new new jersey state police firearm
- Thread starter exgi
- Start date
John Farnam has quite a bit of discussion of the idiocy of the NJSP. Unfortuatly, you've got to hunt around for it. Part of it is here:
http://www.defense-training.com/quips/4Dec00.html
http://www.defense-training.com/quips/4Dec00.html
But the S&Ws are sooo much safer. Let's see it has a dingus on the slide and a magazine disconnector and "smart" technology and a ATM pad to punch in the password and, most importantly, the pistol will not function.
That must make it the safest pistol of all time!!! Let's have all the feds, especially ATF, carry these wonderpistols.
That must make it the safest pistol of all time!!! Let's have all the feds, especially ATF, carry these wonderpistols.
KSFreeman...
I think I understand what you are trying to say in your post...but I certainly do not appreciate the way that you said it.
First, you state the pistol will "not function"...
Then, you state your desire to see all FEDs carry them.
Are you saying you desire our Federal agents to carry weapons that do not work???
In this present day, statements like that are what give us "intellegent" folks who have a desire to see 2nd Amendment rights forwarded a bad rep. Let's all tone down the rhetoric down a bit.
We need to be as supportative as we can while the FEDs go after this evil element that has reared its ugly head on our soverign soil.
I think I understand what you are trying to say in your post...but I certainly do not appreciate the way that you said it.
First, you state the pistol will "not function"...
Then, you state your desire to see all FEDs carry them.
Are you saying you desire our Federal agents to carry weapons that do not work???
In this present day, statements like that are what give us "intellegent" folks who have a desire to see 2nd Amendment rights forwarded a bad rep. Let's all tone down the rhetoric down a bit.
We need to be as supportative as we can while the FEDs go after this evil element that has reared its ugly head on our soverign soil.
PeterGunn
Well said.
There are a whole heck of a lot more good men and women in Law Enforcement than there are bad. And it seems that in poll after poll they tend to support the rights of honest citizens to keep and bear arms. It's the few political leaders and some others who do not trust the citizens who seem to get the press and give many the idea that law enforcement wants all of us disarmed.
Your point about supporting the FEDS is right on target. To take it one step further, we must support law enforcement agencies when they do the job of fighting actual crime and work to remove any laws which only harm the honest citizen.
Well said.
There are a whole heck of a lot more good men and women in Law Enforcement than there are bad. And it seems that in poll after poll they tend to support the rights of honest citizens to keep and bear arms. It's the few political leaders and some others who do not trust the citizens who seem to get the press and give many the idea that law enforcement wants all of us disarmed.
Your point about supporting the FEDS is right on target. To take it one step further, we must support law enforcement agencies when they do the job of fighting actual crime and work to remove any laws which only harm the honest citizen.
Since the federal government is attempting to foist this safety rubbish on us, it only seems fair that they use it first. (Oh, wait, they are exempted).
I refuse to blindly support my government in the past, present or future. Federal law enforcement blew the brains out a mother holding a child in her arms over a $5 tax and said it was "reasonable."
They have continually attacked peaceful citizens whose only crime was to exercise their right to arms.
To use John Dingell's (D-MI) analogy, if I was in Germany during the 1940s, I would not support the SS since the SS is doing their duty to the fatherland in fighting the Bolshevik hordes. I will not blindly sign over my freedom to my government over any pretense--not crime, not for the children, not to get on the winning side for the big score.
The recent terrorists attacks were caused by the inane Federal soccermommie rule of no guns on planes and now the Federal government wants more power and less freedom for me because of terrorist acts that one armed good guy could have prevented.
Yes, as a former LEO myself, I can say there are good people in law enforcement, even federal law enforcement . That does not mean my right to criticize their actions, policies (such as "safe guns") and mistakes is waived or waivable. Further, my criticism of my government does not make me any less of a citizen and patriot.
I refuse to blindly support my government in the past, present or future. Federal law enforcement blew the brains out a mother holding a child in her arms over a $5 tax and said it was "reasonable."
They have continually attacked peaceful citizens whose only crime was to exercise their right to arms.
To use John Dingell's (D-MI) analogy, if I was in Germany during the 1940s, I would not support the SS since the SS is doing their duty to the fatherland in fighting the Bolshevik hordes. I will not blindly sign over my freedom to my government over any pretense--not crime, not for the children, not to get on the winning side for the big score.
The recent terrorists attacks were caused by the inane Federal soccermommie rule of no guns on planes and now the Federal government wants more power and less freedom for me because of terrorist acts that one armed good guy could have prevented.
