1911Forum banner

cops want hollow points banned??

3331 Views 34 Replies 25 Participants Last post by  LW McVay
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
NYC seems to be a seething cesspool of stupidity in a truly staggering number of shapes and forms. My favorite parts are the "need a permit to buy ammo" and the admission at the end that "vests stop hollow-points and (ball) rounds equally well". I'm sure they could find a couple NYPD officers willing to publicly support banning hollow-points. Out of a few tens of thousands of officers there's undoubtedly going to be some idiots in the mix willing to say such a thing.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
7,478 Posts
"Our mission is to stop violent felons," said Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch. "There is no reason for anyone else to have that ability."
Lynch :barf: apparently thinks policemen are an exhaulted breed who need better weapons than the rest of us. He misses the point that he carries a weapon for the same reason I do: self defense. I guess he thinks NYC (like DC) is so safe I don't need to be armed at all.

Gotta ban dem "cop killer" bullets!

-- Chuck
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
17,797 Posts
Ignorance knows no bounds.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
"Our mission is to stop violent felons," said Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch. "There is no reason for anyone else to have that ability."

Nobody else needs the ability to stop violent felons???????????????????
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Not this cop.

Non-LEO's should have the same access to whatever we carry. Bad guys will always get whatever they want, regardless of the law... that's why they're bad guys! I see no reason to handicap lawfully-armed citizens.

Train hard and be safe.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,002 Posts
I tell you some people are clueless!!!

I was over at my sisters house last night and while I was there I was talking to her husband, a NYC cop, about guns and I brought this article up and spoke to him about it. He TOTALLY agrees with the whole concept that civilians should not have hollow-point ammo, high-capacity magazines, etc..., etc..., etc...

His argument is that the bad guys shouldn't have these various things because it puts cops in danger and the civilians don't need them. :mummy: Like the bad guys are going to follow the laws. :scratch: How about the fact that this leaves "Joe Average" civilian armed with lesser protection ability than the bad guys have. :mad:

I tried to get him to understand that it should be the illegal use of a weapon that is against the law, not the weapon itself. He wouldn't hear any of it.

It amazes me how some people think. In fact, I am not sure that some people even do think - I know that sounds awful, but I think its true.

Luke
 

· Registered
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
Hmmmm yes Im sure someone willing to commit a felony by illegally carrying a handgun in NYC and then trying to kill a cop with it will follow the ban on hollow point ammo. As for law abiding citizens, who will never even think about killing a cop and just want the best equipment with which to defend themselves and their property, they can go pound sand I guess.

The authorities should be able to successfully keep hollow point ammunition out of NYC quite well just by making it illegal too. Just like they have with cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, prostitution, etc.

:rolleyes:

Im suprised they didnt mention hollowpoint bullets filled with liquid teflon in that article. What a horror those are. I learned all about them on an episode of Third Watch. If the teflon gets in your bloodstream... thats all she wrote.

:rofl:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Unfortunately, there are some "elitist" cops out there who feel that non-LEO's do not have the right to adequately defend themselves. It's sad how someone who swears an oath to uphold and defent the Constitution of the United States may never have heard, or does not understand, the Second Amendment.

It has been my experience that these elitists are usually the cops who are not part of the gun culture and often are not particularly proficient with their sidearm (there's a vast difference between "qualifying" and "being proficient," in my book). I suspect that their fear of an armed citizenry stems from their feelings of inadaquacy with their martial skills or lack of familarity with weapons in general. We fear what we don't understand.

Those LEO's who actively train hard (in departmentally-supported programs or otherwise... out-of-pocket) to maintain a high level of proficiency are often quite comfortable being around other armed non-LEO's, providing proper safety rules are observed. These types of LEO's can often be found at shooting competitions and are not afraid to be out-shot by a non-LEO. This type of competition motivates them to train harder. In 10 years of active pistol competition I have met many, many non-LEO shooters who helped me along with my firearms skills. At the same time, on many occasions, I have been in the position to help along a non-LEO shooter. This type of interaction builds bonds between LEO's and the citizenry they protect.

Of course, there may be many LEO's who are highly proficient with firearms who are against an armed citizenry simply because they know that without regular performance evaluations and mandatory on-going training, many non-LEO's may not have the necessary skills to safely go armed in society, and as a result, create an undue danger. Based on many of the civilian CCW courses I have taught I find that argument difficult to counter at times. The answer to this argument is for anyone considering going armed to get the proper safety, marksmanship, and tactical training before strapping on a sidearm and heading out into the civilized world. If you know someone who ventures out with a sidearm, but couldn't hit sand if he/she fell off a camel, then it is your responsibility as a member of the gun culture to help them along with their skills or direct them to someone who can. Safety is everyone's job.

Of course, there are also LEO's (and I would hazard to guess it is an extreme minority) who feel that they are entitled to certain perks and benefits simply because they wear a badge. Fortunately, in my 10 years of municipal law enforcement I have found this type of LEO to be few and far between. It is difficult to argue any point of reason with them so I usually steer clear of having such a discussion with them.

