ny leo exempt

[Soju 153]

How can you say frequency doesn't matter? Citizens are not required to respond to confront dangerous people of all types, police are. Citizens are required to retreat, police are required to move forward to the threat. You cannot see the difference? Frequency and mission are WAY far apart!

 

Say that to the person who is a shit situation and ends up not being able to completely defend themselves or family because of some arbitrary restriction. Statistics don't mean squat on a personal level. I would say it doesn't matter if I valued a certain group of people's lives more than another groups. I think it is fair to assume you do not think the life of a LEO is more important than your own life, your family members lives, or just a random law abiding citizen. Is this a correct assumption?

 

That is why if it is deemed acceptable for LEOs, it should be equally acceptable for law abiding citizens.

[Knuckle Sandwich 5]

I'm pretty sure everyone here can agree that pro-carry non-LEOs want to see LEOs, retired LEOs, AND non-LEOs able to carry. What some folks seem to have a hard time understanding is that the feeling isn't mutual. LE leadership in the Northeast always thumps against us, rank and file guys only cry out when they aren't exempted. That is why you are seeing regular folks making a rabble about exemptions. Regular folks didn't drive the wedge between us, politicians and LE leadership did. The rank and file guys that may disagree but stand idly by are not part of the solution, so they are viewed as part of the problem.

 

We are supposed to be equal, but are treated like criminals. If you don't see why this creates animosity it's not really worth having a conversation about it.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

How can you say frequency doesn't matter? Citizens are not required to respond to confront dangerous people of all types, police are. Citizens are required to retreat, police are required to move forward to the threat. You cannot see the difference? Frequency and mission are WAY far apart!

 

It's a rather simple idea, i'm not sure why its flying so high. You have 2 separate ideas here, the fact that LEO's encounter more threats, and the fact that in the state of NY and NJ we have a duty to retreat WHEN POSSIBLE, and no duty to retreat inside your residence.

 

I'll just enforce what i have been saying this entire time... You may deal with way more threats then your average person, but that doesn't change the fact that your average person doesn't deal with those same threats, no matter how less often. If you need something to deal with a threat, then it would be logical to say that i need that same thing to deal with a threat.... Even if i only need it once, and you need it a thousand times. What's not to get about that? Your not dealing with all these threats at once, you deal with them on a case by case basis, just like we do. How does the fact you deal with threats more often mean that those individual threats are any greater then the ones we deal with?

How does being exempt contribute to the frequency of threats you deal with? it doesnt matter.

how does being exempt contribute to individual threats you deal with? Increases your potential for self defense and the likely hood of survival.

 

I dont want to see LEO's loose rounds from there magazines.. i want these expemtions to be called what they are, removed...and i want everyone to have what they need to protect themselves..... that is what this is about...

 

people just think it is funny, ironic, retarded etc.. when leo's are given a taste of what it feels like to be us, complain that it puts them in danger, and have no comment on how it relates to everyone that is not a criminal, its selfish attitude and they are not defending rights, they are defending their privileges.

 

When i read about when LEO's step up, it puts a big smile on my face because they are a credible entity that can greatly impact the rights of all individuals.

[TK421 2]

I disagree.... I do not work in Camden/Newark/Jersey City.....etc....but there are plenty of very bad people all over. I am always amazed at the lack of knowledge people have of what actually happens in their own neighborhoods. Frustration with the system abounds. A gentleman I arrested attempted to stab me with a 14" scissor blade, fought with me for my gun, bit my chest so hard through my BP vest that he burst the blood vessels in my chest then finished by calling out he would get 5 years, do only 3 years then when he gets out and I forgot about him he would walk up to me and put a bullet in my head, cut off my dick and stick it in my wife's mouth before he put a bullet in her head. During grand jury one of the people on the jury said and I quote: "it is his freedom of speak to say that". I have no faith. As a police officer I get it from bad guys and goods guys who just don't like the police for whatever reason. You cannot win.....

 

In the last 8 months or so, I've done plenty of use of force reports including chasing down a criminal with a 9mm and tackling him as he was pulling it out of his waistband. "We" have regularly needed high quality/capcity weapons. I'm not saying I don't want others to have it if the "want" one, but we "need" them. There is a big difference between wanting one and having to have one. Like it or not that makes perfect sense.

 

Agreed, if YOU NEED one you will have it, if WE NEED one we're screwed, that is the difference and it makes no sense what so ever. Point is bad people do bad things; doesn’t matter if it is a 30, 15, 10, 7, or 5 round magazine a knife, a bat or even as mentioned scissors, bad people will do bad things with them leaving the good people encumbered by these laws that leave them holding their hand on their ass when they NEED them.

[ktd1597 10]

Who ever said anything about "rights"? Nor do I believe any one person is more important than another, I would and have put my life on the line protect people in my community. That's my job (guns are one of our tools) when I go to work, and respond to situations where I need to protect myself and others. Using the argument that everyone should have any weapon available then why don't we push for automatic weapons? That would be one of the best for protection since it works well for our military? The SWAT guys carry automatic weapons, I don't. I understand why and do not begrudge them. I would like to, but it is unreasonable for me to have an automatic weapon for patrol purpose. The weapons/magazines carried work well enough to give us an edge over criminals carrying weapons. If I had a S.A.W. in my trunk it would be cool and work pretty well, but that's not going to happen.

 

There is no blank check on weapons that can be possessed. With "some" weapons you will need to pass a litmus test as to WHY you need that particular kind of gun. I think the NY restrictions go WAY too far in the opposite direction and hopefully someone can change it, but he LE community shouldn't have to suffer because of it.

 

It is a simple matter of work. Higher frequency, different mission. We’ll never change each other’s minds, but we can all agree that NY’s rules suck and the ones proposed by the POTUS suck! J

[ktd1597 10]

It's a rather simple idea, i'm not sure why its flying so high. You have 2 separate ideas here, the fact that LEO's encounter more threats, and the fact that in the state of NY and NJ we have a duty to retreat WHEN POSSIBLE, and no duty to retreat inside your residence.

 

I'll just enforce what i have been saying this entire time... You may deal with way more threats then your average person, but that doesn't change the fact that your average person doesn't deal with those same threats, no matter how less often. If you need something to deal with a threat, then it would be logical to say that i need that same thing to deal with a threat.... Even if i only need it once, and you need it a thousand times. What's not to get about that? Your not dealing with all these threats at once, you deal with them on a case by case basis, just like we do. How does the fact you deal with threats more often mean that those individual threats are any greater then the ones we deal with?

How does being exempt contribute to the frequency of threats you deal with? it doesnt matter.

how does being exempt contribute to individual threats you deal with? Increases your potential for self defense and the likely hood of survival.

 

I dont want to see LEO's loose rounds from there magazines.. i want these expemtions to be called what they are, removed...and i want everyone to have what they need to protect themselves..... that is what this is about...

 

people just think it is funny, ironic, retarded etc.. when leo's are given a taste of what it feels like to be us, complain that it puts them in danger, and have no comment on how it relates to everyone that is not a criminal, its selfish attitude and they are not defending rights, they are defending their privileges.

 

When i read about when LEO's step up, it puts a big smile on my face because they are a credible entity that can greatly impact the rights of all individuals.

 

I see your point...

[JackDaWack 2,895]

FA weapons are accessible, maybe not here, but in other states. I would argue that military personnel actually deal with different threats then we do here domestically, so the idea that i need a grenade launcher and so on..... would be a little misplaced. Also, a gun is tool you use on the job, but it is a tool that everyone uses for protection. No one should have to suffer from these restrictions, not LEO not no one.

[PeteF 1,044]

Ktd1597,

 

Question for you.

 

When that 7 man team of extensively trained SWAT members go to make an arrest at a drug dealers house,

They need to have automatic weapons and 30 round magazines.

But the 67 year old grandfather who lives alone next door to the dealers house and has had his house ransacked by said drug dealer, doesn't need to have more than 7 rounds because he won't see as many threats, right?

 

Do you see any problems with this logic? I certainly do.

[GRIZ 3,369]

Two wrongs don't make a right and using the police exemption to complain that the public cannot use the same size comparion is faulty logic. Like I mentioned earlier, why doesn't this law apply to the New York National Guard? Why not include EVERYONE. When the Secret Service comes to town they need to change out their weapons, along with the FBI etc.... Don't forget the Coast Guard stationed in NY right? The answer is: They carry guns for a PROFESSION and it is a tool of their trade. Forcing the police to use diminished capcity magazines only puts them in danger from criminals who are using illegal firepower. Police do NOT get paid to fight fair, especially to PROVE A POINT. The likelihood of police confronting one of these criminals with the illegal guns is much, much, much greater than an individual on their private property. The police have an exemption to speed while in the performance of their duties, but no one is up in arms about that?

 

I do not agree with their law by any means, but I also don't agree with complaining about the police being exempt (an exemption which is logical) to prove a point. Seven rounds is ridiculous.

 

The 7 rd limit wouldn't apply to the Secret Service, Coast Guard, or any Federal entity with or without an exemption. The Federal government is never subject to state or local jurisdiction whether its gun laws, labor laws, or anything else.

 

Making a 7, 17, or 70 rd magazine limit will have no effect on violent criminals who will find a way to do violence regardless what the law says.

 

 

[Qel Hoth 33]

FA weapons are accessible, maybe not here, but in other states. I would argue that military personnel actually deal with different threats then we do here domestically, so the idea that i need a grenade launcher and so on..... would be a little misplaced. Also, a gun is tool you use on the job, but it is a tool that everyone uses for protection. No one should have to suffer from these restrictions, not LEO not no one.

 

Not only are FA weapons accessible legally in other states, one could argue they are easier to acquire illegally than they are to acquire legally, due to the costs involved. We can't stop drugs hemorrhaging across our borders, to think that FA weapons are any different is delusional. If the (organized) criminal element wanted them, they would have them.

[ktd1597 10]

Ktd1597,

 

Question for you.

 

When that 7 man team of extensively trained SWAT members go to make an arrest at a drug dealers house,

They need to have automatic weapons and 30 round magazines.

But the 67 year old grandfather who lives alone next door to the dealers house and has had his house ransacked by said drug dealer, doesn't need to have more than 7 rounds because he won't see as many threats, right?

 

Do you see any problems with this logic? I certainly do.

 

Pete, The difference between a SWAT team and the neighbor is that the "mission" is different. That drug dealer "may" be offensive with his actions toward the neighbor if he/she actually had a realistic reason to attempt to enter his neighbors home. Personally, I'm not going to grab my Saiga, I'm reaching for my Mossberg 590A with 8 tactical 00 buck shot rounds. I, the neighbor would be "defensive". It is widely known that there is a 3:1 advantage needed when you are attacking vs. defending.

 

The SWAT team on the other hand is being highly offensive with a different mission vs. the neighbor who is strictly defending. Their objective is to get him in his house, out of the back door, down the street, into his car, around the corner if necessary. The law for the police is not to retreat and continue to be offensive until the bad guy is caught.

 

I absolutely see everyone's point, but you have to remember that others will not. I wholey agree the limitation in NY is not a good thing for the citizens OR the police. My only argument all along was that the police will run into it sooner. That doesn't make it better, it makes it wrong which is how I feel. The concept should be: "if they have it why can't I?" not "if I can't have it, you should take it from them". It proves nothing by taking it away from the police.

 

Everyone here already knows that NJ has the same exemption for police capacity magazines? They also have the full auto exemption for some. I do not have the police mags at my home, I have plenty of 15 round Saiga mags. Frankly I would be thrilled if I had 20 round vs the 15, but I'll take 15 because I have very little issue doing a mag change for the defensive. You have to understand it will be a negotiation with people who do not think like you. Give and take will be required, but NY used a tragic incident to take and take and take. I find that very offensive, but typical liberal tactic.

[PeteF 1,044]

I, the neighbor would be "defensive". It is widely known that there is a 3:1 advantage needed when you are attacking vs. defending.

