Police state came knocking for his guns

J R Green said:
You didn't see this yourself until you were inside the tent though, did you? Like you say, not a sexy story.
Click to expand...
Yes, I did. I've never painted cops with a broad brush. I'm not going to pull news stories from Baltimore or Chicago and apply it to all LEOs.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
IrishCannon said:
Like this story for example.

And most cops I interact with on the reg are completely against the war on drugs.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How many drug arrests do those cops still make?
 
This may ruffle a few feathers.

Those types of laws are only in a few states and, yes, there are cops saying that they are against such laws. There are cops who voice that they probably won't follow unjust laws (not put to the test, talk is talk). Which brings me to the problem... Time.

The cops who are against unjust/unconstitutional laws won't be in those positions forever. They will be promoted, fired, retired or just say it's not worth it and move on. Those will be replace with new cops who don't have a problem, only see that they get paid to follow orders.

Same with the general populace. People who remember history will 'move on' for a better phrase. To be replaced with people who tore down statues, been indoctrinated in college and see the Constitution as a piece of paper and not an idea.

In time this country will cease to be anything near what it started out to be and was for 200 years.
 
I can get behind this. The cops I'm talking about do not typically find themselves in elevated roles.

The problem is coming from the top down.
rdinatal said:
This may ruffle a few feathers.

Those types of laws are only in a few states and, yes, there are cops saying that they are against such laws. There are cops who voice that they probably won't follow unjust laws (not put to the test, talk is talk). Which brings me to the problem... Time.

The cops who are against unjust/unconstitutional laws won't be in those positions forever. They will be promoted, fired, retired or just say it's not worth it and move on. Those will be replace with new cops who don't have a problem, only see that they get paid to follow orders.

Same with the general populace. People who remember history will 'move on' for a better phrase. To be replaced with people who tore down statues, been indoctrinated in college and see the Constitution as a piece of paper and not an idea.

In time this country will cease to be anything near what it started out to be and was for 200 years.
Click to expand...

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
Do you really think all the german soldiers were totally on board with all the atrocities? They did their job and when the trials started they pled innocent because they just obeyed orders. Jews, pols, gypsies...
All still dead.
 
Last edited:
IrishCannon said:
Like this story for example.

And most cops I interact with on the reg are completely against the war on drugs.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So how many people are they still locking in cages for drugs?
 
SPM said:
So how many people are they still locking in cages for drugs?
Click to expand...
Way too many.

I get what you're saying with the drug thing, but let's not stray from the topic at hand. - One can't really draw a comparison with how cops act towards drugs vs. the inalienable, God-given right to self-preservation and defense via the 2A. The drug thing is a cultural issue, the 2A is not. It is written, secured, and binds all courts to it when they take their Article VI oath, as well as every cop, service member, and a plethora of others.

Yes, there are a lot of cops that would happily charge the door and infringe on this guys rights, especially in a city like this...but there are also many cops in this country that would happily die in a pile of brass over relinquishing their rights to the State.

You really can't say, "ya well he arrested some dude that was high on bath salts trying to rip peoples face off and had a speedball in his pocket so that cops a scumbag." - It doesn't cross over to the 2A thing.
 
Last edited:
IrishCannon said:
Way too many.

I get what you're saying with the drug thing, but let's not stray from the topic at hand. - One can't really draw a comparison with how cops act towards drugs vs. the inalienable, God-given right to self-preservation and defense via the 2A. The drug thing is a cultural issue, the 2A is not. It is written, secured, and binds all courts to it when they take their Article VI oath, as well as every cop, service member, and a plethora of others.

Yes, there are a lot of cops that would happily charge the door and infringe on this guys rights, especially in a city like this...but there are also many cops in this country that would happily die in a pile of brass over relinquishing their rights to the State.

You really can't say, "ya well he arrested some dude that was high on bath salts trying to rip peoples face off and had a speedball in his pocket so that cops a scumbag." - It doesn't cross over to the 2A thing.
Click to expand...

So......most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against the war on drugs.......and most of those cops still lock way too many people in cages for drugs.

And most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against gun control, but won't be locking up way too many people in cages for guns if they become illegal?

And no offense, but your example is ridiculous, as an assualt on another person is occurring (i.e. there is a victim), whereas the majority of the ober half a million people placed in cages by most cops against the war on drugs are there for nonviolent drug offenses.

Forgive me if I find faith in the mass of law enforcement officers not enforcing laws they proclaim to disagree with.....problematic.

The evidence doesn't support a sudden arrival of a moral compass as Prohibition evolves from alcohol (that American law enforcement actually poisoned and killed over 10,000 of their fellow Americans) to drugs to guns.

Every step of the way they have been order followers, regardless of results.
 
Last edited:
SPM said:
So......most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against the war on drugs.......and most of those cops still lock way too many people in cages for drugs.

And most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against gun control, but won't be locking up way too many people in cages for guns if they become illegal?

And no offense, but your example is ridiculous, as an assualt on another person is occurring (i.e. there is a victim), whereas the majority of the ober half a million people placed in cages by most cops against the war on drugs are there for nonviolent drug offenses.

Forgive me if I find faith in the mass of law enforcement officers not enforcing laws they proclaim to disagree with.....problematic.

The evidence doesn't support a sudden arrival of a moral compass as Prohibition evolves from alcohol (that American law enforcement actually poisoned and killed over 10,000 of their fellow Americans) to drugs to guns.

Every step of the way they have been order followers, regardless of results.
Click to expand...
Without going into detail, no, the cops I work with don't lock people up for drugs. Those individuals just lose their jobs (sometimes).
 
IrishCannon said:
Without going into detail, no, the cops I work with don't lock people up for drugs. Those individuals just lose their jobs (sometimes).
Click to expand...

Turnover must be insane in that department. Anyone been there more than a couple years?
 
SPM said:
Turnover must be insane in that department. Anyone been there more than a couple years?
Click to expand...
Maybe I explained that poorly. - The individuals that get pinched for drugs do not get locked up. Drugs get confiscated, they talk to mr policeman, they get released (unless a major violent crime occured in conjunction with the drug offense), mr policeman talks to their "mommy" and "daddy", they get kicked out of daddy's house. - Our jurisdiction is a little different. PM me if you're curious.
 
Last edited:
SPM said:
So......most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against the war on drugs.......and most of those cops still lock way too many people in cages for drugs.

And most cops you interact with on the reg are completely against gun control, but won't be locking up way too many people in cages for guns if they become illegal?

And no offense, but your example is ridiculous, as an assualt on another person is occurring (i.e. there is a victim), whereas the majority of the ober half a million people placed in cages by most cops against the war on drugs are there for nonviolent drug offenses.

Forgive me if I find faith in the mass of law enforcement officers not enforcing laws they proclaim to disagree with.....problematic.

The evidence doesn't support a sudden arrival of a moral compass as Prohibition evolves from alcohol (that American law enforcement actually poisoned and killed over 10,000 of their fellow Americans) to drugs to guns.

Every step of the way they have been order followers, regardless of results.
Click to expand...

Cops don't lock people up. They just arrest them. The judges and juries lock people up. But of course you already knew that.
 
Last edited:
I think an issue with cases like this is that we can wax poetic over whether or not all cops will follow these orders or will "adhere to the constitution", but I would bet dollars to donuts that with each of these situations the police officers are told "Guys, we have to go check up on this guy, he has been acting irrational and crazy, and he is known to be well armed. So we need to get in there, make sure he is stable, and keep him from hurting himself." To which people training to follow orders think "Well, that sounds reasonable, we don't want a nutjob out there shooting up a school or nothing..."
 
B00ger said:
I think an issue with cases like this is that we can wax poetic over whether or not all cops will follow these orders or will "adhere to the constitution", but I would bet dollars to donuts that with each of these situations the police officers are told "Guys, we have to go check up on this guy, he has been acting irrational and crazy, and he is known to be well armed. So we need to get in there, make sure he is stable, and keep him from hurting himself." To which people training to follow orders think "Well, that sounds reasonable, we don't want a nutjob out there shooting up a school or nothing..."
Click to expand...

And, if the police don't go to check on someone who family members are worried about and he later goes off and kills somebody the police are then critizied for doing nothing.
 
SPST said:
And, if the police don't go to check on someone who family members are worried about and he later goes off and kills somebody the police are then critizied for doing nothing.
Click to expand...





What about Broward county they had multiple calls and they still did nothing and the list goes on and on appears the pick who they check and who they don’t
 
Darkhorse said:
What about Broward county they had multiple calls and they still did nothing and the list goes on and on appears the pick who they check and who they don’t
Click to expand...

The mental health system needs a major overhaul. I saw a fact that said less than 10% of the population of mental institutions from the 50's is currently under direct supervision. Think about that for a second, the population has nearly doubled.
 
Cowboy said:
The mental health system needs a major overhaul. I saw a fact that said less than 10% of the population of mental institutions from the 50's is currently under direct supervision. Think about that for a second, the population has nearly doubled.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The problem is one both of finance and social stigma.
 
I start to twitch when I hear "mental health overhaul" on a pro-2A forum. What direction is this going?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
IrishCannon said:
I start to twitch when I hear "mental health overhaul" on a pro-2A forum. What direction is this going?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
As if you don’t know, wanting to own a gun is an indication of mental instability. Owning one is conclusive evidence of same, but protected by the 2nd. It’s the owning of more that one gun that is actionable.

But cuttin off yer tallywacker, or sewing one on, is perfectly sane. Probably not a tangent we need to explore.
 
IrishCannon said:
I start to twitch when I hear "mental health overhaul" on a pro-2A forum. What direction is this going?
Click to expand...

From where .gov stands, it is an angle to accomplish nullification of the RTKBA. Imo, that's why they are pushing the 'mental illness' narrative.

Who gets to define 'mental illness'? .Gov, of course. Sooner or later, you are going to see folks denied their birthright, simply because they were diagnosed with ADHD as a child, made disparaging remarks about .gov/pols on an internet forum or sustained a boxers fx when they got upset and put their fist to a wall.

