him off at work because he can't drive.. "

There is no good reason for it.

Why is it not required? Okay. One reason is that cops often have possession of guns that don’t belong to them. This includes department issued guns( national guard and military are also exempt), having to hold guns of their fellow officers often outside of shooting ranges, Or just taking possession of illegal guns. None of these are listed on a permit.
Some LEO positions that don’t have those issues do require a permit to be armed.

 

[spat]

Why is it not required? Okay. One reason is that cops often have possession of guns that don’t belong to them. This includes department issued guns( national guard and military are also exempt), having to hold guns of their fellow officers often outside of shooting ranges, Or just taking possession of illegal guns. None of these are listed on a permit.
Some LEO positions that don’t have those issues do require a permit to be armed.

And regular folks don't need to do that too ?

"Damn, my wife was going to clean the kitchen, but I left my gun on the table when I went to work so she had to clean around it because she doesn't have a permit".

"Guy came into the ER after a motorcycle accident, but he was carrying, so we had a hell of a time trying to treat him without taking possession of it".

If you need to exempt the cops from your law, you shouldn't be able to pass it to begin with.

I know you guys think your special and need to be exempt from half the laws, but you're not, and the ones you need to be exempt from shouldn't exist.

 

[Truebeliever]

And regular folks don't need to do that too ?

"Damn, my wife was going to clean the kitchen, but I left my gun on the table when I went to work so she had to clean around it because she doesn't have a permit".

"Guy came into the ER after a motorcycle accident, but he was carrying, so we had a hell of a time trying to treat him without taking possession of it".

If you need to exempt the cops from your law, you shouldn't be able to pass it to begin with.

I know you guys think your special and need to be exempt from half the laws, but you're not, and the ones you need to be exempt from shouldn't exist.

The wife moving the gun reason is one that the licensing authority might take your permit away for
The hospital has “transitory possession”. It’s the same reason police can take illegal drugs from someone without a permit to do so. It’s taken to turn over to the courts or other process.
An officer who hands his gun to his partner to have his partner hand it back to him is a different issue

 

[spat]

The wife moving the gun reason is one that the licensing authority might take your permit away for
The hospital has “transitory possession”. It’s the same reason police can take illegal drugs from someone without a permit to do so. It’s taken to turn over to the courts or other process.
An officer who hands his gun to his partner to have his partner hand it back to him is a different issue

Then the officers should do the same thing a couple hunting buddies have to do in the same situation.

Why do you think you should be exempt from some law thats a major inconvenience for you, when it's just as much an inconvenience for anyone else but they aren't exempt ?

If the government is going to pass dumb ass laws, they should not be allowed to exempt themselves from the pain.

Also, where is the exemption for the courts fir the drug possession ?

Pharmaceutical companies have to get special licenses to handle that stuff. Courts should be no exception.

"Sorry, all drug cases have to go to judge Wilson's court, they're the only ones licensed to handle narcotics".

 

[Truebeliever]

Then the officers should do the same thing a couple hunting buddies have to do in the same situation.

Why do you think you should be exempt from some law thats a major inconvenience for you, when it's just as much an inconvenience for anyone else but they aren't exempt ?

If the government is going to pass dumb ass laws, they should not be allowed to exempt themselves from the pain.

Big difference in the day to day but do I think permit holders should be able to do the same thing? Why not.
But it’s not the same. Cops also hand guns back to and from strangers at secured locations. And yes, there is a special gun permit to do that.
Cops return evidence of other vouchered property to gun owners. Do they need a gun dealer’s license too?
Guns are exchanged in real police departments all the time, several times a day for various reasons even if it’s to check on a prisoner in the cell area or use a different gun than issued for an immediate issue. Do you think they have to issue a permit to every national guardsmen too?

 

[Truebeliever]

Then the officers should do the same thing a couple hunting buddies have to do in the same situation.

Why do you think you should be exempt from some law thats a major inconvenience for you, when it's just as much an inconvenience for anyone else but they aren't exempt ?

If the government is going to pass dumb ass laws, they should not be allowed to exempt themselves from the pain.

Also, where is the exemption for the courts fir the drug possession ?

Pharmaceutical companies have to get special licenses to handle that stuff. Courts should be no exception.

"Sorry, all drug cases have to go to judge Wilson's court, they're the only ones licensed to handle narcotics".

Courts are exempt because the constitution requires the evidence to be seen and a chance for the defense to refute it.
And drug criminal trials themselves tend to limited to certain courts. And the drug evidence is carefully control to only certain court officers ( chain of custody) then remessured after the hearing/trial to make sure none is missing.

