Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

chief cali cop says guns are not for defense

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

but DHS says our guns are assault weapons while they buy auto's claiming they are personal "DEFENSE" guns
patdollard.com...

so that video is yet another display of this current insanity of theirs
be safe brothers
sorry if i didn't write much here as
that video just says it all
propaganda is in full force
edit on 9-2-2013 by lasvegasteddy because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   


Another cop trying to twist their intended use. You guys hang on to them.
edit on 9-2-2013 by AdamOver because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
What an idiot translation only cops get to kill people.

That is what he is saying.

Meh


For the record firearms are neither depends on the person behind the trigger
edit on 9-2-2013 by neo96 because: error corrected



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
That's typical thinking for socal cops... airheads all the way,
i know there are a few that are good from that area, but they are limited.

If guns are not for defence, then why dose he carry one?



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   
It's not about guns. It's never been about guns.

It's about control.

If the government was serious about crimes committed using firearms, then there would be death penalties for crimes committed with them.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
That is downright silly. LE policy nationwide states that firearms are to be used only for defense.

A threat is an offense.
Stopping that threat is defense.
Stopping a threat with firearms is a defensive maneuver.
The use of a firearm in an offensive manner of any sort is already illegal.

Enforce existing laws!!



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





If the government was serious about crimes committed using firearms, then there would be death penalties for crimes committed with them.


If they were serious about crimes committed using guns the Us would not be the largest arms dealer in the world.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by beezzer
 





If the government was serious about crimes committed using firearms, then there would be death penalties for crimes committed with them.


If they were serious about crimes committed using guns the Us would not be the largest arms dealer in the world.


Point taken.




posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
The HYPOCRISY of the gun-grabbers is completely unbelievable. Epic hypocrisy and nonsense.

Its at a level where even the most loyal of gun control advocates should NOW be able to CLEARLY SEE that this gun control garbage it is NOT about SOLVING CRIME, nor is it for our PROTECTION, but is for NEFARIOUS agendas. The nonsense and hypocrisy should be CLEARLY obvious by now for even the most brainwashed of gun-haters out there.

These TRAITORS have NO interest in solving crime or protecting American citizens. They are interested only in DISARMING law-abiding American citizens period. They are TRAITORS through and through.

edit on 9-2-2013 by ResistTreason because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lasvegasteddy
 
I would have to see the whole clip here but it looks like he is simply saying that a gun on a cops hip is there amoung other things to intimidate the bad guys. And thats ok. Thats what the second amendment is for.....to intimidate the bad guys.

If he is having problems with the terms......like maybe he thinks the people shouldnt be able to intimidate with an offencive weapon. Well like I said the 2nd amendment is intimidating to the wrong people.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Between what is happening in California as well as New York in regards to disarming law-abiding citizens, it is so SICKENING.

What do law-abiding folks in California and New York plan to do when they are disarmed and the gangs and out of control angry youth and flash mobs there start overruling their neighborhoods and homes? Lots of gangs and unruly angry youth always looking for trouble in many populated regions throughout those two states.

LE officers there already have their hands completely full. Their budgets drained. When law abiding folks are finally completely defenseless, all HELL will break loose. It doesnt take a fortune-teller or a prophet to see this coming.

Having lived in both states, I can surely say that those two states are the LAST STATES a law-abiding citizen would ever want to be disarmed in. I feel sick for the law-abiding citizens there. They better stand up and start screaming from their rooftops against gun control.

The Bad Guys and Traitors are having their fantasies come true there. I really feel sick for the law-abiding decent folks there.

edit on 9-2-2013 by ResistTreason because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ResistTreason
 


THAT'S when they call in federal troops or the UN!



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
It is nearing the time that "We the People" need to require our elected officials and justice officials to submit to a test on the meaning of the Constitution of the United States and if those potential government or justice officials do not pass said test with a score within the upper 90 percentile range, those who do not meet such requirements be banned from holding a position of public trust or security. To ensure this test is not circumvented the results of this test needs to be made readily publicly available, no FOIA requests, no form requests that can be passed around and put off, but posted online and in a public place such as a library so that the Citizens can ensure that those put in position of power have a clear and proven understanding of their responsibility. If after successfully obtaining a position of power and public trust, that person then makes statements or takes actions that are clearly ignorant, or intentionally ignoring the standards they were held to in obtaining that position of trust and power, then depending on the level of injury suffered due to their actions including damage to the faith and trust of the Citizens of the US. They should at minimum be immediately removed from the position and permanently banned from taking another such position in the future. Removal due to such an infraction must include the removal of any tax payer supported health benefits, pensions aside from those paid into the Social Security System or earned in positions unrelated to the public trust.

This police Chief has told the world that he is completely ignorant of the intended purpose of the rights granted to the Citizens of the United States to keep and bear arms. That amendment had nothing to do with hunting, it was intended to allow the Citizens of the US to protect themselves from a Corrupt Governmental System.

I have seen candidates for public office state that they intend if elected to nullify the 1st Amendment of the Constitution to make it more Christian. (which would have nullified his oath of office before even taking it had he been elected), would have made him immediately impeachable and guilty of treason.

People who do not have a comprehensive knowledge of the duties and the limits they are swearing to uphold are a disgrace to our country and an affront to this countries citizens,
edit on 2/9/13 by Pixiefyre because: My version of "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore"



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   
I'll bet the Socal/LAPD forces are finding much value in "assault" weapons and 30 rd mags.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamOver
 

The Police Chief should be demoted for stupidity. A gun is both an offensive and defensive weapon depending on how it is used. I guess only the offense can score points in football also and you cant intercept a pass or recover a fumble for a touchdown either (how dumb)....sorry for the tangential example. Back on point: A gun used to rob someone is an offensive weapon and a gun used to defend yourself from an armed robber is a defensive weapon. Maybe the PC is caught up on semantics and lacks common sense....so let me put it in terms that he will understand given his nomenclature and frame of refence..."the best offense is a good defense" and a gun used as a counter-offensive weapon to protect from a firearm being used as an offensive weapon against you is one of the primary purposes for civilian ownership of guns (the police chief was focusing on the militarized police methinks).



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
pistols should be banned. Its the crooks weapon, to take to hold up a store or to pull when you are around your target. If you want to stop an invasion you need rifles, if you want to overthrow a corrup government lybia style pistols wont do much good. So ban pistols, make riflesafes obligatory to store weapons in them, when 1 or 2 is not going on.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by lasvegasteddy
 


Just another Liberal California Politician doing what they do.

He is a moron, plain and simple.



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Some of you caught it! Most didn't...

Stop and THINK. This guy just spoke the truth. "Cops do not use guns to defend themselves, they use them to do their jobs". He prefaced that by saying that "Some people think guns are for defense, they're not, they're used to intimidate and control".

He spoke the plain truth in the first 30 seconds. The rest of it was just BS dissembling. This is EXACTLY the way the liberal establishment thinks. This is how they view guns. This is why they want those guns out of the hands of civilians. it is hard, almost impossible, to "intimidate and control" people who are as well armed as the cop.

By that very logic I am not only going to keep my guns, but may have to put them to use to "intimidate and control" an out-of-control police state!!!



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
What an idiot translation only cops get to kill people.

That is what he is saying.

Meh


For the record firearms are neither depends on the person behind the trigger
edit on 9-2-2013 by neo96 because: error corrected


Shouldn't that be only cops HAVE to kill people?



posted on Feb, 11 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Has it seemed like KILLINGS are thru the roof since Sandy Hook? I know in just my small town people seem to be going crazy, or either the news is just reporting more on it now than before. Which ever it may be there is a lot going down concerning guns.





new topics




 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join