I'm just saying you might as well ask "why do people suck?" or "why do certain folks break the law?" Some people just don't get it right. And no one has the same values as anyone else.
Truth.
I'm just saying you might as well ask "why do people suck?" or "why do certain folks break the law?" Some people just don't get it right. And no one has the same values as anyone else.
I'm just saying you might as well ask "why do people suck?" or "why do certain folks break the law?" Some people just don't get it right. And no one has the same values as anyone else.
Really? If you were an officer, you`d have no use for the Constitution?
I guess I just expect better from law-enforcement. They are held to a higher standard, like it or not. And because of the respect they garner due to their position, they may sway good citizens who otherwise would side with law-abiding gun owners.
Nice leap of logic there
Not a leap in the least. The Second Amendment clearly states that the RIGHT of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED. Not a peep about unless law-enforcement feels it`s too risky...
I guess I just expect better from law-enforcement. They are held to a higher standard, like it or not. And because of the respect they garner due to their position, they may sway good citizens who otherwise would side with law-abiding gun owners.
i said I can see the appeal of a disarmed population if I were on officer.
i see the appeal of prostitution too. I see the appeal of embezzlement. I see the appeal of many things. Doesn't mean I would pursue them.
i can see why an officer would like it, that's all
Any group of people, any topic, there is a bell curve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve
Not a leap in the least. The Second Amendment clearly states that the RIGHT of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED. Not a peep about unless law-enforcement feels it`s too risky...
I get what you`re saying, I seriously do. All I`m trying to say is that opinion doesn`t matter, the Second Amendment is law.
No limitations whatsoever?
Okay. How about this.
With the jury system, it is often not the law that determines the outcome of the trial, but showmanship.
A defendant will often come in, nice suit, haircut, etc.
What does that have to do with the law? Nothing.
But humans are ruled by emotions and opinions.
Yessir, I get that...but I stand by the law of the land...
But to the point of the statement you made, no, my response was not a "leap of logic" at all. If you claim law-abiding citizens have no right to keep and bear arms doc, then you`re dismissing the U.S. Constitution.
Not a leap in the least. The Second Amendment clearly states that the RIGHT of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED. Not a peep about unless law-enforcement feels it`s too risky...
But to the point of the statement you made, no, my response was not a "leap of logic" at all. If you claim law-abiding citizens have no right to keep and bear arms doc, then you`re dismissing the U.S. Constitution.
A factor you have to consider is that police officers are earning a living from the state and the government that they work for may be populated with people who are anti 2A. You won't see many raises or advance far if you publicly disagree with your bosses.
Always follow the money