LSU's steps to being safer?

[MOTOR51]

Because I stated previously my goal is not to attack but to understand. And hopefully get you thinking because one day you will be faced with some of these very questions, and my hope is a well meaning officer of the law doesnt get fooled into violating his oat. Cause let me tell you they will not stop with making civilians unarmed.

Ok, well we are clearly not on the same planet so any further discussion is pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Saintsfan6]

I see you like to ask a lot of questions. Why didn't you preface this question with "I'm not trying to flame you"? What do you think I would do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think he brought up a good point, and I am also interested in how the military or LE would react to a unilateral executive action or bilateral vote by the house and senate that would require confiscating guns from civilians. I don't imagine the orders would be unanimously followed by all LE or military, but it is a good topic to discuss IMO. I am neither LE or military, just a guy that legally owns firearms and am curious how a scenario like this would play out. If you aren't comfortable answering the question, I would not hold it against you.

 

[Whitebread]

Well I'm not going to blow smoke up your ass and tell you I believe it's to allow everyone no matter what to carry guns wherever whenever. I believe it was to address militias of the time. I do not think it was to address CHP on LSU campuses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The militias of the time were farmers, busnessmen, teachers, preachers, doctors, lawyers, you get the idea. Had it not been for civilians being able to protect themselves from there former countrymen who were career military we would still be a colony. How is a militia supposed to fight for freedom when they cant own weapons?

 

[Emperor]

I see you like to ask a lot of questions. Why didn't you preface this question with "I'm not trying to flame you"? What do you think I would do?

"Heir Motor, wissen Sie, warum wir dich hierher gebracht? Nun einige Fragen zu beantworten!"
(Heir Motor, do you know why we brought you here? Now answer some questions!)

 

[Whitebread]

Ok, well we are clearly not on the same planet so any further discussion is pointless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do you figure? I assume yoh are a well meaning good guy who got into law enforcement because you wanted to protect your fellow citizen. I'm a well meaning citizen hoping to help protect the same people you wish to protect.

 

[MOTOR51]

"Heir Motor, wissen Sie, warum wir dich hierher gebracht? Nun einige Fragen zu beantworten!"
(Heir Motor, do you know why we brought you here? Now answer some questions!)

The funny thing is whitebread thinks I'm new to this and apparently thinks he invented this interrogation technique lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whitebread]

I think he brought up a good point, and I am also interested in how the military or LE would react to a unilateral executive action or bilateral vote by the house and senate that would require confiscating guns from civilians. I don't imagine the orders would be unanimously followed by all LE or military, but it is a good topic to discuss IMO. I am neither LE or military, just a guy that legally owns firearms and am curious how a scenario like this would play out. If you aren't comfortable answering the question, I would not hold it against you.

Agreed. If you dont want to answer the question publicly, I get that but you need to at least answer it to yourself. You need to think about it, because one day if we live long enough you will have to make your dicision in a official capacity.

 

[Whitebread]

The funny thing is whitebread thinks I'm new to this and apparently thinks he invented this interrogation technique lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again I'm not here playing gotcha with the fuzz.

At the end of the day we are either 100% a free people or 100% inslaved to our task masters. There is no in between there are just more gentle task masters.

 

[MOTOR51]

Again I'm not here playing gotcha with the fuzz.

At the end of the day we are either 100% a free people or 100% inslaved to our task masters. There is no in between there are just more gentle task masters.

I can tell by your use of slang


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Emperor]

The militias of the time were farmers, busnessmen, teachers, preachers, doctors, lawyers, you get the idea. Had it not been for civilians being able to protect themselves from there former countrymen who were career military we would still be a colony. How is a militia supposed to fight for freedom when they cant own weapons?

This^ is true! The militia's of the time were; "We the People!" The common day argument is playing on semantics and today's interpretation of the word; militia. But none of that matters, because the Founders themselves framed and penned their intent in the many writings back and forth to each other. It is absolutely clear what they meant, and whom thoust was talking about!

But, if people still want to muddy the term, remember; they also used words like "ye", and "thoust". Today we have "m'ni&&a" and "dude".

There is clearly a movement afoot in this country, to subtly (yet purposefully), disregard the Founders crib notes!

 

[Whitebread]

I can tell by your use of slang


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are misinturpreting I assure you.

