It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


GUNS: The Untold Truth

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 04:38 PM
Guns: The Untold Truth

So thinking your safe, the police will save you? Thinking that, even if you follow safe gun use, and such in your home, that your more likily to have an accident? Think that the police are better with guns then you are?

Here is an interesting article talking about guns, gun control, and guns used in self-defense. Also talks about the Police and their role.

I urge those who are gun owners, and those who are not gun owners to give this a read.

Here is a short clipping from the article

The police are not required to protect you, as an individual!
In fact, I challenge you to think of just one case where the police have actually prevented a crime. When you think about it, the actual job of the police is not to prevent crime, but to investigate crime, catch the perpetrator and bring the perpetrator to court - ALL after the fact.

Think about how the police work. They try to take the bad guys off of the street. How do they know who the bad guys are? They know, because the bad guys did something bad (past tense). So, by putting the bad guy in jail, you can argue that the police prevented potential crime, protecting the public at large. But the act that put the bad guy behind bars was a real crime, with real victims.

Guns: The Untold Truth

It is a lengthy article, but well worth the read.

It's deffeintly an eye-opener..

Edited to add link to article, as I forgot to include it in orginal post..

[edit on 1-4-2010 by Cygnis]

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 04:41 PM
Police have no Afirmative duty!

Here's a full article on this! It gives a good synopsis of the laws!

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 04:57 PM
Yep, was just going to reference this case:

Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d 1, 1981) ((O)fficial police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection ... this uniformly accepted rule rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen ... a publicly maintained police force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit the community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good order.)

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 05:21 PM
Yes, indeed! There is a book that deals with this also. Amazon

It's a small book. You can see the reviews on the link.

I've tried telling the sheep where I work about this and I can tell they don't believe me. They believe their electronic home security systems will save them, and the police will come screaming up in seconds, just like in the movies.

Excuse me while I go oil my Mossberg.

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 05:31 PM
So effectively for the police to have any motivation the crime has to be commited creating a criminal and therefore giving reason for the police to act.
It is up to the individual to prevent the crime... otherwise become a victim.
If i ever actually need them for anything the first thing i'll do is say, "Where the # were you before this happened? You could have prevented this had you not been off pulling over hard working people for doing .05 over the speed limit!"

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 05:51 PM
I wouldn't go attacking the police on this one. First we can't pre legislate. You can't arrest someone for "looking like they COULD break the law". That's crap. Secondly, with their limited numbers they can't be everywhere at every time. But guess what can.... and armed gun owner.

WE are responsible for our safety. Police are responsible for finding out what happened should we fail in that role.

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 06:28 PM
The article also points out, that you are more likily to die form many other common things, then you are of being shot by accident.

Also talk about how gun control also is more of a problem for the legal people then it is for the criminals.

Some good eye-opening figures in the article.

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 07:02 PM
Excellent thread to the OP. Thank you. S&F

I have a mossie 12 gauge with Knox stock and fully loaded in the bedroom as well as various guns throughout the house. I know this isn't a thread about our guns! P)

I just wanted to say that I have had to rely on my legally permitted carry weapon twice (no shots fired and bad guy went to easier target I assume) in nice area's of town while recreationally riding bikes with my wife. And once while answering the door (in a nice neighborhood) of my home (three guys on my porch who ran out of gas.. They saw my Glock and decided they had enough gas to get to a gas station, NS)

My brother is also a cop (as stated in my previous posts) and after he had been in 3 gunfights, numerous confrontations w/ druggies, I cannot understand why people in this country are not armed, I really cannot.

Recently I bought a Taurus LCP .380 and that goes every where I go (loaded with Corbon DPX). And yes, I cycled 300 rounds through it to validate carrying it. Expensive but a neccesity!

When seconds count, Help is only minutes away! ( a friend of mine in Tennessee got a note from the police chief who issued his permit with this quote on the letter).

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 07:10 PM

Originally posted by ArcAngel
My brother is also a cop (as stated in my previous posts) and after he had been in 3 gunfights, numerous confrontations w/ druggies, I cannot understand why people in this country are not armed, I really cannot.

When seconds count, Help is only minutes away! ( a friend of mine in Tennessee got a note from the police chief who issued his permit with this quote on the letter).

It is such things that have prompted me to start making some purchases, and looking into Conceal and Carry permit from my sherrif.

It is no longer safe to be ignorant, and unprepared.

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 07:21 PM
Yes, well we all know that they charge, punish, fine and "label" you a criminal even for a victimless crime.

I guess in order for someone to be free you would need to have no victimless crime laws, I believe a true crime is one that affects others, not potentially or theoretically, but directly. We all know that having DUI laws does not stop drunk drivers. Laws do not protect people, they make money for the state/city and create useless jobs. They also label people, discriminate if you will, and can very easily ruin you're life.(career)

Its all a money making scheme.

Honestly what is going to stop a desperate person from breaking into your house and stealing crap. Is it the police and laws? or is it a vicious dog, or an angry homeowner with a shotgun.

I guess the police are good for protecting the criminals rights who breaks in, in case he cuts himself on glass or slips on a wet floor.

