That's assuming that they're not even more trigger-happy with non-lethal weapons, which is almost certainly the case. I still think it's a good idea overall, but it would lead to more cases that were individually less bad.
That's still better than now.
That man was shot, in cold blood, for no reason. The police officer - Peter Liang - murdered another man. He's dead. That can't be undone.
A dozen unduly tazed people are a dozen harmed, but alive people. But Akai Gurley - the man Peter Liang murdered, is dead.
Shit man, I don't know. I used to think Second Amendment Crusaders were off-base - how are you going to stop the military with your civilian firearms? But it seems that abuse at the hands of local law enforcement is way more likely.
I have asked this question, and the answer they inevitably give involves mass desertion from the armed forces, bringing their arms and equipment with them, because of some vague idea that the US military wouldn't shoot Americans who are threatening them with weapons, because they're also Americans, and would instead join their noble cause against the government.
Shit man, I don't know. I used to think Second Amendment Crusaders were off-base - how are you going to stop the military with your civilian firearms? But it seems that abuse at the hands of local law enforcement is way more likely.
I have asked this question, and the answer they inevitably give involves mass desertion from the armed forces, bringing their arms and equipment with them, because of some vague idea that the US military wouldn't shoot Americans who are threatening them with weapons, because they're also Americans, and would instead join their noble cause against the government.
Yeah, I've heard this line of reasoning as well. Which really just reinforces the point - civilian-level firearms could not stop a military from subjugating a population. If it takes the military to stop the military, then your guns don't matter.
The thought of a carrying a gun to protect myself against a cop carrying a gun is mind-boggling, and yet it seems like an actual situation that could happen to you. How the hell did we get here? Was it always this way?
I can believe that it was an accidental discharge. However, even if that was the case, it's manslaughter. And even beyond that it is horrendously reckless police work. How the fuck is "draw my gun and point it at the person" the first reaction when patrolling a stairwell?
1) Are NYC cops issued pistols and tasers? The cops in my town carry both.
2) 2nd Amend. Should at least protect up to the basic carbine/rifle in military service. The populace should have access to the M-16/M1911 (or whatever today's equivalent is). The musket of years past is the autorifle of today.
3) Cops should not be immune to prosecution if they kill while in uniform. All cops should also be fitted with cameras and audio recording equipment for everyone's protection. They are public servants and need to be reminded of this fact.
do like Switzerland does. Every person from 18 to 40 is in the national militia, is required to maintain a battle rifle in their homes, and MUST, must mind you, attend mandatory training exercises. If you want to own a pistol for protection outside your home, great, MORE mandatory training for you!
2) 2nd Amend. Should at least protect up to the basic carbine/rifle in military service. The populace should have access to the M-16/M1911 (or whatever today's equivalent is). The musket of years past is the autorifle of today.
They do have access to these weapons in most areas, just not in fully automatic (unless you get a permit and pay a special tax). I don't see any realistic barrier to people defending themselves against the state unless the government were to start bombing it's own cities.
Fully automatic is only useful for suppression fire. Semi-auto is far superior on the battlefield. Even the three round burst on an M-16 is less useful than semi-auto but it is also less wasteful than auto for suppressive fire.
All they have to say is that they feared for their life, then poof. They're free.
Does that excuse also work for when non police shoots someone. Because if it doesn't work with civilians, it should not be enough for police. Shooting an unarmed person, or a kid or anyone who clearly was no needed or shouldn't have been shot should put you in jail. No matter if you are a cop or not, shooting people should be punished, harshly.
That's assuming that they're not even more trigger-happy with non-lethal weapons, which is almost certainly the case. I still think it's a good idea overall, but it would lead to more cases that were individually less bad.
That's still better than now.
That man was shot, in cold blood, for no reason. The police officer - Peter Liang - murdered another man. He's dead. That can't be undone.
A dozen unduly tazed people are a dozen harmed, but alive people. But Akai Gurley - the man Peter Liang murdered, is dead.
I totally agree with you , I just think it's a point worth mentioning that non-lethal weapons will be abused even more then lethal weapons. As I said in my first post I think it's a worthy trade-off, but it's clearly not the final solution. We need something beyond that.
is required to maintain a battle rifle in their homes
Yes, but they're also not allowed to keep ammo in their homes. It changed in 2007, and the practice of keeping ammo in the home(which was also securely wrapped, and audited on occasion - you could only use it when authorized, and penalties for using it otherwise were stiff) was discontinued. Now there's only 2000 or so reservists who are allowed to keep their ammo, and they're specialists assigned to certain areas considered sensitive or otherwise important. Everyone else has to get their ammo from Government Armories in the case of an emergency, or from the range if they wish to go shoot for fun. And as I'm sure you're aware, a gun without ammo is just a half-assed club.
Woman buys gun because she fears unrest in Ferguson. While in a car with boyfriend, she pulls out the gun to show that she is ready for unrest. Boyfriend, who was driving, ducks and hits another car. Gun goes off and kills woman. Ta da
Woman buys gun because she fears unrest in Ferguson. While in a car with boyfriend, she pulls out the gun to show that she is ready for unrest. Boyfriend, who was driving, ducks and hits another car. Gun goes off and kills woman. Ta da
Woman buys gun because she fears unrest in Ferguson. While in a car with boyfriend, she pulls out the gun to show that she is ready for unrest. Boyfriend, who was driving, ducks and hits another car. Gun goes off and kills woman. Ta da
The problem with poor people in poor places is that they are sometimes trapped there because they can't readily survive a trek to a new area. Although I do want to see the people of Ferguson just take their ball and leave.
Comments
That man was shot, in cold blood, for no reason. The police officer - Peter Liang - murdered another man. He's dead. That can't be undone.
A dozen unduly tazed people are a dozen harmed, but alive people. But Akai Gurley - the man Peter Liang murdered, is dead.
The thought of a carrying a gun to protect myself against a cop carrying a gun is mind-boggling, and yet it seems like an actual situation that could happen to you. How the hell did we get here? Was it always this way?
But now, thanks to the Internet, we see where we are.
The No-God is the internet.
WHAT DO YOU SEE?
2) 2nd Amend. Should at least protect up to the basic carbine/rifle in military service. The populace should have access to the M-16/M1911 (or whatever today's equivalent is). The musket of years past is the autorifle of today.
3) Cops should not be immune to prosecution if they kill while in uniform. All cops should also be fitted with cameras and audio recording equipment for everyone's protection. They are public servants and need to be reminded of this fact.
I disagree that the police should be disarmed, but rather that they have steeper penalties for the abuse of power.
All they have to say is that they feared for their life, then poof. They're free.
Woman buys gun because she fears unrest in Ferguson. While in a car with boyfriend, she pulls out the gun to show that she is ready for unrest. Boyfriend, who was driving, ducks and hits another car. Gun goes off and kills woman. Ta da
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/23/us/ferguson-woman-kills-herself/index.html
The problem with poor people in poor places is that they are sometimes trapped there because they can't readily survive a trek to a new area.
Although I do want to see the people of Ferguson just take their ball and leave.