Yes, as a former LEO myself, I can say there are good people in law enforcement, even federal law enforcement . That does not mean my right to criticize their actions, policies (such as "safe guns") and mistakes is waived or waivable. Further, my criticism of my government does not make me any less of a citizen and patriot.
for KS
it is apparent from your post that you expend a great deal of emotional
energy in the defense of your freedoms. while it is your inalienable right to do so, the rabid manner in which you choose to express your defense tends to reinforce the stereotype that all pro second amendment folks are a couple fries short of a happy meal.
to compare u.s. law enforcement with the ss of hitler's germany is OUTRAGEOUS. comments like this only reinforce the anti's campaign to first discredit us, then demolish our right to keep and bear arms.
further, no one requires your blind submission or obedience to anything.
however, a prudent person would not blind himself to the realities of our current situation. your government / law enforcement is not the enemy. the mass murder of 9/11
should make it painfully clear who is.
it is apparent from your post that you expend a great deal of emotional
energy in the defense of your freedoms. while it is your inalienable right to do so, the rabid manner in which you choose to express your defense tends to reinforce the stereotype that all pro second amendment folks are a couple fries short of a happy meal.
to compare u.s. law enforcement with the ss of hitler's germany is OUTRAGEOUS. comments like this only reinforce the anti's campaign to first discredit us, then demolish our right to keep and bear arms.
further, no one requires your blind submission or obedience to anything.
however, a prudent person would not blind himself to the realities of our current situation. your government / law enforcement is not the enemy. the mass murder of 9/11
should make it painfully clear who is.
It does seem strange that our noble LE types tell us that we need more safety devices on handguns, and that the devices will not interfere with the use of the gun under emergency conditions. Yet, all LE agencies totally reject those very same devices.
If the locks and safety devices do not prevent use of the gun, why does LE reject them? If they do prevent use, why does LE have no problem with dead civilians?
Oddly, the first cry for "smart" guns came from LE, as a way of preventing a bad guy who grabbed a LEO's gun from using it on the LEO. Now, LE rejects the idea for themselves (even though the problem still exists) but wants to ram it down the throats of the rest of us.
Jim
If the locks and safety devices do not prevent use of the gun, why does LE reject them? If they do prevent use, why does LE have no problem with dead civilians?
Oddly, the first cry for "smart" guns came from LE, as a way of preventing a bad guy who grabbed a LEO's gun from using it on the LEO. Now, LE rejects the idea for themselves (even though the problem still exists) but wants to ram it down the throats of the rest of us.
Jim
gburner: there's an old joke about -
"...be wary of strong liquor, boys. It can make you shoot at revenooers, and MISS!!!"
I take it you'd object to that being politically incorrect also?
To my way of thinking, ( and in politically correct terms, too ) Mark Twain's remark that: "First God created idiots. That was for practice. Then he created school boards" suggests you may have served as a school board president.
KSFreeman, I would point out that you and I both appear to have disregarded another of Twain's dictums that "It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things:
freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them."
"...be wary of strong liquor, boys. It can make you shoot at revenooers, and MISS!!!"
I take it you'd object to that being politically incorrect also?
To my way of thinking, ( and in politically correct terms, too ) Mark Twain's remark that: "First God created idiots. That was for practice. Then he created school boards" suggests you may have served as a school board president.
KSFreeman, I would point out that you and I both appear to have disregarded another of Twain's dictums that "It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things:
freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them."
rusty,
i have no use for school boards nor idiots (save for those who choose to respond to my occasional postings).
as for the PC label you toss around so freely, i find it curious that anything in my previous post could be construed to indicate that i would deny ANYONE their right to free speech (even yourself). i meerly wanted to make the point that
speech without thought of future consequence is both foolish and destructive.
i appear to have violated one of twain's dictums as well.......
never argue with a pig, it gratifies the pig and makes you look foolish.
.................
double canister, boys!
i have no use for school boards nor idiots (save for those who choose to respond to my occasional postings).
as for the PC label you toss around so freely, i find it curious that anything in my previous post could be construed to indicate that i would deny ANYONE their right to free speech (even yourself). i meerly wanted to make the point that
speech without thought of future consequence is both foolish and destructive.
i appear to have violated one of twain's dictums as well.......
never argue with a pig, it gratifies the pig and makes you look foolish.
.................
double canister, boys!
Simplistic responses don't help. It's not hard at all to have multiple enemies. In fact, that is what we face. SOME in law enforcement are in that category. Certainly not ALL, and certainly not MOST. But the FBI and ATF who torched 80 people and covered it up certainly ARE our enemies, and that is not changed by 9-11.
the atrocities of ruby ridge and waco point to a justice department that behaved in the manner of the administration it served. morally bankrupt, traitorous, and concerned only with their own political survival. it is my fervent hope that this has changed with the change of administrations and that there will be the political will to bring those responsible to justice.
Remember, Ruby Ridge transpired during the administration of George Herbert Walker Bush, not Klinton. The thuggish misbehavior of ATF has transpired over many administrations. They have more than demonstrated that tax clerks should not be armed.
I was not the first to compare the behavior of federal law enforcement to its historical counterparts. That analogy belongs to John Dingell a Democratic Congressman from Michigan.
That being said, the solution is exactly as Mr. Price states. Abolish the NFA and the GCA of `68, for starters, and the cause of federal misbehavior disappears.
I was not the first to compare the behavior of federal law enforcement to its historical counterparts. That analogy belongs to John Dingell a Democratic Congressman from Michigan.
That being said, the solution is exactly as Mr. Price states. Abolish the NFA and the GCA of `68, for starters, and the cause of federal misbehavior disappears.
don't shoot it's me
New member
"Oddly, the first cry for "smart" guns came from LE, as a way of preventing a bad guy who grabbed a LEO's gun from using it on the LEO. Now, LE rejects the idea for themselves (even though the problem still exists) but wants to ram it down the throats of the rest of us. "
LEOs are not ramming anything down our throat. Legislation from liberal senators is putting gun locks and the sort on your weapons. LEOs are simply looking for devices that will not allow their gun to be fired if taken away....has nothing to do with the current safety fever being spewed from washington.... and the resason they reject the idea now for smart guns is that the technology isn't foolproof...when it is is, I'll gladly use it on my duty gun if I know it will go click if someone else grabs it....
LEOs are not ramming anything down our throat. Legislation from liberal senators is putting gun locks and the sort on your weapons. LEOs are simply looking for devices that will not allow their gun to be fired if taken away....has nothing to do with the current safety fever being spewed from washington.... and the resason they reject the idea now for smart guns is that the technology isn't foolproof...when it is is, I'll gladly use it on my duty gun if I know it will go click if someone else grabs it....
Just because some of the administrators of law enforcement agencies are idiots, don't lump in the rank and file with them. Most of the "street cops" are just like most of us. Bear in mind that the heads of most agencies are politically oriented and will do anything to get their picture in the paper or on tv.
Let's not forget the Miami raid.
Not deadly, but still pretty scary.
And how about Gordon Kahl?
The boys and girls of the press have a way of reporting some of these violations -- when they're reported at all -- in a light that's favorable to the guv'ment. Long as the guv'ment at the time happens to be the National Socialist Democrat Party. A jack-booted thug by any other name....
The GOP has it's morons, too, though, I might add. And the Dems have some good guys.
We've gotten way off the track here, though, haven't we. (Not that I mind.) Familiar as I am with the bureaucracy in the People's Republic of N.J., I'm not surprised at the state police snafu. I thought initially the S&W was a payoff for "The Deal." Then they found out the guns just didn't work so good.
Remington's come out or is coming out with some kind of electronic safety (batteries not included?). Gimme a break! And then there's those "smart" guns that can be turned off by a garage door opener. CMP even included a trigger lock with my M1.
Say I bought one of those new guns that comes with a key. First thing I'd do is unlock the gun and throw away the key. Long as the gun makers give me that option, I almost don't care what they put in the package. Almost.
Not deadly, but still pretty scary.
And how about Gordon Kahl?
The boys and girls of the press have a way of reporting some of these violations -- when they're reported at all -- in a light that's favorable to the guv'ment. Long as the guv'ment at the time happens to be the National Socialist Democrat Party. A jack-booted thug by any other name....
The GOP has it's morons, too, though, I might add. And the Dems have some good guys.
We've gotten way off the track here, though, haven't we. (Not that I mind.) Familiar as I am with the bureaucracy in the People's Republic of N.J., I'm not surprised at the state police snafu. I thought initially the S&W was a payoff for "The Deal." Then they found out the guns just didn't work so good.
Remington's come out or is coming out with some kind of electronic safety (batteries not included?). Gimme a break! And then there's those "smart" guns that can be turned off by a garage door opener. CMP even included a trigger lock with my M1.
Say I bought one of those new guns that comes with a key. First thing I'd do is unlock the gun and throw away the key. Long as the gun makers give me that option, I almost don't care what they put in the package. Almost.
Last edited: