mark larue is a great guy

[bm11]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Paul, I can tell it really gets up your ass for "being descriminated against for being LE." But you are missing the point, and that is that you are being hampered by your own state laws. Mark Larue is not saying that you will get in the back of the line, or that you will pay more than a civilian. He is saying that you will get the same as a civilian. You arguing against by stating that you need more because the gun laws are too restrictive, well, that is the point. I believe if every manufacturer made the police play BY THE SAME RULES, people in power and people with the vote may start to feel differently about the laws. I don't think you should be limited in your weapon or magazine selection. But I don't think I should either.

You state multiple times that you are lro second amendment and anti gun law. But then you get upset when a manufacturer restricts your abilities. Which is the point. Mark is not saying the power of the police needs to be limited. He is saying that the power of civilians needs to not be limited.

 

[2ndamendfan]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Do you ask every LEO you come across what their opinion is on gun rights? If not then how can you perceive something that isn't there? How do you know there aren't LEO at gun rallies? Is it based upon not seeing a uniform that maybe they're not allowed to wear outside of being on duty? And yes LEO are suspicious people when you encounter them in their professional capacity as it's their job to do so. </div></div>

No I don't ask LEO, But I also don't ask everyone I see in the mall either.

I perceive it the same way that the last time I was pulled over I didn't have my DL with me and the officer perceived the vehicle to be stolen. She was very professional and she was doing her job, but she did jump to some conclusions pretty fast. As I stated way earlier LEO are humans. I don't know that LEO aren't at the gun rallies. It would be nice to see a sign or something. Again I will say when the local Sheriff sent a letter to the President I was put at ease.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: spiralseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
like the Cell phone law in NJ, you cannot be on your cell driving, great law...but LE and essential state govt. employes are exempt from it...</div></div>

I'd say 99% of people on that kick don't think about it fully. Many officers have to make work related calls as follow-ups or to do investigating. Would you rather they spent that time in an office and off the street where at least their presence is a deterrent and should they need to respond they'd at least be in the area? The exemption isn't there because they're some sort of special but because in the process of doing their job and effectively using your tax dollars it's better for them to be exempt. They could always increase taxes and therefor funding so as to hire more LEO if you feel that's a better idea... just sayin. </div></div>

That's absurd BS. People in sales depend on the phone even more so for their jobs. Do they get an exemption? The fact is they passed a law because they believe it's unsafe to drive and talk on the phone. If it's unsafe for the public, it's equally, or even more unsafe for the government officials. </div></div>

You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line?

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 2ndamendfan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Do you ask every LEO you come across what their opinion is on gun rights? If not then how can you perceive something that isn't there? How do you know there aren't LEO at gun rallies? Is it based upon not seeing a uniform that maybe they're not allowed to wear outside of being on duty? And yes LEO are suspicious people when you encounter them in their professional capacity as it's their job to do so. </div></div>

No I don't ask LEO, But I also don't ask everyone I see in the mall either.

I perceive it the same way that the last time I was pulled over I didn't have my DL with me and the officer perceived the vehicle to be stolen. She was very professional and she was doing her job, but she did jump to some conclusions pretty fast. As I stated way earlier LEO are humans. I don't know that LEO aren't at the gun rallies. It would be nice to see a sign or something. Again I will say when the local Sheriff sent a letter to the President I was put at ease. </div></div>

We're not discussing random people like people in the "mall" and you didn't comment as to the opinions of those people, so that point is completely irrelevant. If you had then I would have posed the same question and opinion back. As for the conclusions I think you meant assumption, but either wat you might not be aware but depending on the situation there are certain questions posed intended to get a prescribed response and to gauge the situation. Also... you got pulled over and you didn't have your license on you so what did you expect? Flowers and a Thank You?

Add: There's likely more to that story than your missing license in order for an officer to question if the vehicle is stolen. ie missing plates, missing registration, no temp tag, etc...