Medical records will be scoured and those deemed 'mentally ill/unfit' will be denied ownership/possession of firearms.
 
IrishCannon said:
I start to twitch when I hear "mental health overhaul" on a pro-2A forum. What direction is this going?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think it's the proper conversation to start to figure out somethings. Obviously the country is not going back to wholesale warehousing the mentally ill. But there are a bunch on the streets at this time that are very very dangerous. I had a marine back from his 4th deployment try to kill a drunk guy at the strip club and himself. That guy needed a long term stable treatment with direct supervision. I've never seen the true thousand yard stare before that night. He even told me he just wanted to die. So I cannot tell you how to end the conversation but I can say I think we need to have one about mental health.
 
wsfiredude said:
From where .gov stands, it is an angle to accomplish nullification of the RTKBA. Imo, that's why they are pushing the 'mental illness' narrative.

Who gets to define 'mental illness'? .Gov, of course. Sooner or later, you are going to see folks denied their birthright, simply because they were diagnosed with ADHD as a child, made disparaging remarks about .gov/pols on an internet forum or sustained a boxers fx when they got upset and put their fist to a wall.

Medical records will be scoured and those deemed 'mentally ill/unfit' will be denied ownership/possession of firearms.
Click to expand...
THis pretty much addresses my concerns. - Add to that, women with postpartum depression, military seeking behavioral health, etc. - Allowing the government to decide who can and cannot use a firearm for "mental health reasons" is a very dangerous thing. As with anything else, they will I'm sure push a list of "common sense mental health reforms" and then continue to expand the list as they see necessary.
 
wsfiredude said:
From where .gov stands, it is an angle to accomplish nullification of the RTKBA. Imo, that's why they are pushing the 'mental illness' narrative.

Who gets to define 'mental illness'? .Gov, of course. Sooner or later, you are going to see folks denied their birthright, simply because they were diagnosed with ADHD as a child, made disparaging remarks about .gov/pols on an internet forum or sustained a boxers fx when they got upset and put their fist to a wall.

Medical records will be scoured and those deemed 'mentally ill/unfit' will be denied ownership/possession of firearms.
Click to expand...

"A pair of New York legislators is drafting a bill that would make social media history checks part of the process of purchasing a gun."

https://fee.org/articles/new-york-l...-buyers-social-media-history-for-hate-speech/
 
Diablos said:
"A pair of New York legislators is drafting a bill that would make social media history checks part of the process of purchasing a gun."

https://fee.org/articles/new-york-l...-buyers-social-media-history-for-hate-speech/
Click to expand...


And there ya go.

And just who gets to define "hate speech"? You guessed it...government.


But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism...


It's like they had a crystal ball.
 
Last edited:
This is why donating money & time to groups like GRNC are essential to prevent these laws from becoming enacted here.;)

Donating $50 here & there, a 4-hour shift at the local gunshow, now & then is nothing compared to being forced to shell out tens of thousands in court costs & attorney fees, time off work, etc. :eek:

Not everything they do is perfect but they are the best of what we have & I hope one day I can have more help.

We had a gunshow in Hickory, NC the weekend before the election... but nobody from GRNC was there to hand out voter guides becuse nobody wants to take on the responsibility of 5 weekends a year. :(
Meanwhile I have 10 that I do, and not just 4-hours but all day.

I thrive on this, like a Topsail Island vacation that doesn’t require a massive drive & hurricane traffic. :D
But as good as I am, I can’t carry us all forever. I simply can’t be every where.

Please folks, set your past grievances aside & step up. I can’t say that having someone in Hickory would have made a huge difference, but it might have..

I was at the polling stations in Forsyth county & a huge number of folks don’t even know anything about the judges until they show up. We have got to get out there...
 
Cowboy said:
What exactly did that article add?
Click to expand...

Maybe that the police chief basically said “wow, good thing we have these red flag laws, otherwise who knows what this guy would have done.” I don’t recall that from the first article, but I didn’t check.
 
JimB said:
Maybe that the police chief basically said “wow, good thing we have these red flag laws, otherwise who knows what this guy would have done.” I don’t recall that from the first article, but I didn’t check.
Click to expand...

I saw that part before on one of the articles posted.
 
Also add the whole " I don't know what we were protecting him from but we did a damn good job killing him, no telling what he might have done."

He must be so proud.

If it came from a judge, must be a good thing !

Forking criminal. The guy acts like they didn't have a choice. Everyone there had a choice and I pray it haunts them every day until they seek forgiveness.

JimB said:
Maybe that the police chief basically said “wow, good thing we have these red flag laws, otherwise who knows what this guy would have done.” I don’t recall that from the first article, but I didn’t check.
Click to expand...

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"What would’ve happened if we didn’t go there at 5 a.m.?”

I tell you what would have happened, you would have not shot an innocent man down in his own home. :mad:
 
What should of happened didn’t happen. Bunch is freakin cowards come under the cover of darkness to carry out nazi orders.


Rant over!


Note to self do not go to door during the night but with the exception of “ say hello to my little friend...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom