Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
A Cops Guide to the DC Gun Ban
policelink.com — The law enforcement community has explicitly stated they are against the ban. See what they have to say.
qwirty408- 57 diggs
- digg it
- Iconoclast25, on 03/20/2008, -0/+35Truly excellent - this is a series of statements by various LEOs offering strong support to firearms owners and CCW holders. It's not what the elitist political cops at the top say in keeping with their left wing politico masters, but the views of those who put their lives on the line to protect society.
- WriterSD, on 03/20/2008, -0/+20Exactly!
- TrevaLVF, on 04/11/2008, -0/+1I had not thought of it until the Bush regime assumed power, but I can see some far right-wing extremists calling for public disarmament while claiming it's for "national security reasons," and "to defend our country from domestic terrorists."
The far left: "for public safety reasons."
The far right: "for national security reasons."
Both argue in favor of less freedom, they mostly disagree on the "reasons" why they want certain restrictions on our liberties.
- WriterSD, on 03/20/2008, -0/+25Anything about cops, who risk their lives every day for our safety, is diggable!
- Temlakos, on 03/20/2008, -0/+23Forty years ago, cops wanted all guns off the street--said, "Leave it up to the professionals." But the current generation of cops doesn't feel that way anymore--and you never hear about that, do you? Except in places like this...
- KJeffV, on 03/21/2008, -0/+4I'm always highly amused by the news arts that speak to citizens successfully defending themselves, followed by the standard police disclaimers. Of course, the argument against successful, personal defense is much like the argument over whether God still performs miracles. After over thirty yrs of calm observation, "ten thousand co-incidences" are no longer co-incidental. And, ten thousand successful, personal defenses no longer fit the standard, police disclaimer-mold. History is SO inconvenient, isn't it?
- G3eeze, on 03/20/2008, -0/+22The cops are the first to tell a citizen that they are powerless to do anything about someone that threatens you harm but has not acted upon the threat. It is up to the citizen to provide his/her own protection for themselves and their families. It always has been. That is what the "militia" actually is, common citizens that are armed and that can act in the absence of other authority that is unavailable. Government does not want us to have "weapons" or "arms" of any sort to protect ourselves with so that we are relegated to being rock throwers, virtually defenseless against any danger that comes against us, both foreign and domestic.
- PatNolan, on 03/21/2008, -0/+4I knew a girl in college that was in an abusive relationship. She left and he followed. She got a restraining order. He violated it and smacked her around. They picked him up and in less than a week he was back out on the street. She is dead by his hand and he is in prison. The police can't protect you. They can only pick up the pieces.
- oceanrain, on 03/20/2008, -0/+22Common sense says that criminals will never obey gun bans, so it is only logical that law-abiding people have the rights and means to protect themselves. Afterall, that thin blue line between safety and insanity is stretched thin.
- PappyPapillon, on 03/20/2008, -0/+16Nice to hear from some good cops for a change instead of the worthless power-mad lunkheads who normally make the news.
- Iconoclast25, on 03/20/2008, -0/+10The ones who garner the headlines are the top brass and / or "spokes____" who are strictly political toddy spin merchants beholden to their politico masters. They are flunkies with titles who seldom are in touch with their rank and file.
- Antarcticn, on 03/20/2008, -0/+11SCOTUS entertained oral arguments the day before yesterday about banning guns and killing the Second Amendment. Of course, the 4½ communist injustices crave killing the Second Amendment and private gun ownership.
The scariest part is that presumed pro-Constitution "conservative" Justices are balky. Their tone belies waffling instead of staunch support of gun ownership.
Here's the punchline. SCOTUS's scheme is to reveal its "decision/opinion" at the end of June immediately before scurrying off for summer vacation. If you've paid attention to "hit & run" misrulings, that's when they issue their absolutely worst diktats as they dash out the door. Expect the worst. - whodat51773, on 03/20/2008, -0/+13The purpose of the law is to convict...Cops really are after the fact not because they want to be but because its the law. If the voting majority of any nation cannot be trusted with firearms, then that nation is doomed.
- RGWX, on 03/21/2008, -0/+4I'll quote the Bard, "An armed society is a polite society."
- GodzGurl59, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3Those were some interesting articles and even more interesting comments! Thanks Icon!
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by