steelheart
Moderator
From www.keepandbeararms.com comes one policeman's view of the "Assault Weapon" issue.
continued...Honor, Racism, Service Rifles & "Assault Weapons":
One Black Cop's View
By
Police Officer "Snake" Bowman
The Author "Henry 'Snake' Bowman" is obviously a "nom de-guerre" for a real person, an active full-time, Black Police Officer whose agency prevents him from speaking his mind at risk of his employment.
"Well, you Sons of Bitches, now you know how I feel!"
-General George S. Patton-
You may not like what I'm going to say here, but the First Amendment is still in effect (at the time of the time of this writing) so I'm going to exercise my right to rant: Prepare to get your feathers ruffled!...
If you are an uniformed Police Officer of any rank and do not fully, and honorably support the pre-existing God given rights enumerated in the 2nd Amendment, you are a disgrace to your Badge and your oath of office to protect and serve. The citizens of the United States of America deserve better than you. You should not be allowed the honor of public service as a sworn peace officer of the law. Taking a contrary, selective position to the Constitution means you are not following the supreme law of the land and are, in fact, endangering the safety of yourself, your fellow officers, and the public you are sworn to protect. This dishonor is increased if you support any (so-called) "Police Fraternal Organization" that aligns itself with groups seeking to infringe, limit, or destroy the 2nd Amendment (Such as "Handgun Control Incorporated", etc). This dishonor is increased if you support any State or Federal Attorney General, Legislator (Politician); or local Government body that have de facto reneged on their sworn oath to "Protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic." For these individuals (by endorsing "gun control") have become the "domestic enemies" embodied in that oath.
If this description fits you, know that I consider you to have no honor and should rightly be held beneath contempt for your nauseous subservience to an unconstitutional doctrine, plus unheroic behavior in the face of danger to your fellow officers and the public.
Are you ticked off yet? Well, refer to the above quote by U.S. Army General George S Patton. Read it? Good, that means I can only add, (if you were offended): "tough noogies"!. Let's proceed...
There is plenty of documentation to support the fact that "gun control" laws in the United States are and have been rooted in the dishonorable practice generally known as "Racism". If there is any doubt about this, I suggest you do some research on your own (Author Clayton E. Cramer has written a short essay that can bring you up to speed quickly, search it out).
This brings me to a further assertion. I submit that if you wear the badge and happen to be of Black ancestry ("African-American" is the current "politically correct" term: I choose not to use it), and fit the criteria I have previously described, you should be held in special dishonor. Your ancestors fought and died under a special adversity for the rights you presently enjoy. I know that we still have a long way to go, (and you are unhappy with that last promotion you were "suspiciously" beaten out of). But today you are still freer than any previous generation, and should honor what they fought for by at least acknowledging that fact. A Black officer or group of officers that support "gun control" over the 2nd Amendment, in effect, support a continuation of practices rooted in racism, practices that currently discriminate against a targeted group of Americans not limited only to Blacks. If you support that you have no honor and are a disgrace to your badge, your brothers in blue, your brothers in ancestry, and the public you are sworn to protect and serve. (This goes for the rest of you who seek not to be identified as "Black", but are not, so-called, "white"; so for you "others", accept that you have advanced in large part on the corpses of millions of Black Americans who were here before you: It's a fact: Deal with it.)
Are you ticked off yet? Are you calling me bad names? Does the truth hurt? Good, maybe you'll grow a spine and renounce this "thing" called "gun control" and fight for all your rights!...Refer to the Patton quote again here.
(By the way, Patton lauded his Black tanker / tank destroyer units who fought under his command. Patton said words to the effect of him not giving a damn what color a man was as long as he had the balls to fight the enemy...How are yours hangin', Lawman?)
Fact: "Gun Control" is a betrayal of the people you are sworn to protect. "Gun Control" deprives only the law-abiding citizen the best means of self-defense against the violent criminal element. Remember those people? Those you are sworn to protect? And what about those "other" people? You know them well, you have to deal with them on the street nearly every day. You know what mindless savagery they are capable of, you have seen the result first hand. You know they have no conscience. You know that most are sociopathic, and rationalize that the rules don't apply to them, just the "chumps" stupid enough to work for a living and obey "the law" 99% of the time. You know they are cowards who enjoy harming the weak and defenseless; who in fact take a vicious glee in the suffering of their victims. You know there is a reason we need prisons. You know this from "up close and personal" experience the protected rarely grasp: They are taken aback by the naked face of evil, flee from it. They pray that you might arrive in time to save them from it (Except, of course, from the self-reliant gun-owning citizens "allowed" to defend themselves in pro-self defense jurisdictions). But you , Lawman, ideally should be a warrior/philosopher. You run toward the sound of battle, rather than from it. You are charged with righting wrong, sworn to do so even at risk of your life. You know the badge is more than mere metal...
That being the case, to advocate citizens offer themselves up as sheep-like prey, to advocate the best citizens, the level-headed, able to help their fellows in your absence, those who are your support, those whose firearms will NEVER be turned against YOU, is unconscionable, unreasonable, and unrealistic!
That citizen could well save your life some day. It has happened in the past countless times, what makes you think it cannot happen again? Well, it will not happen if that citizen is (un-constitutionally) disarmed. That citizen, (in actuality, that member of the Unorganized Militia of the United States of America, constitutionally protected to keep and bear arms), is there to help. If you have had to deputize a citizen while alone and struggling with a resisting suspect, you know what I mean! (Why do you think you have the power to deputize in the first place? Think about it, Lawman).
Understand this concept: Criminals misuse firearms in violent crime, law-abiding citizens DON'T. The mere fact that one is willing to misuse a firearm against his fellows automatically brands them an evildoer, unfit to share the company of non-violent citizens: Their intent and action (Human responsible agency) defines them as violent criminals, mere possession of firearms does not. Never confuse the two...Remember there is a faction whose intent is specifically designed to deceive you into equating mere possession of firearms with evil intent: Never fall for this sophistical gambit, don't be a gullible fool, manipulated by emotionalist propaganda. Use your mind and logic to see through the hype.