PDA

View Full Version : "Oakland LEOs were mad" - We all should be


Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 9:46 AM
I was thinking last night about a comment someone posted yesterday in one of the Oakland threads about how when the officers came into the hospital they appearred to be mad, and cussing and so on. Well here is my statement on that:

THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE MAD!!!! Some dirtbag felon/parole just killed 4 of their friends and colleagues that day. Who wouldn't be mad? I'm not saying that have a right to act/retaliate in anger, but their position as LEOs does not preclude them from being human. But I would like to take this a little further.

WE SHOULD ALL BE MAD!!!! Why? We as law-abiding citizens should be angry beyond belief that our city/county/state/country has been allowed to deteriorate to this point. But I had to honestly ask myself a question last night: "Who is to blame for allowing this deterioration?"

I think we as law-abiding citizens share some of the blame. We have turned our eyes away, hidden in our houses, and allowed criminal elements to infiltrate every aspect of life in our country, and then hoped "someone else", "them", "the government" would do something about it. Why are these criminals able to move about and engage in their criminal activities nearly unopposed? How are they able to take control of whole neighborhoods? BECAUSE WE LET THEM!!! We let them out of fear, fear of endangering ourselves, fear or reprisal/retaliation, and just plain unsubstantiated fear. And believe me....I'm not excluding myself from that group who has allowed myself to be controlled by fear.

If you think about it....what really is the only thing a criminal fears? Other criminals! Why? Because they know that other criminals are the only ones who will stand up to them and fight whether offensively or defensively without regard for the law. Right now the only "natural predator" for a criminal is other criminals.

We all sit around and talk about our guns and our rights and wanting CCW to protect ourselves and blah blah blah. But what is REALLY needed to turn the tables on crime and criminals? THEY NEED TO FEAR THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE!!! They need to be made to realize that there is nothing more fearsome and terrifying then a law-abiding citizen fighting in defense of his home, and "home" should include his neighborhood, his city and so on.

So as you can tell....I am PISSED!!! And most of all I'm pissed at myself for hiding out in my house for years while things just continue to decay. So this is what I come here to ask:

WHAT CAN WE, AS LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS, DO IN THE FORM OF PROACTIVE STEPS NOW TO TURN THE TIDE ON THE DIRTBAGS?

At what point do we realize that if we want to believe that quote about "Police being citizens and citizens being the police" then we actually hafta do it, act it, live it and help the LEOs out so that the lesson for the criminals out of this latest round of violence is: "LISTEN UP DIRTBAGS! TODAY IS THE LAST TIME WE AS LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS WILL ALLOW YOU TO SEND ANOTHER LEO OR ANYONE ELSE HOME TO THEIR FAMILIES IN A BODYBAG. THE COPS ARE THE LEAST OF YOUR WORRIES NOW!".

The COPs can't do it on their own. I know they don't like to admit it, but it's not said to deminish theirs skills and efforts. It is simply an acknowledgement of the impossibility of the task we have placed upon them and they have taken on themselves. I applaud them for the efforts but I cannot bear to see another report of a LEO or anyone else being wiped from this earth by a dirtbag that has no regard for anyone but himself!

I would like to hear some real suggestions, the time for action is now! Because the reality is that if we wait till direct action is the only option left it will be too late.

To quote Edmund Burke: "The ONLY thing nessecary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

So again I ask "WHAT ARE WE, MY GOOD MEN & WOMEN, GOING TO DO?"

M. Sage
03-27-2009, 9:54 AM
I agree with you completely! I dream about the day that the average would-be rapist is afraid to approach a woman who's walking alone at night. I dream of the day when two punks talk each other out of sticking up a liquor store because it's too damn risky.

The police need to help us get there, though. They need to put pressure on the politicians at the top of their command structure to back off gun control, and to back things like CCW. The average cops on the street could make a huge difference if they all exerted pressure.

ilbob
03-27-2009, 9:58 AM
It would be more surprising if they weren't mad.

ilbob
03-27-2009, 9:59 AM
The police need to help us get there, though. They need to put pressure on the politicians at the top of their command structure to back off gun control, and to back things like CCW. The average cops on the street could make a huge difference if they all exerted pressure.
My guess is the "average" cop in the street cares far more about his regular paycheck than about gun control.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 10:00 AM
I agree with you completely! I dream about the day that the average would-be rapist is afraid to approach a woman who's walking alone at night. I dream of the day when two punks talk each other out of sticking up a liquor store because it's too damn risky.

The police need to help us get there, though. They need to put pressure on the politicians at the top of their command structure to back off gun control, and to back things like CCW. The average cops on the street could make a huge difference if they all exerted pressure.

I think the time for dreaming of those days and waiting for someone else to force that changes is over. That's my point.....what actions can be taken starting TODAY to MAKE those dreams a reality?

Kid Stanislaus
03-27-2009, 10:02 AM
What are we going to do? We're going to continue suffering from the idiocy of the liberal politicians who have this state by the gonads. There sure as hell is NOT going to be an armed uprising to right the wrongs that've been pressed down upon our collective brow like a crown of thorns. Don't be a fool by getting your hopes up that any sweeping change is in the works because that just is NOT going to happen. Nordyke MAY give us a measure of relief and maybe not, only time will tell. I'm guessing I'll be long dead and buried before there is any appreciable improvement in the whole situation known as the State of California.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 10:17 AM
Come on guys.....I'm asking for help to try and look at the bigger picture. Yes...I agree that getting gun restrictions changed and CCW and all that stuff is important. But it's not the miracle cure. I know this is a gun website....but expand your focus if you can.

The fact is that crime has always been a part of any society all the way back to Cain killing Able. It's like a cancer, if you don't take regular steps to erradicate it when it pops up it spreads like wild fire. We post on here day after day about how the government/LEOs can't protect us and laws do nothing to stop crime. Yet when I ask "What can we do" I get answers back needing the government/LEOs to get the laws changed.

And I know it's a hard thing for law-abiding citizens to do because whether we like to admit it or not, we fear the law more than we fear criminals. That's why laws work on law-abiding citizens and not criminals. Now I am not advocating forming armed vigilante posses or anything like that.....at least not yet. LOL If we sit back and wait now, the time will come when armed posses will be the only answer.

But there hasta be something MORE we can all do! Give me some ideas.

How's this for starters: Demand a town hall meeting with your local police chief / sheriff to discuss more realistic options on what citizens can do, or perhaps INFORM them what their citizens intend to do and to help them understand they these citizens are not the enemy and need not be feared, but rather supported in their efforts.

THINK PEOPLE!!! THINK!!!

BobB35
03-27-2009, 10:32 AM
Interesting ideas, but I challenge you to look at this from a different perspective, the one I think prevails in CA. Kid may back me up on this. The govt - doesn't want our help - they want us to be docile little sheep that go to work and pay taxes, that's it. They don't want us armed, thinking too much or responsible for ourselves. Heck look at the political reaction to this, more gun control -- come on how do you beat that.

IMO CA is a lost cause and the only hope is a Federal Judge ramming home to CLEOs and the legislature that the people have a right to defend themselves.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 10:54 AM
Interesting ideas, but I challenge you to look at this from a different perspective, the one I think prevails in CA. Kid may back me up on this. The govt - doesn't want our help - they want us to be docile little sheep that go to work and pay taxes, that's it. They don't want us armed, thinking too much or responsible for ourselves. Heck look at the political reaction to this, more gun control -- come on how do you beat that.

IMO CA is a lost cause and the only hope is a Federal Judge ramming home to CLEOs and the legislature that the people have a right to defend themselves.


