ktd1597

not in Jersey, they are listed on the NJ ban.

yes, i spent a lot of trigger time with a traditional uzi and micro uzi semi autos.....they shot VERY nicely!

Yes

It is because she remembers it so clearly since she was there when it was happening!

Love my Redhawk .44 cal. Sent out through my personal e-mail list and posted on facebook.

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!

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!

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!

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

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??

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!

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.

I see your point...

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

Reminder that I do not support NY' weapon ban. I have an understanding why they would make an exemption for police. BTW..my off duty Kahr 9mm only has 7 rounds so it won't matter for me in NY. Multiple magazines are my best friend!

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!

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.

Not BS. It occurred down south. It was discussed at length on a LE forum. I was amazed it could happen as were other Officers. You could see a pattern though. Northern Officers couldn't believe it was true, and Southern Officers seemed to act as if it happens often. They replied; "he shouldn't want to work there anyway". Amazing.....

I perceive the statement as saying police are exempt having to follow laws, which isn't actually a true statement. Many people believe it is and sometimes I get a little touchy when someone says cops "get away" with law breaking. Sorry if I misinterpreted it.

I am only debating the sense for the exemption. I don't agree with the 7 round limitation. Not everyone needs a Stihl when a Craftsman chainsaw will get the job done, the police NEED a Stihl.

Bones, since you used a plural I am assuming you are talking about law enforcement hypocisy. I won't entertain that topic. QUOTE: .....and be EXEMPT from having to follow laws

My point was that police carry guns specifically to confront criminals on a regular basis whereas the average citizen would only confront them in their home, if ever. I carried a $199 Remington 870; 4 shot; shotgun for the longest time and was clearly out gunned by a criminal carrying an AK/AR variant. Times changed around the time of the Hollywood shooting. Somebody important realized how out gunned the police were. We NEED to have better equipment than the average person b/c we are much more likely to be engaged in a gun fight and are given the ultimate authority to take someone’s life, thus we do not get paid to fight fair. That type of authority is not entrusted to the average citizen, except in their home. I’m not going to get into the training year in and out in order to be given this authority, except to say that the actual hands on the gun is probably the easiest part.

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.

I do not agree. A police officer south of here was FIRED because he put a sign in his front yard advocating the challenger for a Sheriff's election vs. supporting the current Sheriff.

1st: Police have GREATLY reduced 1st amdmnt rights when it comes to expressing their personal opinions. Rules are put into place by departments which regulate what you can/cannot say when it comes to your job. 2nd: Police Officers have almost NO ability to choose what type of weapons they are issued. The people who run the PD's and their Political counterparts control this aspect. The rank and file can protest, but at their peril with threats of suspensions/punishment. TRUST ME when I tell you there is plenty of "whispering" amongst cops. Many are not happy, they do not have the ability to control what these politicians are doing. Some are demonizing the wrong people, many that support you. Go to a Police website and see what some are posting publicly. Much, much more than I would be willing to say..... in public.