Spikes Tactical - Updated Policy for State and Local Law Enforcement Agency Sale

[Ronin13]

We've been in this debate before, and I really don't see how punishing LE in states is really going to accomplish anything. It's not their fault the d-bags in the legislature wrote LE in as an exemption to their stupid laws. So now the fine officers/deputies of Colorado have one less place to shop. Not sure what that's going to do to help the cause. Thanks Spikes- you just solidified that I won't ever be a customer of yours. "Let punishment for the sins of the father be passed down to his children." -Exodus 20:5, an idea I never agreed with in the first place.

[Zundfolge]

We've been in this debate before, and I really don't see how punishing LE in states is really going to accomplish anything.

I think this illustrates the fundamental difference in how we on this forum view law enforcement and that's what leads to the conflicts where one side is accused of cop bashing by people that in turn get accused of licking the jackboot.

The question you have to ask yourself is this: Who are LEOs? Are they "the state" or are they "the people"?

Those (like me) that see LEOs as "The State" are the ones that get accused of cop bashing.

[Ronin13]

I think this illustrates the fundamental difference in how we on this forum view law enforcement and that's what leads to the conflicts where one side is accused of cop bashing by people that in turn get accused of licking the jackboot.

The question you have to ask yourself is this: Who are LEOs? Are they "the state" or are they "the people"?

Those (like me) that see LEOs as "The State" are the ones that get accused of cop bashing.

I don't see them as "the state", I see them as maybe "agents of the state"- but it's not so simple. Granted, I'm a bit biased since that's the kind of profession I want to get into, but I don't look at it as an "us vs. them"- are cops not Americans, same as you and I? I see it as most cops are actually FOR 2A rights, and oppose the decisions made by our legislature just as much as us. The only difference is that they were sworn to uphold and enforce the law (or not enforce stupid laws when ordered by their superiors).

[PSS]

The only difference is that they were sworn to uphold and enforce the law (or not enforce stupid laws when ordered by their superiors).

Really? They swear to not enforce stupid laws?

They are not our fathers. Like it or not they are part of the system that is encroaching our rights. Here's an idiom I like. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[speedysst]

There are plenty of cops that adhere to the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. Yes, they can write a speeding ticket for 4mph over the limit but most don't because they understand that traveling 4mph over the limit is not causing any excessive danger to the general public.

Really? They swear to not enforce stupid laws?

They are not our fathers. Like it or not they are part of the system that is encroaching our rights. Here's an idiom I like. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[Zundfolge]

...I don't look at it as an "us vs. them"...

"Agent of the state" IS "the state" for all intents and purposes (and for this particular purpose, denying "agents of the state" from buying your product because "the state" has kept the people from buying is a clear indication that said company is on the side of the people against the state ... yes it sucks that it's come down to this).

On a whim, a cop can ruin my life (and possibly kill me with retaliative impunity). Worst I can do to a cop is maybe put him in a bad mood for the rest of the day.

Us and them ain't the same anymore. And no, its not the fault of the police, its the fact that government at all levels is too large and too powerful. THAT is why its now us vs them (and only going to get worse).

At any rate, if we're going to follow the spirit of Posse Comitatus, then police are civilians just like the rest of us and should be forced to live under the same laws (even on duty).

[Ronin13]

i think when Ronin says "most" he is probably mistaken. Yes Sheriffs are more open on gun ownership. City cops are less open. And I know geographically it matters. Look at the LEO in major metropolitan areas. There should be absolutely nothing they can own that we cant. absolutely.

Except to meet the threat that is out there... IE: Criminals don't obey laws, and can be- through breaking said laws- better equipped than you and I. Thus, it's only just that those entrusted with maintaining order and public safety are equipped well enough to meet that threat. Nevermind on where an individual LEO stands- or much less their politically appointed Chief (not like Sheriffs who actually do have to be elected). It's based on given the right tools for the job.

Worst I can do to a cop is maybe put him in a bad mood for the rest of the day.

At any rate, if we're going to follow the spirit of Posse Comitatus, then police are civilians just like the rest of us and should be forced to live under the same laws (even on duty).

1- You can actually complain to the department... or if enough infractions are committed you can work toward them losing their job.
2- see my point above. We are not in harms way on a daily basis as per the nature of our jobs, thus I can totally understand why LE needs better than civilian available weapons/equipment.

[Mick-Boy]

Except to meet the threat that is out there... IE: Criminals don't obey laws, and can be- through breaking said laws- better equipped than you and I. Thus, it's only just that those entrusted with maintaining order and public safety are equipped well enough to meet that threat. Nevermind on where an individual LEO stands- or much less their politically appointed Chief (not like Sheriffs who actually do have to be elected). It's based on given the right tools for the job.

Except the police are not responsible for the safety of the individual citizens (IE: you and I). See Castle Rock v. Gonzales. Ergo, I'm responsible for my own safety. So I should be able to be well enough equipped to meet that threat.

Companies that refuse to sell to LEOs in ban states are doing their part to bypass the "I got mine so who cares about the new bans" attitude.

If more LEOs were outspokenly against maybe we wouldn't be fighting to get back our children's rights to be as well equipped as the threats they might face.

[Rabid]

Except the police are not responsible for the safety of the individual citizens (IE: you and I). See Castle Rock v. Gonzales. Ergo, I'm responsible for my own safety. So I should be able to be well enough equipped to meet that threat.

^^^This^^^
The police have no reason to be better armed then i am because the responsibility to protect my self falls solely on myself. To me the people that rely on the police to come save the day are just awaiting their Darwin award.

[Chad4000]

I think this illustrates the fundamental difference in how we on this forum view law enforcement and that's what leads to the conflicts where one side is accused of cop bashing by people that in turn get accused of licking the jackboot.

The question you have to ask yourself is this: Who are LEOs? Are they "the state" or are they "the people"?

Those (like me) that see LEOs as "The State" are the ones that get accused of cop bashing.

exactly...