I agree with you......right now the general stance of gov't is "we dont want your help", "You need us to think for you" and so on. But if they meet no resistance to such ideologies and policies that follow from it, then they've already have they not?

What I'm talking about is not accepting that answer anymore. Not sitting back and asking "What is the gov't going to do for us." But instead TELLING them what we ARE going to do for them. Pretty much something like "We've given you X number of years, and this is what we've gotten and we're not happy with it. So this is what WE are going to do to rectify it. Your support is not required, but would be greatly appreciated."

The reason things have gotten this far is because people didn't resist early enough on to keep it from getting here. There are only 2 solutions I see at this point A) Give up now and throw in the towel and say it's too late, or B) start doing what should have been along time ago.

Not saying option B is easy, digging yourself out of a hole never is. But it is the only way out.....otherwise that hole you're in will soon become your grave. It is such self-willed determination in the heart of individuals that brought people to this continent and made this country great and it will take such determination to keep it from total collapse.

Matt C
03-27-2009, 10:58 AM
The reality is we are going to get the society we deserve.

If it were possible for at least the majority of people to take responsibility for themselves and their security, rather than relying on a bloated and questionably effective police force, then these problems would not exist.

But that's not likely to happen until the police stop getting paychecks, or their job becomes to dangerous for the pay they are getting.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 11:02 AM
But that's not likely to happen until the police stop getting paychecks, or their job becomes to dangerous for the pay they are getting.


But that's not gonna happen until the new regime has spent all of your money. Do you want to wait that long?

dfletcher
03-27-2009, 11:39 AM
WE SHOULD ALL BE MAD!!!! Why? We as law-abiding citizens should be angry beyond belief that our city/county/state/country has been allowed to deteriorate to this point. But I had to honestly ask myself a question last night: "Who is to blame for allowing this deterioration?"

I think we as law-abiding citizens share some of the blame. We have turned our eyes away, hidden in our houses, and allowed criminal elements to infiltrate every aspect of life in our country, and then hoped "someone else", "them", "the government" would do something about it. Why are these criminals able to move about and engage in their criminal activities nearly unopposed? How are they able to take control of whole neighborhoods? BECAUSE WE LET THEM!!! We let them out of fear, fear of endangering ourselves, fear or reprisal/retaliation, and just plain unsubstantiated fear. And believe me....I'm not excluding myself from that group who has allowed myself to be controlled by fear.

If you think about it....what really is the only thing a criminal fears? Other criminals! Why? Because they know that other criminals are the only ones who will stand up to them and fight whether offensively or defensively without regard for the law. Right now the only "natural predator" for a criminal is other criminals.

The COPs can't do it on their own. I know they don't like to admit it, but it's not said to deminish theirs skills and efforts. It is simply an acknowledgement of the impossibility of the task we have placed upon them and they have taken on themselves. I applaud them for the efforts but I cannot bear to see another report of a LEO or anyone else being wiped from this earth by a dirtbag that has no regard for anyone but himself!

So again I ask "WHAT ARE WE, MY GOOD MEN & WOMEN, GOING TO DO?"

I did a little condensing on your thread, just a little space saving.

Who's to blame? Directly - the folks who run Oakland. Indirectly - the folks who voted for the folks who run Oakland.

When the people who run Oakland are more concerned with controlling the police than allowing them to do their job, or pay great heed to community activists who prefer to rein in the police, they foster an environment which weakens the police and embolden the criminals.

Make no mistake - most of the people who live in Oakland are decent and hardworking. The police make mistakes and must be accountable. But there is a difference between accountability and handicapping them. I think the police CAN do the job if they are allowed.

I believe there were +160 murders in Oakland last year, about 90% involved a parolee as a victim or offender. In Alameda Cty last year there were fewer than 5 Officer involved shootings - where is the community outrage at the friends, brothers, uncles & dads killing & being killed by one another? Where are the community meetings addressing these folks killing one another? Where's the effort to address this by the elected officials?

It's much easier to critique the police as an entity than the challenge of looking inward, at one's own community.

Let the police enforce the law. Watch over them, but show more concern about catching and punishing offenders.

And so far as criminal fearing only other criminals - why is that? Will the other criminal call the cops, call a local news station & rat them out? Nope, of corse not - there's a good chance they'll shoot them and that's why one criminal fears another. So loosen up on the CCW laws (again, elected officials and the people who elect them) and maybe the average person will become involved.

MontClaire
03-27-2009, 11:47 AM
I was thinking the same thing but you laid it out so well.

Matt C
03-27-2009, 11:51 AM
But that's not gonna happen until the new regime has spent all of your money. Do you want to wait that long?

External debt alone is already greater than GDP, the money is gone, right now anything they are spending is imaginary.

Personally, I think things are going to get a hell of a lot worse, 4 officers KIA in one day won't be a big number at all.

Trakker
03-27-2009, 11:54 AM
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/daily-breeze/T5L71QG6L1UPR2C4C#lastPost

read about it here

taking our right away

wildhawker
03-27-2009, 12:10 PM
The reality is we are going to get the society we deserve.

Well said.

Americans are now indoctrinated from birth to shirk responsibility, trust the government as provider and do whatever "feels good" and is best for them in the moment (damn the long-term and unintended consequences).

The truth is, Kid, it's not the liberal politicians who have this state and country by the gonads- our society evolved into one which volunteered them into the jaws of the vise, only to look to the same government with the hand on the screw for help and encouragement.

Swiss
03-27-2009, 12:42 PM
I think it's pretty simple to fight the bad guys - you take your community back, block by block, and it has nothing to do with guns.

If your community doesn't already do it, work with your PD to establish community policing so you have beat cops who stick with and become experts on your area.

Establish a neighborhood watch on every block. Beyond the obvious crime fighting aspect, it does wonders to get neighbors talking to each other and learning each other's names, likes/dislikes. If you have neighborhood councils or associations, attend the monthly meetings and get involved. Once you have a cohesive group of neighbors with a common goal of peace and community the criminals residing nearby won't last long.

There are of course larger problems that neighbors or even the municipality can't control, such as school closures, unemployment, blight, etc. But I think you can keep the symptoms of those issues at bay with a well organized group of citizens.

I'll also add that being an active gun-owner in the community, and quietly letting them learn about your position on RKBA, can indirectly further the restoration of gun rights. You'll be the good example they think of when some lefty starts trashing gun owners.

Someone's probably going to call this naive and idealistic, but it's working where I live.

Piper
03-27-2009, 12:49 PM
Okay untamed listen up because I'm going to give you the straight scoop on the contradictions of law currently on the books in California and other associated factors.

1. The fact of the matter is this, we as citizens are told that on the one hand we can defend ourselves in our homes, however, if we do and the dirtbag lives, we can be sued. If a person is financially unable to support themselves in a civil suit, they are effectively screwed.

2. We are told that we can defend ourselves in public against an attack, however we are restricted by laws like 12020, 12025 and 12031 from carrying an effective weapon for self defense.

3. If a citizen chooses to ignore the law, and is caught with said effective weapon, said person is vilified and labeled a criminal for daring to go against the states edicts.

4. Anyone who even talks about carrying an effective weapon is labeled a vigilante and shamed into compliance with the other sheeple.

5. Most police in California will even discourage the carrying of legal effective weapons for self defense and encourage the citizenry to call 9-1-1 for help. Meanwhile we still have ignorant laws on the books like PC 150 that make it a misdemeanor to not come to a cops aid if he or she is getting their @$$ kicked.

