Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1068205]While I respect it ,that is your opinion .I disagree .[/quote]

Law Enforcement doesn't need to be militarized unless there is a more nefarious purpose to their being militarized.

You, GiantOne, from your posts, seem more than happy to have every aspect of your life controlled by others. I am not.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1068193]Extra armor would likely weigh down a normal patrol car, reducing effectiveness in traffic stops. Bulletproof glass sure. But neither of those are about the militarization of the police that you said your videos were proved the need for.
The militarization discussed was about ied proof troop carriers, swat team capabilities in small cities (not large ones named LA or New York).

Just showing a video of a cop being shot, while tragic, isn't proof of a need for military urban attack vehicles.[/quote]

I had a customer years ago who made the occasional armored SUV for dignitaries. The thick steel plating and bullet proof glass add a tremendous amount of weight. The bullet proof glass restricts vision and the extra weight made the thing handle and accelerate like a fully loaded cement truck. The number of people trying to outrun the police would increase tenfold. The cop has to eventually exit the vehicle at some point and be vulnerable anyway.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068238]Law Enforcement doesn't need to be militarized unless there is a more nefarious purpose to their being militarized.

You, GiantOne, from your posts, seem more than happy to have every aspect of your life controlled by others. I am not.[/quote]

Not every aspect no but I also realize there are some things that are out of my control but then I'm not the one whining and crying about people who do and don't mind it .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068238]Law Enforcement doesn't need to be militarized unless there is a more nefarious purpose to their being militarized.
[/quote]





[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=7Dc9ovR9moq-YM&tbnid=7QM3oGUnMayPKM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fexplore%2Fcops%2F%3Fp%3D7&ei=5uhKU_WfENfNsQTGsILYAQ&bvm=bv.64542518,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNFXD0WltbxbQAvBwrTRjeci9-YiQA&ust=1397504296780698"][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSqrlLxCkLZRCshpw93V7Y8MyHzerAW_qCpLECLwpd0qkX2rf1KXQ[/IMG][/URL]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1068259][URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=7Dc9ovR9moq-YM&tbnid=7QM3oGUnMayPKM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fexplore%2Fcops%2F%3Fp%3D7&ei=5uhKU_WfENfNsQTGsILYAQ&bvm=bv.64542518,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNFXD0WltbxbQAvBwrTRjeci9-YiQA&ust=1397504296780698"][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSqrlLxCkLZRCshpw93V7Y8MyHzerAW_qCpLECLwpd0qkX2rf1KXQ[/IMG][/URL][/quote]

That sums your position up perfectly. You're ignorant of the task the police undertake.

Per [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=2&"]SCotUS 2005[/URL], the police have no Constitutional duty to protect. Therefore I undertake my own protection and that of the people I care about.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068268]That sums your position up perfectly. You're ignorant of the task the police undertake.

Per [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=2&"]SCotUS 2005[/URL], the police have no Constitutional duty to protect. Therefore I undertake my own protection and that of the people I care about.[/quote]


If anyone is ignorant of the position of the Police it would be you .Taking things out of context again but as I have said before you have never let a fact get in the way of one of you lies .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Please explain, with specifics, how I'm taking things out of context or admit you're a juvenile, reactionary poster with no basis for anything you stand for.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068398]Please explain, with specifics, how I'm taking things out of context or admit you're a juvenile, reactionary poster with no basis for anything you stand for.[/quote]

LOL , .


[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=rt4pIcMbZogjbM&tbnid=GwH77t9PPw0BrM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcowbell.typepad.com%2Fforty_deuce%2F2013%2F02%2Ftennis-bullying-robson-marino-abuse.html&ei=rOpMU5bUENWisATRg4CQBQ&bvm=bv.64764171,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNGEviiYqnMLMoEMqnVeYbxzU3qu_w&ust=1397635943909074"][IMG]http://cowbell.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83423e30253ef017ee8a4d2b6970d-pi[/IMG][/URL]

No, I didn't think you could.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068268]That sums your position up perfectly. You're ignorant of the task the police undertake.

Per [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=2&"]SCotUS 2005[/URL], the police have no Constitutional duty to protect. Therefore I undertake my own protection and that of the people I care about.[/quote]

LOL, I see reading comprehension is not you strong point .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

OK, so you're comparing yourself to the Internet Warrior?

No, I don't think you could take him. You're a couple of grades below. He probably makes sense.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068459]OK, so you're comparing yourself to the Internet Warrior?
.[/quote]

No , you ! lol

If you call pointing out your inaccuracies and lies bullying, then sure. If it makes you happy to imagine me that way, go ahead. More delusion.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1068489]If you call pointing out your inaccuracies and lies bullying, then sure. If it makes you happy to imagine me that way, go ahead. More delusion.
[/quote]

LOL, statements like that are one of the reasons for drug testing .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/15/us/bloomberg-gun-safety-initiative/]Bloomberg to spend $50 million to challenge NRA on gun safety - CNN.com[/url]



[B]CNN)[/B] -- Michael Bloomberg is investing a chunk of his personal fortune to minimize the influence of the National Rifle Association.
The former New York City mayor pledged $50 million to his new group Everytown for Gun Safety, an umbrella organization for his two other gun control groups: Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. It aims to make the political climate more supportive of gun control.
The new organization plans to compete against the NRA by adopting its playbook. The NRA has built an impressive and effective organization that touts millions of members, a robust lobbying organization and a massive campaign arm


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR3V6guxFoo]Michael Bloomberg to Spend $50 Million on New Gun Control Group - YouTube[/ame]