Only holds with all other variables being equal. ie 1 97 year old 89lb woman on defense is NOT the equal of 3 20 yo 220lb attackers.

 

 

I absolutely see everyone's point, but you have to remember that others will not. I wholey agree the limitation in NY is not a good thing for the citizens OR the police. My only argument all along was that the police will run into it sooner. That doesn't make it better, it makes it wrong which is how I feel. The concept should be: "if they have it why can't I?" not "if I can't have it, you should take it from them". It proves nothing by taking it away from the police.

If the police are held to the same standard as everyone else, the wingnuts making these laws will get much more feedback as to how stupid they really are.

Do you think that Cuomo would be ranting and raving about magazine limits and AWB's if he knew it was HIS security detail that was going to be held to the same standard. I don't think so.

[ktd1597 10]

Only holds with all other variables being equal. ie 1 97 year old 89lb woman on defense is NOT the equal of 3 20 yo 220lb attackers.

 

 

 

If the police are held to the same standard as everyone else, the wingnuts making these laws will get much more feedback as to how stupid they really are.

Do you think that Cuomo would be ranting and raving about magazine limits and AWB's if he knew it was HIS security detail that was going to be held to the same standard. I don't think so.

 

I agree with this would be something to see, but Politicians won't let it ever happen. I would be happy with a nice 1911 for work though! A all encompassing law might limit the guns from only Glocks (non would pass the 7 round test, I think?) to some guns no one would expect. I had spoken about Officers buying guns from an approved list, but was shouted down big time! Instead of my AR I think I would like a nice tactical pump/auto loader 12 gauge!

[H.M. Murdock 0]

people are just really fed up with this idea the LEO's have more rights to self protection(as evident here). A threat is a threat is a threat, if you can justify saying an LEO needs weapon X to stop a threat, then we need weapon X to deal with that same threat. The criminals don't discriminate, why should we?

 

I would go even further and say that criminals would be more likely to murder a civilian than a LEO in similar attacks because murdering a civilian gets you "Wanted" status whereas murdering a LEO gets you HUNTED and VENTILATED.

 

The gentleman's argument that LEO NEED more than 7 rounds and civilians merely WANT more than 7 rounds is made in blantant disregard of our fundamental rights and is a most insidious infrigement at that.

[ktd1597 10]

I would go even further and say that criminals would be more likely to murder a civilian than a LEO in similar attacks because murdering a civilian gets you "Wanted" status whereas murdering a LEO gets you HUNTED and VENTILATED.

 

The gentleman's argument that LEO NEED more than 7 rounds and civilians merely WANT more than 7 rounds is one of the most insidious arguments in support of the infringement of our fundamental rights.

 

I think EVERYONE should be allowed to have the higher capcity mags, my point only was that LEO's should not have to give them up because of this idiotic law when they HAVE to have them! Many complained that the police shouldn't have them, but gun rights people are always first to talk about "chipping away" by taking more and more. The civilians first, then the police who really need them. That argument stands, essentially the "slippery slope". When I spoke of needs vs. wants my only question now is how many times have you had to point your gun at someone "in anger" in the last six months, year, two years?

 

BTW... does the 1911 come with 8 or 7 rounds? If it's 8, what frigg'in full size auto's can be purchased? Defacto semi-auto gun ban that HAS to be challenged! Maybe the cops should go back to wheel guns??

[H.M. Murdock 0]

Alright, I get what you're saying.

 

Statistics on how often a LEO encounters or points a muzzle at a baddie compared to a civilian is irrelevant, in my opinion, since the outcome of a SINGLE confrontation has life or death consequences. Statistics only matter, in my opinion, when studying strings of nonfatal events. In the case of the confrontation, you either have the tools to save your life or you don't. One person should not be handicapped in carrying out their self defense while the other is not, particularly when both parties have an equal right under the Constitution to do so.

 

My 1911 is 7+1 which I assume is ok since the new law doesn't refer to a round in the chamber.

[ktd1597 10]

That's it, I want a .357!

 

UNCLE!!!

[BlueLineFish 615]

That's it, I want a .357!

 

UNCLE!!!