 

[spat]

Big difference in the day to day but do I think permit holders should be able to do the same thing? Why not.
But it’s not the same. Cops also hand guns back to and from strangers at secured locations. And yes, there is a special gun permit to do that.
Cops return evidence of other vouchered property to gun owners. Do they need a gun dealer’s license too?
Guns are exchanged in real police departments all the time, several times a day for various reasons even if it’s to check on a prisoner in the cell area or use a different gun than issued for an immediate issue. Do you think they have to issue a permit to every national guardsmen too?

If that's what they want everyone else to do, then yes. Every PD should need an FFL too. Hand your gun off to go into the area with prisoners, someone checks it into a bound book like a gunsmith has to.

The point isn't that that stuff isn't asinine. The point is that it is asinine and if they're going to subject the rest of us to it they should feel the pain too.

Or maybe they just repeal the BS and let normal people do normal stuff without the hassle.

 

[Truebeliever]

If that's what they want everyone else to do, then yes. Every PD should need an FFL too. Hand your gun off to go into the area with prisoners, someone checks it into a bound book like a gunsmith has to.

The point isn't that that stuff isn't asinine. The point is that it is asinine and if they're going to subject the rest of us to it they should feel the pain too.

Or maybe they just repeal the BS and let normal people do normal stuff without the hassle.

And you should be able to prescribe drugs too-, huh.

 

[spat]

Courts are exempt because the constitution requires the evidence to be seen and a chance for the defense to refute it.
And drug criminal trials themselves tend to limited to certain courts. And the drug evidence is carefully control to only certain court officers ( chain of custody) then remessured after the hearing/trial to make sure none is missing.

The constitution requires that the evidence be seen. It doesn't require the courts to be exempt from the rules everyone else has to follow.

I would be fine if every court needed 2 or 3 hundred different licenses in order to function. Maybe they would reconsider requiring all of them.

 

[spat]

And you should be able to prescribe drugs too-, huh.

The requirements to do that should be the same for everyone. No exceptions.

Can a judge just decide to prescribe some drugs because the courts can handle them ?

 

[Truebeliever]

The constitution requires that the evidence be seen. It doesn't require the courts to be exempt from the rules everyone else has to follow.

I would be fine if every court needed 2 or 3 hundred different licenses I'm order to function. Maybe they would reconsider requiring all of them.

Yes, it does. Tell me, how does the jury see the evidence ? How does the defense get to refute the evidence? Do you want a license for kiddie porn too? Or any other illegal item to possess?
Is the court subject to the mistakes of the legislature when they make laws so they can’t even rule on the law?
Your argument might hold water if the court workers were allowed access outside the scope of their employment like cops do with their firearms. But you as a private citizen don’t have the same restrictions as to what you can carry. Some better, some worse.
Some LEOs are restricted to only handguns that their department authoritizes. They aren’t even authorized to buy a handgun for personal use at the range so they can’t even own any other handgun . And they all are reported to the state police by the way( supposed to be anyway )
And if you had a permit before you got hired, you have to turn it in for many departments downstate

 

[spat]

Yes, it does. Tell me, how does the jury see the evidence ? How does the defense get to refute the evidence? Do you want a license for kiddie porn too? Or any other illegal item to possess?
Is the court subject to the mistakes of the legislature when they make laws so they can’t even rule on the law?
Your argument might hold water if the court workers were allowed access outside the scope of their employment like cops do with their firearms. But you as a private citizen don’t have the same restrictions as to what you can carry. Some better, some worse.
Some LEOs are restricted to only handguns that their department authoritizes. They aren’t even authorized to buy a handgun for personal use at the range so they can’t even own any other handgun . And they all are reported to the state police by the way( supposed to be anyway )
And if you had a permit before you got hired, you have to turn it in for many departments downstate

There are almost no things that are completely illegal to possess. Almost everything has a license that is available to the right people. If you're going to require some people have such a license, then you need to require everyone who needs to handle that stuff have that license.

If a doctor needs a special license to handle narcotics, he doesn't just get to say "I can't do my job without them, so I don't need a license". Why do cops expect that argument to work for them when it doesn't for everyone else ?

Arguing that they do incredibly stupid things downstate is not helping your cause. The obvious solution is stop doing stupid things downstate and then you don't need any of those exemptions.

