Thread: Armed Police buying lunch

The “threat level” isn’t the only reason police need to carry firearms. Now general arming every officer may be a negative because it would be rather easy to overpower a solo female cop and take her side arm.
But I believe in general arming of the police of those members who have had more training in retention of a sidearm.

The other threat police face are gang members with firearms. It is unbelievable how many gang members are in possession of firearms in their footwells, down the side of their car doors or in their boots of the vehicle. An unarmed officer has to approach these situations and then once they know there is a threat it could be far too late..
the police are here to protect he public. While at the moment it sucks they have taken the wrong side of the firearms argument it DOES NOT make them our enemy.

I am sorry disappointed in the police leaderships and also Chris Cahills to disarm law abiding citizens but that doesn’t make the average cop on the street a bad guy who wants to take your guns. There are police also who will be losing their sport and firearms and these individual attacks or remarks against a single police officer are a little stupid. That cop you take the piss out of for being armed may be on our side of the argument and you don’t even know it. Maybe she will have to take action with a firearm against an active shooter later that night or some idiot stomping someone’s head in. Would we complain about the arming then?

The I am trying to make is that cops are individuals as well. Just because the leadership has backed the MSSA ban doesn’t mean the cop does. It would be unfair for the police that disagree with the ban have to leave their employment just to prove how disgusting they think it is.

How about we be a democracy and put the ban to a vote. Hats our real problem here. So we as a society can decide what rules and laws we want in this country.