6. Lets not forget that while we are disarmed and have to rely on the police for protection, the courts have ruled that police are not obligated to protect us personally. So, it becomes a crap shoot in that if you choose to actually stand against criminal behavior, you are effectively on your own unless others around you choose to stand shoulder to shoulder with you or you're lucky enough to have a cop around when you actually need one.

7. Then there is the police attitude. If you should decide to stand against criminal behavior, most cops will make stupid assessments that you are "trying to play police". If you do call 9-1-1 and report criminal behavior, if you're lucky, a unit will drive through the area 30 minutes after the dirtbags are gone. That is unless you mention maybe seeing one of them with a gun (hint hint).

The bottom line is this, liberals have become the overwhelming majority in this state and have elected the feel good socialists that have brought us to this point. So, while I stand with you and agree with your frustration, liberals will have to decide what they want California to look like. As for me, I'm considering the alternatives to California like Texas, South Carolina, and Florida.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 1:13 PM
External debt alone is already greater than GDP, the money is gone, right now anything they are spending is imaginary.

Personally, I think things are going to get a hell of a lot worse, 4 officers KIA in one day won't be a big number at all.


Yes....but they haven't gotten to the point of imposing a 90% tax on your income yet. It could get that bad.....do you want to wait that long? Or would you rather start fighting the fight now before what you DO have is gone?

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 1:30 PM
I just want to respond in general to Piper and some others.

Go back and read your posts some of you.....you are all confirming what I said earlier. We are more afraid of the law then we are the criminals and that's why the criminals win......and they will continue to win as long as that attitude is maintained. I'm not talking about asking the criminals or the gov't for our safety back.....I'm talking about TAKING it back!

I find hypocrital the LEA mentality of "don't get involved call us if you need help", yet then when you do call and they don't come in time and they get sued, they opt for the "well we are not obligated to protect you".

I'm not baggin' on individual COPs, they do a tough job with not enough resources. I am speaking more to the LE community as a whole. This whole "let us handle it" line when we all know, them included, that they can't is just what is called "turf protection and political posturing". If they suddenly let citizens get involved it would be hard to justify contiued requests for more money to pay salaries not to mention for a sheriff to get re-elected or a police chief to keep the city council from dumping him for admitting his dept. can't do the job.

But we all need to get past that crap. Real change comes about thru the 3 A's. Awareness, Acceptance, Action. We are all aware of the problem, but we struggle with the acceptance thing. Accepting it doesn't mean we like it, it just means we accept the reality of the situation as it is, so that it can be used as a starting point for taking the corrective actions that are needed.

Until the criminals truly fear the law-abiding citizen, or at bear minimum have to give a second thought to who they pick on rather just seeing everyone as easy pickin's, then nothing is going to change. Because come on if you think getting your gun rights back is the answer....remember these guys do not even fear the COPs and they DO have guns, and we have 4 dead LEOs in one day to demonstrate how little fear they have of anyone.

And remember your CCW is only going to be effective in situations where lethal force is justified. Which means you can't do a drive by on the dirtbag dealing on the corner, or stealing that car parked on the street and so on. Would be nice if we could....I think you'd see crime really drop off if we could, but we can't. So what are you/we/me gonna do about those kinds of situations? That's why I'm trying to look at the bigger picture.

Or do I just need to accept that our society is going to collapse, and I need to stock up on supplies so that when it's every man for himself the dirtbags can then find out how terrifying a man defending his home can be?

Is the reality that our society has already collapsed and what remains is just a facade of it's former self and in many ways it's already every man for himself?

Wompinblazer
03-27-2009, 1:48 PM
I agree with a few different posts here.

I think what we need to do, is show the LEOs and Govt, that we are capable of making decisions involving our safety, and the safety of our lives. Make them understand that WE are responsible for ourselves, and we aren't functioning at a "Mob Mentality" level.

Once they understand that part, the criminals will take notice. They will see that the police arent in a hurry to come rescue them from the house they just tried to break into. They will notice that the guy behind the counter at the liquor store is no longer afraid because in his hand is .45 that he has owned and shot for years, making him deadly accurate.

Once WE get the rights WE need to protect OURSELVES from criminals, we will be more scary then the police departments. There are more law abiding citizens then there are LEOs and criminals combined.

It is about education, and balls. We as a whole lack both.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 1:55 PM
Once WE get the rights WE need to protect OURSELVES from criminals, we will be more scary then the police departments. There are more law abiding citizens then there are LEOs and criminals combined.

It is about education, and balls. We as a whole lack both.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 2:03 PM
I wanted to add something. Think about why criminals act w/o fear. It's because they do not fear losing anything because they have nothing to lose.

And I know it's hard for law-abiding citizens to face some of these issues because we do fear losing what we have. We fear losing our rights and freedom is we end up in prison, we fear losing our money/property in fighting legal battles and most of all we fear losing our lives or that of a loved one if taking some action brings retaliation. And I say this because I have those fears too.

But in reality aren't we already losing those things little by little by letting the dirtbags win and gov't to continue to make the good people pay for the criminal acts of others?

Ironchef
03-27-2009, 2:07 PM
Personally, I think things are going to get a hell of a lot worse, 4 officers KIA in one day won't be a big number at all.

And when the next batch of cops is killed (either on the border with cartels, or from internal issues, or regular bad guy vs. good guy situations like Oakland just had, I think the "hell of a lot worse" scenario to expect is a smack down on existing gun freedom. Security at the cost of rights and it's attendant false sense of safety is how bad it will get.

We all know arming the society (exercising of natural self defense rights of keeping and bearing arms) is the ONLY real solution...not 3x more cops, not anger management, not more or less jobs, not prescription drugs..just regular old conceal carry AND the gun culture behind it letting everyone know that it is a risky coin toss when considering to attack someone that may have a gun. I may be naive as I'm in a small town of about 10k people in a spread out county of only 40k people, but the amount of homicides in this STATE is about 10-15...basically what the city of Antioch had last year. I would simply credit the lack of crime up here (despite rampant meth use) to "small-town-itis" but I have to believe it's because of that coin toss analogy...'you may get a victim who'll unload his glock 26 into you.' I've seen the sexual predator and violent offender lists up here and there's as many x-felons here as in Antioch so it's not easy to simply say it's naturally a safe place...per capita anyway.

Untamed1972
03-27-2009, 3:25 PM
1. The fact of the matter is this, we as citizens are told that on the one hand we can defend ourselves in our homes, however, if we do and the dirtbag lives, we can be sued. If a person is financially unable to support themselves in a civil suit, they are effectively screwed.

This a long standing issue that needs to be addressed in this country. It happens not only to private citizens but also police depts. which drains tax payer dollars. There needs to be something put in place to make a private person or a public agency immune from civil liability once a self-defense act is deemed justified. The civil suit thing has just been too long abused in this country by the dirtbags and the ambulance chasing attorneys that represent them.

6. Lets not forget that while we are disarmed and have to rely on the police for protection, the courts have ruled that police are not obligated to protect us personally. So, it becomes a crap shoot in that if you choose to actually stand against criminal behavior, you are effectively on your own unless others around you choose to stand shoulder to shoulder with you or you're lucky enough to have a cop around when you actually need one.

That's my point....there need to be more mutual back up of our fellow citizens. Take the dirtbags demonstrating in the streets for Mixon. There should have 10 times the number of people out there expressing their rage at the criminals who infest that area. But that didn't happen? Why not? The rage against the criminals needs to be taken public! If a good citizen is gettin' run thru the mill by LEAs and DAs for a self defense act there needs to be more public outcry. Where is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when an innocent person gets killed by a dirtbag gangbanger?

Matt C
03-27-2009, 3:35 PM
Yes....but they haven't gotten to the point of imposing a 90% tax on your income yet. It could get that bad.....do you want to wait that long? Or would you rather start fighting the fight now before what you DO have is gone?

You are preaching to the choir my friend. Unfortunately until there is mass unrest a single person taking action, probably even just literal defensive action to protect his person, against the state will be vilified and the result will be negative.

yellowfin
03-27-2009, 4:11 PM
I agree with a few different posts here.

I think what we need to do, is show the LEOs and Govt, that we are capable of making decisions involving our safety, and the safety of our lives. Make them understand that WE are responsible for ourselves, and we aren't functioning at a "Mob Mentality" level. Show them?? It's their legal obligation under the Constitution to operate under that whether they like it or not.

It is about education, and balls. We as a whole lack both.
I can agree with that. But "Please, give us a chance, we'll promise we'll be good" isn't sufficient. We've tried that. It's going to have to be "Look, we have a solution to this. We've tried it the other way, and it doesn't work. You just got a taste of what it's like to be us. Now, how important is maintaining the status quo versus YOUR OWN lives? Apparently when this was us, you didn't care, but now it's you. We've paid the price for doing it your way, now you are. Are you going to keep this up?"

M. Sage
03-27-2009, 4:18 PM
I think the time for dreaming of those days and waiting for someone else to force that changes is over. That's my point.....what actions can be taken starting TODAY to MAKE those dreams a reality?

I guess I didn't make my point clearly enough. That's what happens when you're tired. :o My point is that now is a good time to reach out to the police. Now is a good time to let them know that gun owners have their backs against a-holes like the one who killed four of them.

On law and order political matters, the police have a lot of pull. They'd make great allies.

wildhawker
03-27-2009, 4:21 PM
There exists in this conversation a chasm between the application of imperfect human decision and the purity of the Constitution and this Republic in theory (and as was intended).

Just as case law provides the precedent for deciding the next case, so have our societal decisions provided the context for our current state of being. It is what it is; we haven't given up, but we are aware of where we are today. This is not a negative outlook; to the contrary, it shows that a) we know where we want to go and b) provides us with a reason to take the actions necessary to achieve our goals.

I'll take this opportunity to ask those who would like to take action to PM me with their contact information and location; there are many public events planned for this year and we need all the help we can get.

Matt C
03-27-2009, 4:24 PM
I'll take this opportunity to ask those who would like to take action to PM me with their contact information and location; there are many public events planned for this year and we need all the help we can get.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/2538518450_eaa8283722.jpg?v=0

Just had that handy...

Matt C
03-27-2009, 4:26 PM
On law and order political matters, the police police unions have a lot of pull. They'd make great allies.

Fixed that for you. Oh, and they will NEVER be on our side.

yellowfin
03-27-2009, 4:31 PM
Fixed that for you. Oh, and they will NEVER be on our side.Well, the police unions, by nature of the politicians and policies they support, got these officers killed, for all intents and purposes. So they're not on the cops' side either. Will the cops see that for what it is? I can see that they blatantly don't care about the average citizens, but can they keep getting away with blatantly not caring about the police too?

Matt C
03-27-2009, 4:37 PM
Well, the police unions, by nature of the politicians and policies they support, got these officers killed, for all intents and purposes. So they're not on the cops' side either. Will the cops see that for what it is? I can see that they blatantly don't care about the average citizens, but can they keep getting away with blatantly not caring about the police too?

They can and will. Unions have never really existed to serve their individual members, if you think about it they are unnecessary in that capacity (although they do generally act in that capacity of preserving and enlarging the membership group as a whole as a matter of necessity). Unions are a product of government (a certain form of government at that) and exist to exert political influence on behalf of the people who control them (note that it's NOT really the individuals that they "represent").

M. Sage
03-27-2009, 4:39 PM
Fixed that for you. Oh, and they will NEVER be on our side.

The members in the unions vote.

If we could convince the rank and file to actually give a damn, they could make the changes. All we're lacking is the will on the part of the union members.

Matt C
03-27-2009, 4:41 PM
The members in the unions vote.

If we could convince the rank and file to actually give a damn, they could make the changes. All we're lacking is the will on the part of the union members.

Heh, you could same the same thing about the general population, if only we could convince them. LEOs are no less susceptible to the BS pushed at them than the average voting citizen, and no more likely to willfully resist what is now happening to this country barring a cataclysmic change in the system.

Ford8N
03-27-2009, 5:48 PM
Okay untamed listen up because I'm going to give you the straight scoop on the contradictions of law currently on the books in California and other associated factors.

1. The fact of the matter is this, we as citizens are told that on the one hand we can defend ourselves in our homes, however, if we do and the dirtbag lives, we can be sued. If a person is financially unable to support themselves in a civil suit, they are effectively screwed.

2. We are told that we can defend ourselves in public against an attack, however we are restricted by laws like 12020, 12025 and 12031 from carrying an effective weapon for self defense.

3. If a citizen chooses to ignore the law, and is caught with said effective weapon, said person is vilified and labeled a criminal for daring to go against the states edicts.

4. Anyone who even talks about carrying an effective weapon is labeled a vigilante and shamed into compliance with the other sheeple.

5. Most police in California will even discourage the carrying of legal effective weapons for self defense and encourage the citizenry to call 9-1-1 for help. Meanwhile we still have ignorant laws on the books like PC 150 that make it a misdemeanor to not come to a cops aid if he or she is getting their @$$ kicked.

6. Lets not forget that while we are disarmed and have to rely on the police for protection, the courts have ruled that police are not obligated to protect us personally. So, it becomes a crap shoot in that if you choose to actually stand against criminal behavior, you are effectively on your own unless others around you choose to stand shoulder to shoulder with you or you're lucky enough to have a cop around when you actually need one.

7. Then there is the police attitude. If you should decide to stand against criminal behavior, most cops will make stupid assessments that you are "trying to play police". If you do call 9-1-1 and report criminal behavior, if you're lucky, a unit will drive through the area 30 minutes after the dirtbags are gone. That is unless you mention maybe seeing one of them with a gun (hint hint).

The bottom line is this, liberals have become the overwhelming majority in this state and have elected the feel good socialists that have brought us to this point. So, while I stand with you and agree with your frustration, liberals will have to decide what they want California to look like. As for me, I'm considering the alternatives to California like Texas, South Carolina, and Florida.

Excellent!

wildhawker
03-27-2009, 8:47 PM
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/2538518450_eaa8283722.jpg?v=0

Just had that handy...

Timing is everything :D

wildhawker
03-27-2009, 8:51 PM
They can and will. Unions have never really existed to serve their individual members, if you think about it they are unnecessary in that capacity (although they do generally act in that capacity of preserving and enlarging the membership group as a whole as a matter of necessity). Unions are a product of government (a certain form of government at that) and exist to exert political influence on behalf of the people who control them (note that it's NOT really the individuals that they "represent").

Unions are also a business unto themselves- the business of power (controlling the supply of labor), political influence (manipulating the demand for and condition of labor) and the administration of various trusts, all while collecting membership fees in the form of dues (by the members) and fringe benefits and contract administration costs to employers.

Bad Voodoo
03-27-2009, 8:55 PM
Fixed that for you. Oh, and they will NEVER be on our side.

Police unions? You're exactly right. The FOP is more anti than most anti political organizations.

M. Sage
03-27-2009, 9:55 PM
Heh, you could same the same thing about the general population, if only we could convince them. LEOs are no less susceptible to the BS pushed at them than the average voting citizen, and no more likely to willfully resist what is now happening to this country barring a cataclysmic change in the system.

