Will you honor your oath?

They pay me so I follow their orders whatever they may be, that's all that counts to me in order to keep my job, pension and paycheck. The liability is on the agency because I am just following orders.

Ya your one hell of a deputy. Really need more like you in LE. People who will follow orders they know are wrong or questionable.

They pay me so I follow their orders whatever they may be, that's all that counts to me in order to keep my job, pension and paycheck. The liability is on the agency because I am just following orders.

Ya your one hell of a deputy. Really need more like you in LE. People who will follow orders they know are wrong or questionable.

That argument has been tried before.
It didn’t work very well for the Nazi guards at the concentration camps that were “following orders”
There are higher accountabilities than civil liabilities; moral accountabilities trumps them all.
They hung the guards.
Oh well.

They pay me so I follow their orders whatever they may be, that's all that counts to me in order to keep my job, pension and paycheck. The liability is on the agency because I am just following orders.

Ya your one hell of a deputy. Really need more like you in LE. People who will follow orders they know are wrong or questionable.

That argument has been tried before.
It didn’t work very well for the Nazi guards at the concentration camps that were “following orders”
There are higher accountabilities than civil liabilities; moral accountabilities trumps them all.
They hung the guards.
Oh well.

The first poster who started this rant is using circular reasoning to begin with. There is a false premise that local law enforcement will some day be required to confiscate firearms from citizens for no apparent reason under color of law. There is no evidence to support this argument at all. Then somehow we jump all the way to a post hoc ergo propter hoc of comparing law enforcement to the Nazi's of Germany during World War II. That's an idiotic comparison written by a paranoid person. And show me where the right to possess a firearm is a "moral accountability". Moral issues would apply to safety, freedom, and liberty. You can have all those without a firearm. Although I believe in your right to have one. I, unlike you, believe there is a limit to what you should be able to have. There is no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic machine gun. But if you do, you have a class 3 license and the Federal Government knows what you have and where you live. No one with a class 3 is crying about being disarmed. There is no reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle. They are designed for military combat. The only issue is that the federal government is too stupid properly describe one and I agree they cannot be trusted to distinguish between the types. For people to fear gun registration is stupid. There are more pros than cons. And the cons are based in ignorance. But go on and live in dream world of fighting the good fight. This is not Red Dawn and you are not a Wolverine. You are a scared stupid red neck with a gun. And that concerns me more than your pipe dream ever coming true.

Ever read the US Constitution and the Federalist Papers?

The first poster who started this rant is using circular reasoning to begin with. There is a false premise that local law enforcement will some day be required to confiscate firearms from citizens for no apparent reason under color of law. There is no evidence to support this argument at all. Then somehow we jump all the way to a post hoc ergo propter hoc of comparing law enforcement to the Nazi's of Germany during World War II. That's an idiotic comparison written by a paranoid person. And show me where the right to possess a firearm is a "moral accountability". Moral issues would apply to safety, freedom, and liberty. You can have all those without a firearm. Although I believe in your right to have one. I, unlike you, believe there is a limit to what you should be able to have. There is no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic machine gun. But if you do, you have a class 3 license and the Federal Government knows what you have and where you live. No one with a class 3 is crying about being disarmed. There is no reason for a civilian to own an assault rifle. They are designed for military combat. The only issue is that the federal government is too stupid properly describe one and I agree they cannot be trusted to distinguish between the types. For people to fear gun registration is stupid. There are more pros than cons. And the cons are based in ignorance. But go on and live in dream world of fighting the good fight. This is not Red Dawn and you are not a Wolverine. You are a scared stupid red neck with a gun. And that concerns me more than your pipe dream ever coming true.Logic Snap





Well, where do we start?
You are partially correct in the premise that local law enforcement will go around collecting people’s guns, that job has been given to Northern Command under orders from FEMA when the day comes.
The Nazi guard comment was meant to illustrate the perils of following unlawful orders and that the defense of following orders does not exonerate you from criminal responsibility.
The next part of you comments is when it gets interesting for me. Like a good little Socialist/Progressive, you feel that you know best and somehow have been enlightened and empowered to tell the rest of us how to live, what we need, what to buy and how to use it.
First and foremost please read the definition of an “Assault Rifle”. You will be hart broken to find that the readily available civilian AR15s and AK-47 type rifles are simply semi-automatic rifles. I would offer to you that if YOU don’t feel YOU need an AR-15 DON’T BUY ONE, but you lack the constitutional authority to tell me what I need, what I want and what I can buy. See, the way this works is that if you and yours are allowed to dictate in this arena you soon will be telling me that I can’t buy that 400 HP Camaro that I want and that I need to buy the Prius because the speed limit is 70 and they both achieve that top speed so everyone should get a Prius.
Please read the US Constitution and pay special attention to the 2nd Amendment. Please show me where it says anything about hunting or target practice. If you study the history of the period and the trials and tribulations of our founders in preparing this document you will fine that the real Legislative Intent of the 2nd Amendment (Please make note that it was rated #2 in importance) was to empower the people to overthrow an illegitimate government by force should one occur.
You really don’t know who or what I am; however, I will tell you that I have been in this profession for over 30 years and hold a Bachelors and a MPA. I have never seen this country as divided, nor have I seen this level of distrust in the federal government. If there is in fact any ignorance out there is because there is a government that is routinely caught lying and people don’t know what to believe.
Remember your elementary psychology; “Perceptions are real to those that have them” consequently I firmly believe that you are just another liberal pompous ass.

I respect your right to have an opinion on the matter and your right to free speech. But I don't agree with your 2nd amendment interpretation. It is your interpretation, not reality. But I donnot hate you because you view it differently. I am far from liberal, quite the opposite. I am a reasonable conservative. I have read the 2nd amendment and about it's origins. It does not say you can bear any arms you wish. And I am familiar with the definition of an assault rifle. That too is ridiculous. Minor issues like not having a bayonet lug and folding stock makes a difference? Seriously? It's absurd. And Americans were never armed in the times of the American Revolution to revolt against it's government, it was to defend it. So nice tangent there. You should be able to have a pistol, a shotgun and a rifle. But when you start violating the laws, they need to be taken away. You have no need for a machine gun. You have no need for a short barreled rifle or shotgun. In your little world you do, but you have no common sense. You are scared. Of something that will never come. I would fear a government that wishes to disarm its citizens. Thats a problem. But idiots like you have this pipe dream that the Feds have a big plan to do it. You are s-t-u-p-i-d. Grow up Johnny the Prepper.

I respect your right to have an opinion on the matter and your right to free speech. But I don't agree with your 2nd amendment interpretation. It is your interpretation, not reality. But I donnot hate you because you view it differently. I am far from liberal, quite the opposite. I am a reasonable conservative. I have read the 2nd amendment and about it's origins. It does not say you can bear any arms you wish. And I am familiar with the definition of an assault rifle. That too is ridiculous. Minor issues like not having a bayonet lug and folding stock makes a difference? Seriously? It's absurd. And Americans were never armed in the times of the American Revolution to revolt against it's government, it was to defend it. So nice tangent there. You should be able to have a pistol, a shotgun and a rifle. But when you start violating the laws, they need to be taken away. You have no need for a machine gun. You have no need for a short barreled rifle or shotgun. In your little world you do, but you have no common sense. You are scared. Of something that will never come. I would fear a government that wishes to disarm its citizens. Thats a problem. But idiots like you have this pipe dream that the Feds have a big plan to do it. You are s-t-u-p-i-d. Grow up Johnny the Prepper.

You have no idea how much I appreciate that you respect my opinion; it gives me a tingly feeling down my leg. If you in fact have read the 2nd amendment then you will find that it does, in any way, define the arms, its function ability or capacity. Some of you pseudo intellectuals would make the argument that it only authorizes you to be armed with a musket as the technology of the day when written. If that is your interpretation then the 1st amendment only protects the printed media and excludes TV, Radio, the internet, Cell phone services and any other technology since 1776. You can’t pick and choose legislative intent to suit your political agenda.
You did not read the definition of an assault rifle. An Assault Rifle MUST have the capability to fire in full auto mode, the commercial ARs and Aks do not, and as I previously stated they are only self loading semi auto rifles that only resemble their military counterparts. It never ceases to amaze me how the people promoting these gun bans don’t know anything about the guns they want to ban.
You are right that our forefathers were armed in order to fight for our freedom that was when they realized that in order to stay free they must stay armed. They were a lot smarter than us and had just finished obtaining their freedom from an oppressive government; they wanted to make sure that future generations could do the same if needed. That is probably the reason that 420,000 full automatic military rifles are kept in private ownership in Swiss homes; they get it.
Now, all of this other stuff has been window dressing and excuses for your argument. The real deal here is that YOU, in your infinite wisdom and intellectual capacity have decided that I can’t own something that you don’t approve of. Well bubba, as a cop, past SWAT commander, former military and as an American I like guns, collect them and shoot them. It has nothing to do with “preparing for something that will never come” (according to you and your crystal ball), but it may have something to do with idiots like you trying to deprive me of my right as an American to buy whatever the **** I want as long as it is not illegal, immoral or fattening. Oh, and I must be your biggest nightmare, I have federally registered short barreled rifles, machine guns and ten of thousand or rounds of ammunition.
You are so confused that you refer yourself as a “reasonable conservative”. Dude, WAKE UP, you are a liberal, you think like a liberal, you act as a liberal and you write as a liberal painting others with different points of views as intellectually challenged children of a lesser God.
I will reinstate my previous assessment in that you are just another Liberal/Progressive and very confused Pompous Ass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEnVFp4huo8