I teach firearms courses to both LEO's and non-LEO's and over the past several years have had the chance to have this discussion frequently. Overall, the majority of LEO's I have met do not have an issue with an armed citizenry, provided the armed citizen takes the time to acquire proper traning and maintain a reasonable level or proficiency.

I would hope that anyone thinking about carrying would first prepare themselves properly. Col. Jeff Cooper explained it best when he said,

"Having a firearm and thinking you are armed is like having a piano and thinking you are a musician."

Barrett Tillman followes in that vein with,

"You will not rise to the occasion; you will default to your level of training."

Train hard and be safe.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
MEH92:

I hope that you realize that you are in fact the vast minority in today's LEO world. Every uniform I have met in my life has been heavily against civilians owning any guns, period. No buts, no howevers, not maybes. Their uniform notion is that they have the job to stop criminals and don't you civilians take their glory. I am not joking. People should just call 911 and whatever they can't do, they need to vote for more police funding in the next election(if they survive the ordeal). I see way too many people who barely graduated high school and got a job in the sheriff's department and next were pulling me over for U turns.

The LEO world is like anyother world, a lot of it is composed of people looking for a job, unfortunately when people aren't passionate about what they were there to do in the first place, we have a police state where police is run like any other business. That's what I see LEO has become in some parts of the country.

The LEO world has been a forerunner for the anti-gun movement, too often have we seen one uniform at one of these rallies that cry "no more deaths", yet these women(and some men) would be better off carrying a Keltec next time a knife is wave in their face, not a 911 call minutes later. Yet these mouth-foaming anti-gun people are dragging along a few witless officers and say, "see, even the cops think so",

I hate to say this, but I have lost a lot of my respect for the law because of the LEOs I have encountered in my life time. They were simply doing their job, and that's exactly what the problem is.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
An armed society is a polite society

I think it varies by your location.
All the LEO's I know are strong supporters of a armed community.
"Call 911, be sure to give a good description of YOURSELF, hold them at gunpoint, if your life is in danger kill them."

The description of yourself is so they dont shoot the wrong dirtbag when they show up.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
7,478 Posts
Any time a policeman refers to other civilians as "civilians" tells you a lot about his arrogance and eliteism. (If he doesn't want to be a civilian he can join the military.)

Note MEH92 did not do this, he mentions "non-LEOs".

-- Chuck
 

· Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
270winchester said:
MEH92:

I hope that you realize that you are in fact the vast minority in today's LEO world. Every uniform I have met in my life has been heavily against civilians owning any guns, period. No buts, no howevers, not maybes.
Well, I suppose this could vary by region. I am a LEO in Arizona and in my agency, and my experience with those in other agencies, is that about 60% of the officers are strongly in favor of armed citizens, 10% are pro gun control, and about 30% are somewhere in between. I would say, without a doubt, the average LEO I know is more pro gun/2nd Amendment than the average non-LEO.

Troy
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
17,797 Posts
TroyTK said:
I would say, without a doubt, the average LEO I know is more pro gun/2nd Amendment than the average non-LEO.

Troy
That has been my experience as well.

270 Winchester: Your views have to be a bit shaded due to your location in Santa Cruz. Next to Berkley, one of the most liberal/socialistic places on the planet.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Hmmmm.....

270winchester:

Your post deserves a response. I hope the moderators see this as simply an informed reply and not a flame, insult, or instigation for an argument. I feel that I have some standing in this area so here goes:

I cannot know what your experience with LEO's has been in the past. I'll assume from your reply you've had your fair share of interactions with LEO's and based upon that collective experience, you have come to form your biased conclusions. That is unfortunate, but it hardly places you in a position to speak for the "law enforcement world." If you have other special credentials, or access to information or data to support your positions I'd like to hear it. I speak from a position of professional interaction from duty, training, and socializing with LEO's for a little over 10 years.

I suspect that my law enforcement experience in general, is probably a bit more expansive and varried than that of an average 21-year old (not to insinuate that you are average), but I would still not presume to speak for the entire "law enforcement world." I can speak of those officers and agents with which I've had this discussion and I'll stand by my initial assesment. TroyTK put up some interesting numbers and by my guesstimate, he's probably pretty close to what I have found, give or take a few percentage point here and there.

As far as your assessment of the "LEO world," "LEO glory," and educational requirements for the job... well... I think people will see those non-points for what they are. Maybe you have an excellent education and you feel that a "GED" shouldn't be able to give you a traffic ticket. That is something you will simply have to come to grips with as you grow older. I have a bachelor's degree from a highly reputable private university, but most of my superiors only finished high school or came out of the military. That doesn't make them less intelligent than me, it simply means they took a different route to the same destination. Obviously, your assesment will fit a minority of officers and supervisors here and there, but I've found that to successfully absorb and sucessfully put into practice all the necessary training, skills, and command of legal issues, we must have at least a modicum of intelligence, common sense, and good judgement. The news is often filled with stories of LEO's acting inappropriately. It rarely shows us at our best because that wouldn't sell papers or get TV ratings. Be careful how you view the media. Listening to their stories as if they were gospel would give you a very stilted and biased view of the real world. That however, is a topic for another time.

Be weary when you hear about particular unions, associations, or other groups of LEO's who take a stand on one particular side of the argument. Often that position does not accurately reflect the feelings of the whole body, rather it reflects the feelings of those participants who decided to show up at the meeting and vote. Or worse, it reflects the opinions of the leaders of that body who pressure subordinates to "see things their way." I believe that this is not just characteristic to law enforcement, but to many types of organizations throughout society.

I have never been to California. Maybe you really have the pulse of law enforcement on the West Coast. I'd love to hear from a California LEO on this matter. I will say this; my sister-in-law works for Los Angeles (area?) Animal Control and she is an occasional recreational shooter. She also has many good frineds in the LAPD. Often she goes out into the desert, shooting with frineds. Some are LEO's, some aren't. I have never gotten the feeling from her that all her cop buddies are anti-gun. That however, is a small sampling from CA.

What I have found to be generally accepted by LEO's is that scum-bags should not have guns... period. I don't mean misdomeanant traffic violators, or kids who got caught with a joint when they were 18; I mean serious convicted violent felons, drug dealers, and organized crime. It would be hard to argue that lawfully arming these people is a good idea. Unfortunately many of these idiots illegally arm themselves anyway.

Finally, I must regretably agree that some LEO's have lost their passion for the job, and it directly affects their performance. I see it every day and it never stops bothering me. Why does this happen? Certainly the media's constant bombardment doesn't help. Also, chronic underfunding in some areas of the country makes a tough job even tougher... and more dangerous. That can't do much for morale either. Finally, constant exposure to the lowest dregs of society, grief, tragedy, death, and victimiation takes it toll on the psyche. This is a voluntary job and all of us are free to quit whenever we like. Unfortunately, economic issues keep many disenchanted LEO's chained to the "regular paycheck" so instead of leaving they stay on and allow their morale and performance to slowly slip away. It is sad, but it happens. While those LEO's exist, there is a vast multitude of LEO's out there singly interested in making this a better, safer, responsible society and are willing to do our level best, within the bounds of the law, to achieve that goal.

I'll end my rant on that positive note.


Chuck S:

Thank you for noticing. Yes, many LEO's will commonly use the terms "civilian" or "citizen" in casual discussion when refering to non-LEO's. I count myself guilty in the past. They are misnomers to be sure, but I think it comes from the para-military nature of the profession. I strictly avoided those terms here for obvious reasons. If you hear an LEO make this mistake please do not automatically assume that you are dealing with an elitist. It is simply (and unfortunately) a part of the professional jargon we cops love to use. :)

We are all citizens and civilians and equally restrained and empowered by the same body of laws.

Train hard and be safe.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,900 Posts
Chuck S said:
Any time a policeman refers to other civilians as "civilians" tells you a lot about his arrogance and eliteism. (If he doesn't want to be a civilian he can join the military.)

Note MEH92 did not do this, he mentions "non-LEOs".

-- Chuck

As far as CPD goes Chuck you ought to know they cover everyone equally .....we're all Aholes and if not currently an Ahole you're an Ahole in waiting:biglaugh:
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,689 Posts
270 Winchester: That is not my experience with LEOs. Members of the local city police, university police, sheriff's office, and MO Highway Patrol use the range I go to. I've asked and not one of them ever replied that they thought a lawfully armed citizen was a threat to them. Just the opposite. MO requires mandatory classroom and range training prior to applying for a CCW license. The course I attended was taught in the county court house by the county Sheriff's Office. We used the range that the deputies used at that time for the qualification. The classroom instructors and range officers were deputies and the sheriff was present for all training. Sure doesn't appear to me that they were against CCW by lawful citizens! They used the money paid for the training to buy police equipment they needed. Stuff like vests to protect them from the "bad guys" that don't give a damn about the law. Gotta disagree with you on this one bud. Have a great New Year!
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
If it were up to me, there would be NO restrictions on the carry, possession, or use of ANY firearm in ANY caliber, using ANY ammunition the owner decided on.

A good example is the use of AP .30 rounds for competition. The .30 AP projectile has shown superb results on the firing line. Granted, they ARE available--but only in certain places, unfortunately.

Now, I might well get flamed for this, but so be it: The only restriction I would keep would be a NICS type background check, done instantly without record retention. Why? I believe that violent felons should lose the right to own firearms FOREVER. You may differ, but I think that people who have a history of attacking others should not have an easy time of it.

Then again, I bet if the restrictions on carry were removed, there would not be too many people convicted of violent crimes left alive to worry about. :p
 

· Registered
Joined
·
8,947 Posts
Powderman said:
I believe that violent felons should lose the right to own firearms FOREVER.
I believe violent felons should receive a fair trial and a swift execution.

;)

Since I havent seen any evidence that the Brady Bill stops violent criminals from getting guns its nothing but wasteful spending.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top