All jokes, slang and ideaology aside, I have a great respect for any man or woman willing to serve their countrymen no mater if thats a badge, an m16 and fatigues, or an axe and resporator. This country carries on its normal day to day lives because you guys ard willing to put your lives on the line. That is to never be forgoten.

I want to be on the same side as you but I am not going to freely give up a right maintains the rest of my rights and I'm hoping get you thinking about where is your line in the sand, and when do you chose to disobey a direct order to stand for freedom.

 

[Vermiform]

..... I believe it was to address militias of the time.

You had said this before in another thread and I wasn't sure if you truly believed it or you were just trolling me.

Carry on.

Jeff

 

[tkben002]

This thread has been a very good discussion and I have enjoyed reading it. I was not going to post but........

It appears to me that you as a police officer have different gun rights than I do as a citizen, and as such, your rights are not nearly as much in question as the rest of us and maybe that makes it easier for you to justify saying that citizens no longer have a right to protect themselves soley based upon the fact that they are on public property (school campus). To me, this is absolutely absurd. There are stupid people out there, and you can not fix stupid.

How would you like to be told that you had to do your job without a weapon because we have "sensible gun laws and bad people can not get guns"? Or because guns scare the public and there are bad cops out there.....etc. ( I am not saying cops are bad, just trying to show a different context)

Travis

 

[Emperor]

To get an illustrative understanding of how this country is watering down the inherent Right of gun ownership for individual citizens, think about a glass of red wine! Lets use Cabernet Sauvignon to represent the original intent of the Constitution and specifically the 2nd Amendment. It is clearly red! Now, each year; add a drop of clear fresh water to the glass. In 239 years, you have pink water.

The water drops are any laws, opinions, oppositions, hurdles, obstructions, fiats, executive orders, directives, beliefs, interpretations, etc. that go against the initial meaning of the Founders version of the 2nd Amendment and without a Constitutional Convention.

I have no personal problem with a person stating his or her opinion on the matter. Just like I have no problem with another person sticking inanimate objects up their own ass in their own home and as long as they don't have to go to the emergency room to extract said object on my tax dime. But they are wrong to think the 2nd Amendment is not for regular everyday people.

 

[MOTOR51]

This thread has been a very good discussion and I have enjoyed reading it. I was not going to post but........

It appears to me that you as a police officer have different gun rights than I do as a citizen, and as such, your rights are not nearly as much in question as the rest of us and maybe that makes it easier for you to justify saying that citizens no longer have a right to protect themselves soley based upon the fact that they are on public property (school campus). To me, this is absolutely absurd. There are stupid people out there, and you can not fix stupid.

How would you like to be told that you had to do your job without a weapon because we have "sensible gun laws and bad people can not get guns"? Or because guns scare the public and there are bad cops out there.....etc. ( I am not saying cops are bad, just trying to show a different context)

Travis

That's not even a realistic scenario. I tell y'all what, when one of you can present a valid realistic argument to me I will give you a realistic answer. Asking me the same silly questions about how I feel about be 2nd amendment and tin foil hat scenarios is getting old. My view on the 2nd is that when it was put on paper it was exactly as whitebread stated earlier. In today's times there can not be a blanket policy allowing anyone and everyone to carry a firearm. Even the most die hard, molon labe tshirt wearer has to be able to see that. I have never said people should not be able to have as many firearms as they can afford in their house for protection from whatever evil person or thing you want to fear. I only believe that there should be laws to forbid there possession by certain people who have been convicted of crimes and also laws concerning carrying them in certain places like schools.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MOTOR51]

To get an illustrative understanding of how this country is watering down the inherent Right of gun ownership for individual citizens, think about a glass of red wine! Lets use Cabernet Sauvignon to represent the original intent of the Constitution and specifically the 2nd Amendment. It is clearly red! Now, each year; add a drop of clear fresh water to the glass. In 239 years, you have pink water.

The water drops are any laws, opinions, oppositions, hurdles, obstructions, fiats, executive orders, directives, beliefs, interpretations, etc. that go against the initial meaning of the Founders version of the 2nd Amendment and without a Constitutional Convention.

