Friday, March 28, 2014

Unfair!

I am disappointed with the injustice of it all!  Cops in Maryland can get a pass on a CCW just because they are cops.  It's not fair.  They should have to play by the rules, too. 

Well, life isn't fair.

Of course, being honorably discharges from the Navy gives me some advantages over other folks.  But in a lesser way.  Produce a DD214 form in Virginia and you don't have to take a firearm class to get your permit.  So I'm a bit of a hypocrite whining about special preferences cops get.

But cops get some serious extra bennies by being a cop...

12 comments:

Murphy's Law said...

Want the "perk"? Sign up to do the work. Cops get the CCW because on duty or off, they are expected to take action and can't just walk away like Joe Citizen can. Why hate on the good guys all the time just because their job and obligations are different from yours?

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

I have signed up to do the work. "The police are the public and the public are the police."

Murphy's Law said...

What the heck is that even supposed to mean? Did your CCW class instructor certify you as a police officer over the week-end?

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

You are a cop that doesn't recognize a Peel quote?

Murphy's Law said...

No, I want you to tell me what it means when you say it. It sounds like you think that because you have a CCW, you can police the community and fight crime. I'm not getting what you are trying to say so I'm asking you to clarify it. How have you "signed up to do police work" and what do you consider the scope of your authority to be? I'm puzzled here.

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

I have a duty wherever I go, Murphy. It's part of what makes me an adult.


Here's a thought for you . Get in the papers as a cop that doesn't abuse their office. Because your PR aren't very helpful for you.

when you become a class of people where the only official things that can be said to you are am i free to go or being detained?.... That is telling.

Murphy's Law said...

Dude, why all of the hostility? The more you write, the more obvious it is that you seem to hate all police officers across the board. You seem to love to find those little stories about one police officer who does something wrong and use it to bash all of them, yet if someone were to apply that same judgmental standard to CCW holders every time one of them breaks the law, you'd go ape. You do realize that most police officers aren't out there violating peoples' rights and that many of them are regular people who actually fight for your right to carry, don't you?

But let's get back to your duty. Who is this duty to, and what are it's boundaries? Where does it's authority derive from? In every CCW class that I've ever taught or sat in on, the instructor made sure to tell his students that the right to carry a gun for self-defense does not make you a crime-fighter or a superhero or empower you to go looking for trouble. Did yours tell you that, or were you out of the room during that part of the lecture?

Let's stop trying to make this about me, because you don't know anything about me and I'm not the one making the statements that you've made. This doesn't have to get hostile or personal; I'm just asking you for questions about what you've said and seeking clarification. Does this "duty" of yours compel you to proactively look for crimes in progress? Does it give you the authority to act unilaterally when you find one? Where does it start and stop? Active shooters in the mall? Drug dealing on the corner? Serious question asked as openly and straightforward as I can: What is this "duty" of yours, who is it owed to, and how far can you go to carry it out?

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...


I am just peeved when a group of people manage to use a position of power to set themselves above their fellow citizens. When they manage to make 2 sets of rules. Rules that the 'little people' have to obey, and a different set for themselves. It's unAmerican, and strikes me as contrary Article Section 9

Whether Harvard graduates, District Attorneys, People with ancestry that can be traced to the Mayflower, elected officials, or police officers... or... in my case, people with military veteran status that allows them to bypass certain bureaucratic requirements most everyone else has to adhere to. The example is minor, but that doesn't make it any more fair. Everyone should have the same easement. One set of laws for everyone. If a rule is too onerous exempt EVERYONE from that rule.

Murphy's Law said...

And you've just avoided every question that I've asked you. I would really like to know about your belief that you are somehow "the police" because you have a CCW. If I've got that wrong, please explain what you really meant. And if it is your belief, what authority do you act under and what is, in your view, your jurisdiction?

Travis Lerol said...

He's already referenced Peelian Principles. They are essentially the origin of all modern police. It is somewhat concerning that police nowadays have not even heard of them. They center on premises of equality and cooperation.

Geodkyt said...

Murph -- I don't hate cops. In fact, I'd say a much higher percentage of my friends are cops than most people outside the LE or emergency medical fields have.

But, how does being a police officer in State A, where you have a commission, the authority, the duty, and the qualified immunity to enforce the law (even "off the clock") equate to an off-duty cop carrying in State B, where you don't even necessarily know the laws, much less have the authority, duty, or qualified immunity?

A cop from NYC, visiting Georgia on vacation is just a tourist, like all the fellow vistors around him, and no more authorized to "enforce the law" than his fellow tourists. he is merely another citizen, in all respects except the LEOSA which allows him to carry concealed in any state of the union on or off duty, regardless of his actual knowledge of the laws of any state but his own.

I'm not opposed to the idea behind LEOSA, mind you -- I object to the fact that LEOSA created a special class of privileged citizens who are not demonstrable more at risk or better capable of protecting themselves, when outside their states. Arguments about "revenge attacks" by their prior arrestees fall a little flat when you consider that the odds of a, say, Baltimore patrol officer encountering a gang banger they arrested while visiting Disneyland in California aren't significantly higher than Random Citizen from Baltimore encountering some violent criminal while visiting Disneyland. (Hell, I could probably buy the "increased danger due to the nature of their job" argument if LEOSA only applied to contiguous states.)

Of course, I don't see the solution as being "eliminate LEOSA". I see the solution as "enact National Reciprocity on the same lines as LEOSA".

And, NJT -- it isn;t hipocracy that VA will recognize your DD214. VA law requires some proof that at some point in your life, someone qualified to do so has pointed out which end of teh gun is dangerous. All military branches cover at least basic firearms safety, in greater detail than many of the other acceptable training. So, you aren't "exempt" from training under VA law -- you have already been trained.

Murphy's Law said...

Sorry, I haven't paid attention to this thread in a bit, but Geodkyt, to respond to a couple of your points, most if not all states have carved out some jurisdiction for police officers to operate as "peace officers" outside of their normal jurisdictions in certain situations, usually those situations involving felonies and serious breaches of the peace. Likewise, when a police officer off-duty carries on his department credentials, it is with the understanding, and often the requirement of the department, that he or she will take action as a police officer in an emergency situation. The whole idea behind police officers carrying off-duty is to have more cops able to act as cops if the situation requires it no matter where they are. Most people have no problem with this other than a few "sour grapes" types who confuse their CCW with actual police power; it's just petty jealousy from people who want to carry guns around but aren't willing to do what it takes to actually be a police officer. And like I already said: If it means that much to you, police departments hire every day. Step up. And if you don't like the current disparity, the remedy is to talk to the people who made the laws and fight for more gun rights for everyone, not petulantly carping about a bunch of apples getting something that you as an orange don't presently have. And a good way to do that is to try to work with law enforcement personnel as allies in the fight for more carry rights instead of treating them like they are the enemy.