Well, awesome. I guess we should all just pack it in here, pick up our rifles and take it to the streets. :rolleyes:

yellowfin
03-27-2009, 10:02 PM
Isn't it just the FOP here? In other states they can't get away with being this bad.

TheBundo
03-27-2009, 11:21 PM
The court system is so messed up, we need a revolution. Executions need to start happening fast and furious for violent offenses. Kidnap someone, even if they get let go, a 50 cent bullet to the head. Swift justice is the deterrent, what we have encourages crime. As long as there are heavy warnings before a law goes into effect, it should be legal. For one year, announce "On July 1st, 2010, anyone caught putting graffiti on someone else's property will be summarily executed", and I bet graffiti will be a thing of the past. There is no injustice in that if people are warned adequetely.

mfmayes49
03-28-2009, 12:05 AM
Its a sad thing this has happened to good police, but the Feinstein and Brady anti gunners were quick to take advantage of this, I saw on channel 2 news that Brady wants a control on ammo, what that means i dont know, but be ready for another Los Angeles to be used to ban assault weapons, It will be Oakland to be used to control ammo sales.

Matt C
03-28-2009, 12:19 AM
Well, awesome. I guess we should all just pack it in here, pick up our rifles and take it to the streets. :rolleyes:

I'm not saying that. I'm saying get prepared. Do you have a better idea?

M. Sage
03-28-2009, 6:06 AM
I'm not saying that. I'm saying get prepared. Do you have a better idea?

I thought I already posted my better idea.

Reach out to the OPD officers who are hurting. Let them know we support them. And let them know that citizens who choose to arm themselves have their back on the street.

Maverick831
03-28-2009, 6:31 PM
Very nicely said OP! I agree 100% and know exactly how you feel.

If every law-abiding citizen reported criminal actions or actually did something about it.. it would go a very long way..

Salinas is real close to where I live. And I've heard of residents getting sick of the gang violence. But these scared mother ******s don't do **** about it.

This is pretty much how America is now.. everyone wants a hand out and wants someone to wipe their a** for them. It's really sad, and I'm pissed at society for what it has become.

Guitarman
03-28-2009, 6:45 PM
When I heard about this Oakland shooting taking place, it didn't surprise me because of all the crazy things I've seen. I don't know if you guys have seen this video before but there's a girl that gets beaten up by at least 50 people in Oakland. The story behind it is she was hit on by a pimp at a night club and she said something to the likes of f off. The pimp sends his ***** goons to literally beat a helpless girl to death but she survives.

here's a link to it though the quality is pretty bad from the original video I've seen of it... I had to search a bit to find it again (it's pretty graphic so viewer discretion is advised)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgWmY0PGGJY

GuyW
03-28-2009, 7:10 PM
Carry a loaded gun against criminal attack in Oakland, and get back to us on how that worked out...
.

GuyW
03-28-2009, 7:12 PM
My guess is the "average" cop in the street cares far more about his regular paycheck and bennies than whether we can defend ourselves and our families on the street

fixed it for you...
.

blackrifle242
03-28-2009, 9:19 PM
In my personal opinion I agree that most people just sit around and whine. As far as my experiaence goes, I was involved in a attempted murder case. After a brief sensless altercation, an angry ex con decided that he was pissed off at the world and took his suburban determined to end our lives. He hit my buddy (Recon Marine, just back from Iraq) tossed him 15ft in the air, then aimed his car at me. i was able to jump away, nearly being pinned between another car. As he fled the scene at 40 mph he pushed his passenger out of the car. When the cops caught up with him, he rammed their cars and tried to flee again. Long story short, he has been out on bail since 2006 and the trial keeps getting delayed. I call in everytime I get a letter but they always push the trial back. So, yes i want to be proactive in fighting crime but the courts don't help and crimals some how get more rights than they deserve. I have always agreed that a bullet is cheaper than keeping a chronic violent offender in jail. So I will do all I can to support my community and protect my family but until we can get the laws turned into our favor, we have to be careful. If it was up to me i would be patrolling my neighborhood with my AR and a sig on my thigh.

GuyW
03-28-2009, 9:36 PM
Every crime witness who doesn't have a CCW (and can't get one) needs to tell the cops and Prosecutors to "go to hell, I won't testify". Tell the judges you won't testify and tell them why.

If enough people did this, the system *might* take notice and rethink its victim disarmament policies.

.

blackrifle242
03-28-2009, 10:37 PM
In my situation I would have had plenty of time to draw and fire atleast one well aimed shot into the vehicle. I saw the vehicle go twords my friend, hit him and then aim twords me. My first instinct was to go after my friend to help (might just be the Marine in me to aid a wounded brother) I ran twords the car to get to my friend. If I was armed I would have probably shot and then went to aid. Can't say for sure. Things happen fast and you can only rely on your training and experiences. I believe until we as responsible citizens are able to carry, the criminal element will continue to pray on us without remorse and severe consiquences.

Captain Evilstomper
03-28-2009, 11:01 PM
The reality is we are going to get the society we deserve.

If it were possible for at least the majority of people to take responsibility for themselves and their security, rather than relying on a bloated and questionably effective police force, then these problems would not exist.

But that's not likely to happen until the police stop getting paychecks, or their job becomes to dangerous for the pay they are getting.

the problem is the apathy of the general populace. 'I'm too busy managing this restaurant, or trying to make my house payment to worry about the security and crime in my city. And the LE agencies, don't like others horning in on their business. (frankly i don't think i've ever met a cop on duty who seemed like he liked anyone, off duty sometimes a different story) the problem of why the criminals don't fear the general population is due to the fact that most people are sheep, who do what they are told. who only spend their precious neurons on what will most benefit them and their often misbehaved progeny. if everyone cared about the welfare and safety of others around them, say even a 3 house radius, the overlap would cover everyone. if neighbors watched out for each other, a lot of property crimes wouldn't happen. apathy and short sightedness.

MrSigmaDOT40
03-29-2009, 2:37 AM
Ok, the OP is talking about my post. I was talking about a person I know that was at ACH outside when they started bringing the down officers in. I never said they were not supposed to be mad, I was pointing out that according to the person who was there, they were extremely mad and word around town is people think they just ran in the apartment intent on killing the suspect and not too worried about the other people in the building.

Somebody already cleared up that they planned for an hour before they went in, so I would think they were more focused and together at that point. I felt you were trying to make my post sound like something it wasn't but whatever,

As far as ideas......? I'll be glad to escort you and anybody else that want to go to the hardest blocks in Oakland, where you can open carry unloaded pistols and slinged riffles all day long up and down the street. Other then that, you won't do much without getting shall issue CCW and convincing the masses to get a gun and ccw (it would soon get around that most people at any given time are packing).

cousinkix1953
03-29-2009, 5:54 AM
My guess is the "average" cop in the street cares far more about his regular paycheck than about gun control.
True or not, there is the problem of working for a fascist police chief or sheriff. Ask Leroy Pyle in San Jose. He was harassed more than once for being a member of the NRA and being open about it. Joe McNamara tried to fire him; because testified against the Roos-Roberti law in Sacramento. Remember that incident?

KRON interviewed several masked officers at a shooting range. They covered their name plates and badge numbers for the cameras. Their voices were disguised; because they would be demoted or fired.

The first amendment doesn't mean a damned thing to the anti-second amendment crowd either. STFU if you aren't on their banwagon! In fact, many of the sponsors of the new Fairness Doctrine (aimed at talk radio) are also on the NRA's list of enemies on Capitol Hill...

Ford8N
03-29-2009, 10:50 AM
True or not, there is the problem of working for a fascist police chief or sheriff. Ask Leroy Pyle in San Jose. He was harassed more than one for being a member of the NRA and being open about it. Joe McNamara tried to fire him; because testified against the Roos-Roberti law in Sacramento. Remember that incident?

KRON interviewed several masked officers at a shooting range. They covered their name plates and badge numbers for the cameras. Their voices were disguised; because they would be demoted or fired.

The first amendment doesn't mean a damned to the anti-second amendment crowd either. STFU if you aren't on their banwagon! In fact, many of the sponsors of the new Fairness Doctrine (aimed at talk radio) are also on the NRA's list of enemies on Capitol Hill...

Link or info please.

JoeC
03-29-2009, 11:56 AM
I thought this was relevant.

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth. Banks are going bust. Shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter. Punks are running wild in the street and there's no one anywhere that seems to know what to do with us. Now into it.

We know the air is unfit to breathe, our food is unfit to eat, and we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had 15 homicides and 63 violent crimes as if that's the way it's supposed to be. We know things are bad. Worse than bad. They're crazy. It's like everything everywhere is going crazy so we don't go out anymore. We sit in a house as slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster, and TV, and my steel belted radials and I won't say anything." Well I'm not going to leave you alone! I want you to get mad. I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crying in the streets. All I know is first you've got to get mad. You've got to say, "I'm a human being God Dammit! My life has value!"

So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out, and yell, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" I want you to get up right now. Get up. Go to your windows, open your windows, and stick your head out, and yell, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!" Things have got to change my friends. You've got to get mad. You've got to say, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!" Then we'll figure out what to do about the depression and the inflation and the oil crisis. But first get up out of your chairs, open your window, stick your head out and yell, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"

Smokey510
03-29-2009, 12:11 PM
I agree with you completely! I dream about the day that the average would-be rapist is afraid to approach a woman who's walking alone at night. I dream of the day when two punks talk each other out of sticking up a liquor store because it's too damn risky.

The police need to help us get there, though. They need to put pressure on the politicians at the top of their command structure to back off gun control, and to back things like CCW. The average cops on the street could make a huge difference if they all exerted pressure.

The police in Oakland don't like the idea's of CCW's. I asked about it after I got bullet holes in my house because of the gang war going on in front of my house. The lieutenant of my area said "ya, the last thing we want to do in Oakland is put more guns in people's hands".

Personally, I find this attitude outrageous. Furthermore, the cops tell me that THEY would have a hard time living in my neighborhood. But a CCW would still be intolerable to them.

JoeC
03-29-2009, 12:37 PM
The police in Oakland don't like the idea's of CCW's. I asked about it after I got bullet holes in my house because of the gang war going on in front of my house. The lieutenant of my area said "ya, the last thing we want to do in Oakland is put more guns in people's hands".

Personally, I find this attitude outrageous. Furthermore, the cops tell me that THEY would have a hard time living in my neighborhood. But a CCW would still be intolerable to them.

I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

yellowfin
03-29-2009, 12:40 PM
I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

That's really outrageous of them equating lawful CCW by citizens with gangbangers. Are they really that short sighted and stupid? Perspective difference is one thing, but that's 180 degrees out of line. That's like me saying an actor who plays a cop on TV is 100% identical to an actual cop, or that antifreeze is a perfectly edible substitute for lime Jello because they're the same shade of green.

GuyW
03-29-2009, 12:42 PM
Nice job regurgitating the Brady play book and giving cover to elitist LEOs who don't deserve it....

....as if residents of Oakland CA who pass a background check are any different than citizens in the 40 free states that do issue CCWs, and where CCW works just fine - for 20 years now.

What IS different about CA from those other 40 states is that we have LEOs who either

a) can't / won't really think for themselves about guns; or

b) don't give a crap about everyday real-world safety of citizens; or

c) don't give a crap about anything but their salary, OT, pension, benefits, and what toy they're gonna buy next to entertain themselves...


I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

MrSigmaDOT40
03-29-2009, 12:46 PM
I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.


I can't go for the whole "I'm the police and i'm scared for my safety so screw your rights" thing. Nobody forced anybody to become a police officer, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. That is no excuse to put down ccw's to law abiding citizens. Local agencies could run firearms training programs and run ad's to get people to come out and train with their firearm for a small charge. I also wouldn't be against making (by law) anybody who gets issued a ccw have to do some type of situational/tactical training ever so often anyway.

Smokey510
03-29-2009, 12:53 PM
I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

I would like this. I'm not sure where the notion ever came up that people are completely incapable of defending their property, neighbors, friends and family.

There aren't enough cops, and they have no control over the neighborhoods. As has been discussed here to no end, my right to self defense should not be trumped because someone else feels nervous about it.

Electricboy
03-29-2009, 1:38 PM
:thumbsup:

i'm on the list for june to take the class to get my CCW, and i'm talking to friends and family about ab357 and ab11?? and printing letters for anyone who procrastinates or can't afford it.

its time to fight! make polititions fear for their jobs by making phone calls and sending letters.

Question: is it more effective to send one letter per person, or if i go door to door and send in thousands of signatures on one letter?

Stormfeather
03-29-2009, 2:54 PM
IMO CA is a lost cause and the only hope is a Federal Judge ramming home to CLEOs and the legislature that the people have a right to defend themselves.

Personally, I think things are going to get a hell of a lot worse, 4 officers KIA in one day won't be a big number at all.

The reality is we are going to get the society we deserve.

Basically, you guys hit it on the head. Ive lost all faith in the state of california and am preparing myself for the long haul. The only redeeming factor to be totally honest is the type of folks who are on here. While I dont think there will be anything that can be done short of a Federal Judges' ruling or Anarchy, I think the good people in this state have lost the battle. We only participate in small skirmishes now, and while we may win some of them, the true battle has already been lost.

JoeC
03-29-2009, 3:42 PM
I'd like to make myself clear. I'm for CCW. I agree that people should be able to defend themselves. Its a right.

In situations like this, specifically Oakland, I like to be able to see things from both sides.

We've seen how bipolar the attitude is in Oakland. We've seen how volatile the situation is over there. It's cops versus gangers. Now it has the potential to be cops versus citizens because of the perceived martyrdom of Mixon. In some neighborhoods the gangers look like the regular citizens. It's like the insurgency in Iraq. Who is the enemy? The guy with the gun? That could be a CCW citizen.

Police go in see a guy with a gun who may be a ganger, or a CCW defending himself. Either way they are already afraid for their lives, even more so now with the recent killings. What are they to think?

The cautious CCW attitude in Oakland is understandable and even justifiable based on the perceived safety of the officers individually. What I'm talking about here is each officers own personal view of their safety. I'm not talking politics or political agendas or governments. I'm sure you guys can agree and can sympathize with cops who have to go into neighborhoods full of guns and gangs.

Not all citizens are logical and reasonable people. Its not black and white between citizens and criminals. Some law abiding citizens can be just as crazy as criminals. Give that person a gun and you have potential trouble. How would you feel as a cop going into a situation with armed criminals and armed citizens who may be emotionally charged and irrational? Its dangerous.

Now if this was the case in a safer city like San Jose or San Diego, I'd think it was ridiculous. Like in San Diego where they don't issue CCW's for political and personal beliefs. I don't like that.

But please make no mistake. I'm for CCW. In all this I'm just thinking of officers own thoughts in regards to their own safety. CCW in a case like Oakland has to be done carefully and methodically to make sure it doesn't make things worse.

That's really outrageous of them equating lawful CCW by citizens with gangbangers.