I have no personal problem with a person stating his or her opinion on the matter. Just like I have no problem with another person sticking inanimate objects up their own ass in their own home and as long as they don't have to go to the emergency room to extract said object on my tax dime. But they are wrong to think the 2nd Amendment is not for regular everyday people.

Exactly, but you can't think allowing everyone to possess firearms is the way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MOTOR51]

The more you say the more it seems that you have issues with civilians owning guns. I understand your a cop and I would venture to say you see a segment of society that may warrant a loss of faith in people every now and then, but you have to keep end mind there are those of us whom guns are almost as much a part of our daily grind as yours. I would also venture to say many civilians here in particular handle their weapons as good or better than than the average middle America cop, they shoot more, drill more, put more thought into carry strategy, draw, cover and concealment. Now the larger departments get their recruits better training but some smaller departments are a crap shoot at best. I am by no means saying I'm the guy you want if an active shooter situation were to occur, but I'm proficient, very safety oriented, and most importantly I won't cower and let some wacko kill a room full of people.

I went back and was reading some of the comments again. I want all of you to remember one thing about civilian training classes that you pay to attend. Y'all do realize an instructor who tells everyone the truth is not going to last long in the industry? The object is to make you feel awesome so you will continue to go to classes. Training for a job is not the same because the instructors have no problem telling you that you are garbage because they get a check either way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whitebread]

This^ is true! The militia's of the time were; "We the People!" The common day argument is playing on semantics and today's interpretation of the word; militia. But none of that matters, because the Founders themselves framed and penned their intent in the many writings back and forth to each other. It is absolutely clear what they meant, and whom thoust was talking about!

But, if people still want to muddy the term, remember; they also used words like "ye", and "thoust". Today we have "m'ni&&a" and "dude".

There is clearly a movement afoot in this country, to subtly (yet purposefully), disregard the Founders crib notes!

Exactly, but you can't think allowing everyone to possess firearms is the way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In my opinion any one so dangerous to lose one right should lose them all. I assume you are speaking of the convicted violent offenders. I dont understand the laws preventing felons who have been deemed safe to walk among us arent allowed to own guns. Either they are dangerous criminals or they are reformed citizens.

If you havent noticed don't see grey its black or white.

 

[Emperor]

Exactly, but you can't think allowing everyone to possess firearms is the way to go.

We don't! Where we are now is fine by me! And I would vote to stay there with NO FURTHER restrictions on the 2nd. The 2nd has taken a huge hit in the last 25 years; and I don't like it, but that would be my compromise! However, that is not where many people want to stay. They can't wait to add more water to the glass. The hostility of this issue stems from an endless battle to keep the water droppers away from the damn glass.

 

[tkben002]

That's not even a realistic scenario. I tell y'all what, when one of you can present a valid realistic argument to me I will give you a realistic answer. Asking me the same silly questions about how I feel about be 2nd amendment and tin foil hat scenarios is getting old. My view on the 2nd is that when it was put on paper it was exactly as whitebread stated earlier. In today's times there can not be a blanket policy allowing anyone and everyone to carry a firearm. Even the most die hard, molon labe tshirt wearer has to be able to see that. I have never said people should not be able to have as many firearms as they can afford in their house for protection from whatever evil person or thing you want to fear. I only believe that there should be laws to forbid there possession by certain people who have been convicted of crimes and also laws concerning carrying them in certain places like schools.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nowhere did I state anyone and everyone should be carrying a gun. No one is mandated to have to own a gun, it is a personal choice. Many people do not want that responsibility and I respect that. It is their choice. What I don't respect is someone that thinks that they should be able to take that right from me. Just like you who thinks no one has a right to carry on campus...except police. I am trying to understand this opinion but I can not wrap my head around this type of logic.
The 2nd ammendment is not just a right to only be able to protect yourself in your house.

I have a CHP. I am not allowed by law to protect myself or my family If and when I get near a school/campus. But If I move just a little bit down the road I suddenly have my rights back. That is not being treated as a right, that is being treated as a privledge.
Gun free zones dont work. CHP holders are statistically the most safe and desirable gun carriers. Why would anyone want to prevent them from being able to carry. All but 2 of the mass shootings in the US since 1950 have happened in a Gun Free Zone. The data is there, people need to quit being scared/elitist in thinking that only they should carry or that they should decide what is better for everyone else...when it comes to the 2nd ammendment.

Travis