 

Take my advice from one LEO to another. It's not worth the headache arguing your viewpoints here. I tried and just got fed up. People have their minds made up already. You will just get frustrated at the same individuals over and over with the same stuff over and over. TRUST ME i went through this already. Now I just mainly discuss guns.

 

I will probably get flamed for posting this watch...lol

[Nick T 4]

I'm just going to carry 7 rounds when I work in NY so I can conform

When my buddy who is working in Staten Island originally told me LEOs in NY didn't have an exemption at first I said "new department issued duty gun= 1911 where's the problem in that"

[diamondd817 828]

Common, really? Do you guys really believe there wouldn't be a exemptions for LE? NY has had 10mag limits for years and LE is/was exempt from that. Now it's a problem for everyone? And do you think the NYPD or NYSP would comply anyway? If I was an NY LEO I wouldn't comply.

[myosys 0]

That's it, I want a .357! UNCLE!!!

 

Don't know if NY law just banned the 8-shot Taurus SS608 or S&W 327 .

[H.M. Murdock 0]

Take my advice from one LEO to another. It's not worth the headache arguing your viewpoints here. I tried and just got fed up. People have their minds made up already. You will just get frustrated at the same individuals over and over with the same stuff over and over. TRUST ME i went through this already. Now I just mainly discuss guns.

 

I will probably get flamed for posting this watch...lol

 

Blue, this is a different conversation IMO. This is about solidarity amongst gun owners in standing for our rights. We could be talking about exemptions for private security or rape victims for all I care. Assigning people to various tiers of 2nd amendment restrictions is anti-2A. Once the primary users of the frequency band, to use a FCC term, get their exemptions then us secondary users get ignored. We've got no juice!

[Ron 0]

ktd1597,

 

You're not going to win this one buddy, not here. LEOs are employees of the people. They should have no more rights than the people. Any LEO who thinks they SHOULD have more rights than the people shouldn't be a LEO imo.

 

+1

[ktd1597 10]

Take my advice from one LEO to another. It's not worth the headache arguing your viewpoints here. I tried and just got fed up. People have their minds made up already. You will just get frustrated at the same individuals over and over with the same stuff over and over. TRUST ME i went through this already. Now I just mainly discuss guns.

 

I will probably get flamed for posting this watch...lol

 

I appreciated the converstation and learned a lot. I like seeing the other side and learn from the education from others with different viewpoints. No one learns when everyone agrees with you!

[ktd1597 10]

Don't know if NY law just banned the 8-shot Taurus SS608 or S&W 327 .

 

The ban is 7 rounds right? I would love to try and qualify with a S&W .357 revolver! I know with a little practice (using auto's for 20 years) and several speed loaders there would be no problem!

[Ron 0]

 

Only holds with all other variables being equal. ie 1 97 year old 89lb woman on defense is NOT the equal of 3 20 yo 220lb attackers.

 

 

 

If the police are held to the same standard as everyone else, the wingnuts making these laws will get much more feedback as to how stupid they really are.

Do you think that Cuomo would be ranting and raving about magazine limits and AWB's if he knew it was HIS security detail that was going to be held to the same standard. I don't think so.

Exactly.

[Ron 0]

 

 

Take my advice from one LEO to another. It's not worth the headache arguing your viewpoints here. I tried and just got fed up. People have their minds made up already. You will just get frustrated at the same individuals over and over with the same stuff over and over. TRUST ME i went through this already. Now I just mainly discuss guns.

 

I will probably get flamed for posting this watch...lol

Nah, we already know you think more highly of the boys in blue than the rest of us unwashed masses

 

Hehehe

[H.M. Murdock 0]

Now it's imminent

[BlueLineFish 615]

 

Nah, we already know you think more highly of the boys in blue than the rest of us unwashed masses

 

Hehehe

 

Not true..I'm just referring to the countless arguments that went nowhere but back and forth. I learned

[ktd1597 10]

Anyone willing to look at this topic with an open mind will learn. Learning from others is a great thing! BTW....from reading the posts I believe that a lot of the participants are every bit as adapt at handling their firearms (if not more) than a lot of LEO's I work with!