Is it that outrageous? Think about what I said above. Cops arrive and see two guys who look relatively the same both holding guns. Or they arrive where someone is already shot and the other person has a gun. Its perfectly logical for them to think the guy might be a ganger. Unless its a little old lady of course.


It's not the same in other states because the situation was never allowed to spiral to this level of chaos. Other states retained their gun rights and thus kept criminals in check. CA enacted these dumb laws which built up a situation where criminals are out of control in certain areas.

The options in this case are let the citizens CCW, which I agree with let me again say, which will lead to reduced crime. How will it affect a very chaotic situation right away? A city with high crime and you dump a bunch of armed citizens into it. In the most extreme case you'll have a war zone (notice I said extreme case). In other cases you'll have vigilantes running around. Is that ok? A vigilante situation can be good and bad. I guess it depends on how it plays out. In either case the risk of vigilantes running around has the potential to create more trouble.

In the end I like order. I hate chaos. I'd like to see the problem resolved in an orderly fashion if possible.

KylaGWolf
03-29-2009, 7:01 PM
The police in Oakland had every RIGHT to be mad. Mad at the fact that the "bad guys" get out early. That the bad guy doesn't get slammed hard for breaking the rules over and over. They have the right to be mad that their bosses are more concerned about political favor than protecting them. They should be mad that the good guys can't compete with the bad guys.

Maybe what is needed is that everyone that is sick of the bad guys getting away with it to stand up and say ENOUGH. Instead of passing gun laws that make it harder for those that follow the law to defend themselves they should be more concerned in dealing with the bad guy and making the laws stick. Making the sentence stick.

I grew up around law enforcement and can say a lot of them are frustrated they bust the same dirtbags over and over and they were walking the street again before the ink was dry on the police report. Hell I live in a so called "good neighborhood" and have qualms of walking the streets by myself at night.

M. Sage
03-29-2009, 7:07 PM
The police in Oakland don't like the idea's of CCW's. I asked about it after I got bullet holes in my house because of the gang war going on in front of my house. The lieutenant of my area said "ya, the last thing we want to do in Oakland is put more guns in people's hands".

Personally, I find this attitude outrageous. Furthermore, the cops tell me that THEY would have a hard time living in my neighborhood. But a CCW would still be intolerable to them.

Yeah, a LT. Part of the corrupt command structure that I'd like to see the average cop rebel against.

I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

Those are just excuses for an inexcusable attitude. They work for us, yet the politicians in charge, the politicians who masquerade as cops in their command structure, act as though it's the other way around.

As for if I was an LEO in a gang infested neighborhood... No, I wouldn't want them to take to vigilantism, because that would be a violation of someone's rights. I would like to see them armed, trained, even patrolling to interrupt any crimes in progress they may stumble across. At the very least, armed and trained to defend themselves, their family and their neighbors should the need arise.

Basically, what I'm saying is that anybody who would use the excuses you listed as a reason to oppose any aspect of gun ownership by law-abiding citizens is a moron.

Basically, you guys hit it on the head. Ive lost all faith in the state of california and am preparing myself for the long haul. The only redeeming factor to be totally honest is the type of folks who are on here. While I dont think there will be anything that can be done short of a Federal Judges' ruling or Anarchy, I think the good people in this state have lost the battle. We only participate in small skirmishes now, and while we may win some of them, the true battle has already been lost.

I disagree that CA is a lost cause. It actually annoys me that I left while there's a fight still to be fought there. The only thing that makes it palatable to me is that CA is not my home; I wasn't born there.

I do agree, though, that the only thing I miss is hanging out with Calgunners!

In situations like this, specifically Oakland, I like to be able to see things from both sides.

That only really makes a difference if the other side is willing to see your side in return. Otherwise, it usually doesn't matter if you see both sides, because you're still going to have to fight instead of compromise.

We've seen how bipolar the attitude is in Oakland. We've seen how volatile the situation is over there. It's cops versus gangers. Now it has the potential to be cops versus citizens because of the perceived martyrdom of Mixon. In some neighborhoods the gangers look like the regular citizens. It's like the insurgency in Iraq. Who is the enemy? The guy with the gun? That could be a CCW citizen.

One thing that would help curb the violence by eroding the criminal side's base of support would be a social shift away from listening to rap "music" and away from the idiotic culture including mode of dress that revolves around it.

Criminality and rap "music"/culture go hand in hand.

Police go in see a guy with a gun who may be a ganger, or a CCW defending himself. Either way they are already afraid for their lives, even more so now with the recent killings. What are they to think?

I hate to say it, but they need to man up and master that fear or go find a quieter job. Hell, after nearly being killed by Bay Area morons twice inside of three miles one day, I almost quit riding my motorcycle, but I mastered my fear and have been riding almost a year since that day.

The cautious CCW attitude in Oakland is understandable and even justifiable based on the perceived safety of the officers individually. What I'm talking about here is each officers own personal view of their safety. I'm not talking politics or political agendas or governments. I'm sure you guys can agree and can sympathize with cops who have to go into neighborhoods full of guns and gangs.

Cautious!? It's not cautious, it's wrong-headed! How is such willful ignorance, outright stupidity and arrogance ever justifiable or understandable?

Not all citizens are logical and reasonable people. Its not black and white between citizens and criminals. Some law abiding citizens can be just as crazy as criminals. Give that person a gun and you have potential trouble. How would you feel as a cop going into a situation with armed criminals and armed citizens who may be emotionally charged and irrational? Its dangerous.

Useless argument, and an example of willful ignorance. The data from free states with shall-issue shows that CHL holders are far, far less likely to commit a violent crime than even off-duty cops! The data is out there, and you can bet your *** the police who argue against citizen CCW have access to it.

Arguing a position from a purely emotional stance is a bad move, especially when facts show that the position is 100% incorrect.

If we want to argue using the same illogical emotional argument as "citizens with CHLs can be dangerous to cops", we can also argue that it's perfectly fine and normal to be afraid of the dark, because you can't tell what's there! It could be anything out in that dark, so be sure and leave a light on.

Dunno about you, but I don't want to be "protected" by people who are afraid of the bogeyman lurking in the dark.

Now if this was the case in a safer city like San Jose or San Diego, I'd think it was ridiculous. Like in San Diego where they don't issue CCW's for political and personal beliefs. I don't like that. [/quote

Huh? It's more logical to issue CCWs in safer cities!? I don't know about you, but I never felt (or seen) the need to carry a gun in Palo Alto or Hillsborough. I can tell you, though, that taking a gun into SF or Oakland always was an appealing thought.

Why bother carrying where you're already safe? I always wanted to keep a loaded AK on me in some parts of Oakland.... so I'd be safer.

[QUOTE=JoeC;2240307]But please make no mistake. I'm for CCW. In all this I'm just thinking of officers own thoughts in regards to their own safety. CCW in a case like Oakland has to be done carefully and methodically to make sure it doesn't make things worse.

Why bother thinking of what a coward or a moron may be thinking? Cowardice and stupidity are a waste of time.

Is it that outrageous? Think about what I said above. Cops arrive and see two guys who look relatively the same both holding guns. Or they arrive where someone is already shot and the other person has a gun. Its perfectly logical for them to think the guy might be a ganger. Unless its a little old lady of course.

Yes, it's outrageous. Law-abiding citizens hang around and wait for the cops after a defensive shoot. 99% of the time, gang bangers bug out.

It's not the same in other states because the situation was never allowed to spiral to this level of chaos. Other states retained their gun rights and thus kept criminals in check. CA enacted these dumb laws which built up a situation where criminals are out of control in certain areas.