[quote=Big John]

You have no idea how much I appreciate that you respect my opinion; it gives me a tingly feeling down my leg (diabetic neuropathy, if it was in your buttocks I would say you were having a stroke). If you in fact have read the 2nd amendment (I have) then you will find that it does (did you mean not?), in any way, define the arms, its function ability or capacity (actually it did define it's function as traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and it does not grant you the right to carry anything and everything. Maybe you should read it and the related legal writings on the matter before you spout off so ignorantly). Some of you pseudo intellectuals would make the argument that it only authorizes you to be armed with a musket as the technology of the day when written (That's what I want, an idiot like you with a musket, you would hurt yourself). If that is your interpretation (There is that logical fallacy again, short version, words in my mouth) then the 1st amendment only protects the printed media and excludes TV, Radio, the internet, Cell phone services and any other technology since 1776 (Read a book, try 1791). You can’t pick and choose legislative intent to suit your political agenda (But clearly you do!! You argue like a child by the way. See you make a point, I counter it. You don't get to say what I think then argue it.).
You did not read the definition of an assault rifle (You got me). An Assault Rifle MUST have the capability to fire in full auto mode, the commercial ARs and Aks do not, and as I previously stated they are only self loading semi auto rifles that only resemble their military counterparts (Clearly). It never ceases to amaze me how the people promoting these gun bans don’t know anything about the guns they want to ban (I know plenty. I know minus a selector switch that will turn 90 degrees its the same dam weapon. What's the point? What do you need it for? Hunting ducks? No, you assholes are living for the dooms day, zombie apocalypse or race war. You are an idiot with a cache of guns for no reason.) .
You are right that our forefathers were armed in order to fight for our freedom that was when they realized that in order to stay free they must stay armed. They were a lot smarter than us and had just finished obtaining their freedom from an oppressive government; they wanted to make sure that future generations could do the same if needed. That is probably the reason that 420,000 full automatic military rifles are kept in private ownership in Swiss homes; they get it (No JACKASS could it be that they have no ARMY??!?!? Could it be that they have a true "militia"?? No, that would be counterproductive to your BS argument)(WAIT THERE IS MORE - "Keeping the weapon after end of service requires a license". Swallow that pill. And those weapons are provided by the government to the militia).
Now, all of this other stuff has been window dressing and excuses for your argument. The real deal here is that YOU, in your infinite wisdom and intellectual capacity have decided that I can’t own something that you don’t approve of (No, but go on). Well bubba, as a cop, past SWAT commander (where), former military and as an American I like guns, collect them and shoot them (Yawn). It has nothing to do with “preparing for something that will never come” (according to you and your crystal ball), but it may have something to do with idiots like you trying to deprive me of my right as an American to buy whatever the **** I want as long as it is not illegal, immoral or fattening (Again, where did I make that happen again?). Oh, and I must be your biggest nightmare, I have federally registered short barreled rifles, machine guns and ten of thousand or rounds of ammunition (Not at all, the Feds know where you keep them).
You are so confused that you refer yourself as a “reasonable conservative”. Dude, WAKE UP, you are a liberal, you think like a liberal, you act as a liberal and you write as a liberal painting others with different points of views as intellectually challenged children of a lesser God (You accomplished that all on your own).
I will reinstate my previous assessment in that you are just another Liberal/Progressive and very confused Pompous Ass. (Pompous ass? Me? Do you run the PCSO range now?

[/quote:rdnb4pqu]