Laws grow every day, worse punishments and fines. it is just getting out of control.

Yeah sure we are free(maybe 100 years ago)

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 07:34 PM
reply to post by tempesillest

It appears as though the longevity of some 12 year old posters will be 13 years of age due to ignorance.

posted on Apr, 1 2010 @ 07:47 PM

Originally posted by ArcAngel
reply to post by tempesillest

It appears as though the longevity of some 12 year old posters will be 13 years of age due to ignorance.

pardon? if you have a problem with what I said, then state it. Other then that your just another internet maturity nazi who thinks he is all bad and brags about his guns on the internet.

posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 02:34 AM
reply to post by tempesillest

You make a good point, Tempesillest, sadly, there are laws that protect criminals.

Thakfully, here where i live, if someone breaks into my home, I have legal precedence to remove him from the gene-pool..

Granted, anyone who does such said thing, as removing someone from the Gene Pool, and gets in trouble for it when it is in their own home from breaking an entering, or threating ones life and family. That is truly a crime.

I have heard stories of people getting sued by criminals for getting injured in the building/home they have broken into. Sadly, you can and often times people do sue the daylights out of honest people.

The legal system in the United States treats criminals too lightly. Repeat offenders get a slap on the wrist. 3-strikes law for DUI? c'mon, only takes ONE accident to forever change or end another(s) life.

I ask people all the time who argu about the 3-strikes rule.. "If it is your wife/husband and kids in the car that the drunk driver hits, and he's on his second strike, are you going to feel that justice was served?" most people don't have a response to that..

Too many laws in this country, and I'd wager there are a slim few who fully grasp the volumes of laws.

Peace and Saftey, Friends.

posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 02:56 AM
Yep the fact is armed citizens stop more crime in America then all LE agencies combined according to the justice department. And it is usually cause they were the intended victim. As the article insinuates the police are usually on the scene to mop up the aftermath.

posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 10:04 AM
On more than one occasion, I was at a training seminar which consisted of mixed law enforcement (from local to federal), military, and civilians. The speaker, who is a law enforcement officer for the past 15 years, gave a tip to the civilian audience:

"Police's job is not to prevent crime, but to report it."

It spoke volumes to those civilians who pondered the statement's implications. As for the rest (law enforcement and military), they just nodded in agreement.

Joe Public never thinks about this stuff until its too late. Most times when you ask people what they would do if a crime is about to happen against them, they respond with:

"I'll just call the police."

You ask them if they know the average time it takes for police to respond to a call. And you get a typical response of, "Ummmm...." So you tell them the facts:

on average police takes 5 minutes to 2 hours to respond, depending on your area

You can see their heads working overtime as they think about those times.

Then most people stop midway thru their thinking and deny the facts because it causes them to go out of their reality matrix. Most would respond with:

"Well, I would still call the police."

Despite what you tell them, like:

"What would it matter calling the police if the crime already happened? What if you were killed?"

They just keep responding with:

"I would still call the police."

People need to be educated. But there's no way to teach those who refuse to learn.

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:09 PM
Great thread!
I have a concealed carry permit and I carry everywhere i'm legally allowed.
I live in a small town where the police force is virtually non existent (takes over an hour to respond).
In the introduction section, I mentioned that I'm a rookie paranormal investigator, but my day job is assistant manager at a gun store and assistant gunsmith.
I am a firm believer in self protection, it's a crazy world and cops can't be everywhere at all times.
Some people will make fun of you and call you everything from paranoid to wanna be cowboy because you carry. Don't let that bother you, you're right, they're wrong and if the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:25 PM
I don't think its so much an "untold truth" as it is, uninterested. Most people these days are sheep...we know this, its fact, and proven on a grand scale 24/7. They don't bother with learning the laws of their land, don't bother with TRUE self defense or home defense methods and realities. Most people simply go through the motions relying on everyone else to fill in where they lack.

As a LEO I always tell people to protect themselves. I and MOST LEO's have zero issie with armed citizens. We DO have issue with armed citizens who DO NOT take it seriously and train/learn the responsibility involved with carrying in todays enviroment. You have to be familiar with the weapon you choose to carry, know how to carry concealed PROPERLY, know when you should or shouldn't deploy said weapon and definitly know when to surrender that gun in certain situations. When you take the time to do all those things not only do YOU become more confident and capable of protecting yourself and others, but you help us in so many ways legally...and yourself legally.

As for the writer of the article...he is wrong on many things...esecially the "show me one crime a cop stopped before it happened". Well I can point to

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:29 PM

Ty for the LOL info...

sorry to be all Foresst Gump on anyone....
But thats all I got to say bout that.

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:39 PM
reply to post by midnightbrigade

Couldn't agree more. I for one am glad police are not tasked with preventing crime, thoughtcrime and what not.

For me carrying a gun is like having insurance, first aid training and road flares. I've had to skin the pistol a few times now, and it saved my behind.

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 06:01 PM
S&F great thread.
It is up to YOU to protect yourself.
Not the police or anybody else.
This is part of what is wrong with the US now, no personal responsibility.

There is a reason I have 556 in my name

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in