Wrong! Wrong wrong wrong. Michigan went to shall-issue after Detroit had spiraled into worse chaos than Oakland will probably ever see. Detroit didn't really get any better, but it sure as hell didn't get worse.

In the end I like order. I hate chaos. I'd like to see the problem resolved in an orderly fashion if possible.

I love chaos. Not wide-spread and not in my personal life, but chaos is nothing but an opportunity to profit. Heck, I make my living from bringing order from chaos (taking broke cars and un-breaking them).

It's like the old saying: when life gives you lemons...

In other words: quit drinking the FUD-flavored Koolaid.

JoeC
03-29-2009, 8:06 PM
stuff

I'm not drinking FUD koolaid. I understand what you're saying and I agree with it. I'm not talking about the country as a whole here but the situation in Oakland specifically.

Reading what Smokey wrote: The police in Oakland don't like the idea's of CCW's. I asked about it after I got bullet holes in my house because of the gang war going on in front of my house. The lieutenant of my area said "ya, the last thing we want to do in Oakland is put more guns in people's hands".

Personally, I find this attitude outrageous. Furthermore, the cops tell me that THEY would have a hard time living in my neighborhood. But a CCW would still be intolerable to them.

I don't believe that is a direct quote, but it indicates an environment of fear. Note the context: a gang war. To them its another gun in a gang war environment.

You say: Arguing a position from a purely emotional stance is a bad move, especially when facts show that the position is 100% incorrect.

It's a bad move, but it is how people respond. If it wasn't then Barack probably wouldn't be president. If it wasn't then we wouldn't be in this anti-gun nonsense in the first place.

I think the civilians in Oakland should be armed. I'm just trying to say, in probably too many words, that based on Smokey's quote, the cops in Oakland seem to be afraid of more guns because of how bad things are, and that is understandable. I'm not trying to justify anti-CCW attitude.

Piper
03-29-2009, 8:17 PM
I think its a matter of perspective. In their eyes another gun on the street is another gun on the street that they may have to face. Look at all the variables that may turn against them. The gun may be stolen, you may be defending yourself and putting them or another civilian a crossfire, or you shoot a gang member which sparks a gang war in your neighborhood that they have to come in and deal with.

So they're looking at it from the perspective of outnumbered cops in an already dangerous area with guns around and one more gun is exactly that, one more gun. From your perspective its 'I'm surrounded by gangs and guns and I want to protect myself' which I think is perfectly fine and also your right.

You have to ask yourself though, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of armed civilians in a gang neighborhood potentially dispensing vigilante justice against gang members already shooting each other, and other cops, up? It just makes a volatile situation more deadly.

In the end both parties are scared.

I'm aware that most cops don't like citizens to have firearms especially in public. Most cops, who I might add only fire their duty weapons for qualification and not because they are enthusiasts, believe that only they know how to handle a firearm, and not those of us that have probably had far more training than them. So it doesn't surprise me that a bunch of Oakland cops would feel the same way.

If the truth be told, they will talk about endangering the public by allowing private citizens to CCW. However, in truth, the cops are far more worried about themselves than they are about you or me. And that's why I find it so interesting that cops in the past have defended 150 PC. I wonder why that is?

What I'm wondering is, what do you mean by vigilante justice? Is it vigilante justice to want an equal opportunity to defend yourself, family and home from the barbarians? Is it vigilante justice to report a crime in progress and have the means to defend yourself in the event the barbarians discover who reported them? Or are we just supposed to do our duty and accept death when it comes? I'll use your words and ask you, if you were a LEO would you like the idea of being disarmed in public against the barbarians that have no regard for your life or the life of your loved ones? We already have the answers to how they feel about the neighborhoods they work in, because they are afraid to live there. You couldn't pay them enough to move their families into those neighborhoods, even though they are armed. Most of the people that can afford to leave have left, and the barbarians have taken over the neighborhoods and terrorize those that aren't so lucky. The cops point a finger at the public and say that it's our fault that criminals get away with committing crimes. Yet if someone does workup the courage or maybe they're just stupid, and choose to inform on the neighborhood barbarians, chances are the cops will be no where when the barbarians strike back. And when that happens, the response is hey we can't be held responsible for protecting each person. While I understand that, what about protecting the people that are trying to make a difference?

What's very interesting is that you addressed the additional carnage that might occur if citizens were allowed to shoot back. Do you really think that it would be worse than it is already? Innocent people are dying at the hands of the barbarians that become even more emboldened with each person they rape, rob, murder, and frighten. Gangs become emboldened, when the law abiding citizens are unable to resist. Do the cops spend that extra effort and set up shop in the neighborhood to discourage the criminals, NO! They may do a few extra patrols through the neighborhood, but generally it's business as usual. Do they actually bring in extra units to provide the coverage and concentrate on a neighborhood, NO! That would cost money. Years ago, I suggested that a temporary command post be set up in a neighborhood with this kind of problem to give the neighborhood the support they need. The response was simply, it's too expensive. I personally look at gang problems the same way a firefighter looks at a fire. You stay until the fire is out. Let the law abiding arm themselves to help put out the fire, and quit fighting against us.

paladin4415
03-29-2009, 8:43 PM
Much has been said in this thread about CCW and LEO's. I have seen LEO's referred to as "fascist" and "elitist". Some have said that the rank and file LEO's should rebel against upper management in support of CCW. Of those of you that feel that way, what in your opinion, should LEO's do? How should they do it?

Piper
03-29-2009, 8:53 PM
Much has been said in this thread about CCW and LEO's. I have seen LEO's referred to as "fascist" and "elitist". Some have said that the rank and file LEO's should rebel against upper management in support of CCW. Of those of you that feel that way, what in your opinion, should LEO's do? How should they do it?

The only way LEO's will stand up to management is if they stand up together, and only if it effects them.

Smokey510
03-29-2009, 9:00 PM
I'm not drinking FUD koolaid. I understand what you're saying and I agree with it. I'm not talking about the country as a whole here but the situation in Oakland specifically.

Reading what Smokey wrote:

I don't believe that is a direct quote, but it indicates an environment of fear. Note the context: a gang war. To them its another gun in a gang war environment.

You say:

It's a bad move, but it is how people respond. If it wasn't then Barack probably wouldn't be president. If it wasn't then we wouldn't be in this anti-gun nonsense in the first place.

I think the civilians in Oakland should be armed. I'm just trying to say, in probably too many words, that based on Smokey's quote, the cops in Oakland seem to be afraid of more guns because of how bad things are, and that is understandable. I'm not trying to justify anti-CCW attitude.

That was just about an exact quote and it included a chuckle, and I felt that chuckle meant he thought it was a dumb idea. Granted, he was a lietenant, not a street cop. I don't know if the street cops have a different attitude.

cousinkix1953
03-29-2009, 10:03 PM
Link or info please.
When did you arrive from another planet. The NRA will provide it's members with their list of our enemies on Capitol Hill. You can get a list of the politicians who sponsored the Fairness Doctrine from most of it's proponents. Be sure to sound sympathetic when you write them.

Sorry, that I don't have any links to a 20 year old KRON 4 news video.

The free speech war between McNamara and Pyle is no secret either. Pyle also has his own website. Still don't believe it? Talk to former state sens. McClinton and Mountjoy...

JoeC
03-29-2009, 11:04 PM
If the truth be told, they will talk about endangering the public by allowing private citizens to CCW. However, in truth, the cops are far more worried about themselves than they are about you or me.


That is basically all I was trying to say. And it's understandable considering the risks they face. Everything else I said was just trying to show how it's understandable.