 

[Truebeliever]

There are almost no things that are completely illegal to possess. Almost everything has a license that is available to the right people. If you're going to require some people have such a license, then you need to require everyone who needs to handle that stuff have that license.

If a doctor needs a special license to handle narcotics, he doesn't just get to say "I can't do my job without them, so I don't need a license". Why do cops expect that argument to work for them when it doesn't for everyone else ?

Arguing that they do incredibly stupid things downstate is not helping your cause. The obvious solution is stop doing stupid things downstate and then you don't need any of those exemptions.

The police possession of narcotics is transitory possession . It’s no different than if a school teacher found narcotics on a kid and turned it over to the police. Now, if the cop was allowed to take it home, you would have an argument. If there was a license for kiddie porn, are you suggesting a license for that. Or a license for the next thing the legislature decides to make illegal?
And there is a license ( sort of), it’s a master license—the badge. You act as if getting the seperate license would be that big a deal as they get paid as apply to the very organization that gave them the badge.
And I might add, to get that badge, they had to complete the requirements that those licenses would require.
By your standard, a doctor would need a separate license for each drug they perscribe.

 

[spat]

The police possession of narcotics is transitory possession . It’s no different than if a school teacher found narcotics on a kid and turned it over to the police. Now, if the cop was allowed to take it home, you would have an argument. If there was a license for kiddie porn, are you suggesting a license for that. Or a license for the next thing the legislature decides to make illegal?
And there is a license ( sort of), it’s a master license—the badge. You act as if getting the seperate license would be that big a deal as they get paid as apply to the very organization that gave them the badge.
And I might add, to get that badge, they had to complete the requirements that those licenses would require.
By your standard, a doctor would need a separate license for each drug they perscribe.

I bet that transitory possession excuse doesn't fly for handguns in a lot of jurisdictions.

Or if it does, it's allowed for some and not for others. Sure, the EMT is allowed to handle the gun when treating the accident victim, but his buddy maybe not.

There is far too much discretion available in the law, and far too much required for society to function.

If a law cannot be applied universally, then it shouldn't exist. If it needs a bunch of exceptions built in, then it's a shitty law and shouldn't exist.

 

[GOPerfect]

There are almost no things that are completely illegal to possess. Almost everything has a license that is available to the right people. If you're going to require some people have such a license, then you need to require everyone who needs to handle that stuff have that license.

If a doctor needs a special license to handle narcotics, he doesn't just get to say "I can't do my job without them, so I don't need a license". Why do cops expect that argument to work for them when it doesn't for everyone else ?

Arguing that they do incredibly stupid things downstate is not helping your cause. The obvious solution is stop doing stupid things downstate and then you don't need any of those exemptions.

The cops do have a special license in NY State. Their Badge, their ID card and The Criminal Procedure Law Book.

 

[Acer-m14]

i have the book in the link below .. i need a new one .. hasn't been updated since safe act ..

Penal Law ``N.Y.S. Certified'': Statute, New York State: 9780930137021: Amazon.com: Books

Penal Law ``N.Y.S. Certified'' [Statute, New York State] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Penal Law ``N.Y.S. Certified''

www.amazon.com

 

[spat]

The cops do have a special license in NY State. Their Badge, their ID card and The Criminal Procedure Law Book.

There shouldn't be a special license just for them.

They should need the same license everyone else needs, and that license should be available to anyone qualified to hold it.

 

[GOPerfect]

There shouldn't be a special license just for them.

They should need the same license everyone else needs, and that license should be available to anyone qualified to hold it.

Nearly every profession in America has different things they are allowed to do while working in their field.

Why would Law Enforcement be any different?

 

[Acer-m14]

just saying .. how it should work ... LOL ..

Cuz I'm in the hood (Greatest cop video of 2021)

Credits to original publisher (no infringement intended)

www.youtube.com

 

[spat]

Nearly every profession in America has different things they are allowed to do while working in their field.

Why would Law Enforcement be any different?

Everyone else needs a specific license or licenses.

Law enforcement seems to claim thwir badge is a wildcard of dozens of others.

I'm just saying, if there's a license for it, then there should be one license for it. Not different one that vary depending on who you work for.

Just like drivers licenses. You guys can't drive "on your badge". You are expected to maintain a normal driver's license like everyone else. Why not do that for everything else too.

I realize it's quite convenient to get the all access pass, but if something is worth licensing, then everyone who wants to do it should have to meet those requirements.

If you think the cops need to do it, but the requirements to obtain the normal license are too onerous, then they should re-evaluate those requirements.