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Mark is not saying the power of the police needs to be limited. He is saying that the power of civilians needs to not be limited. </div></div>

Or it's a gimmick to sell more guns and he's only interested in protecting his main source of revenue which is civilian sales... just sayin... lol

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: spiralseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
like the Cell phone law in NJ, you cannot be on your cell driving, great law...but LE and essential state govt. employes are exempt from it...</div></div>

I'd say 99% of people on that kick don't think about it fully. Many officers have to make work related calls as follow-ups or to do investigating. Would you rather they spent that time in an office and off the street where at least their presence is a deterrent and should they need to respond they'd at least be in the area? The exemption isn't there because they're some sort of special but because in the process of doing their job and effectively using your tax dollars it's better for them to be exempt. They could always increase taxes and therefor funding so as to hire more LEO if you feel that's a better idea... just sayin. </div></div>

That's absurd BS. People in sales depend on the phone even more so for their jobs. Do they get an exemption? The fact is they passed a law because they believe it's unsafe to drive and talk on the phone. If it's unsafe for the public, it's equally, or even more unsafe for the government officials. </div></div>

You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

That has absolutely nothing to do with what you said. Doing "Follow ups" and "investigation" What they do in their cars is irrelevant. If doing a sales call is too dangerous while driving, then so is a follow up or investigation. They should be required to pull over just like the rest of the people driving.

Under an "emergency" or in pursuit, they're allowed to break the traffic laws anyway, and they do need to communicate. But to exempt them so they can do "Investigations" or "Follow ups" is an absurd argument. If it's unsafe, it's unsafe.

 

[bm11]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Broker,

I know and like a number of LE's, and every one of them uses their "legal necessity" to be able to talk while driving to talk to family, friends, and on business. None of them ever pull over to do so. This whole thing about being more essential to talk because of being in life or death scenarios goes right out the window when 99% of the time the calls are personal or non urgent.

What it really is is special rules that allow something for police that normal people can't have under the pretence of necessity. Which is the whole point of this thread.

 

[snipe10]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

A class act, I'll pay more to shop with LT for his stance here

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's absurd BS. People in sales depend on the phone even more so for their jobs. Do they get an exemption? The fact is they passed a law because they believe it's unsafe to drive and talk on the phone. If it's unsafe for the public, it's equally, or even more unsafe for the government officials. </div></div>

You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

That has absolutely nothing to do with what you said. Doing "Follow ups" and "investigation" What they do in their cars is irrelevant. If doing a sales call is too dangerous while driving, then so is a follow up or investigation. They should be required to pull over just like the rest of the people driving.

Under an "emergency" or in pursuit, they're allowed to break the traffic laws anyway, and they do need to communicate. But to exempt them so they can do "Investigations" or "Follow ups" is an absurd argument. If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. </div></div>

It has everything to do with it. Go back and try reading the part where I said they can't be in their office because they need to be on the street patrolling. You're trying to pull one part of the whole equation out to suit your argument but you still can't answer my question directed at you. Try again...

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Broker,

I know and like a number of LE's, and every one of them uses their "legal necessity" to be able to talk while driving to talk to family, friends, and on business. None of them ever pull over to do so. This whole thing about being more essential to talk because of being in life or death scenarios goes right out the window when 99% of the time the calls are personal or non urgent.

What it really is is special rules that allow something for police that normal people can't have under the pretence of necessity. Which is the whole point of this thread. </div></div>

I don't know the percentage of personal phone calls and therefor I'm not going to get dragged into that discussion since neither do you really. I don't think that was the intent but just what people want to see. But from an opinion stand point I agree that personal phone calls should not be exempt.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's absurd BS. People in sales depend on the phone even more so for their jobs. Do they get an exemption? The fact is they passed a law because they believe it's unsafe to drive and talk on the phone. If it's unsafe for the public, it's equally, or even more unsafe for the government officials. </div></div>

You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

That has absolutely nothing to do with what you said. Doing "Follow ups" and "investigation" What they do in their cars is irrelevant. If doing a sales call is too dangerous while driving, then so is a follow up or investigation. They should be required to pull over just like the rest of the people driving.

Under an "emergency" or in pursuit, they're allowed to break the traffic laws anyway, and they do need to communicate. But to exempt them so they can do "Investigations" or "Follow ups" is an absurd argument. If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. </div></div>

It has everything to do with it. Go back and try reading the part where I said they can't be in their office because they need to be on the street patrolling. You're trying to pull one part of the whole equation out to suit your argument but you still can't answer my question directed at you. Try again... </div></div>

If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit.

Since cops need to be able to cover more area, I suppose you'd be fine with them not having a speed limit in their cars to make sure they cover more ground? After all, 120mph gets you over twice as much area as 60mph.. That kind of reasoning is stupid. If it's unsafe for the people to work from their car on the phone, it's unsafe for cops to work from their car on the phone.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit.

Since cops need to be able to cover more area, I suppose you'd be fine with them not having a speed limit in their cars to make sure they cover more ground? After all, 120mph gets you over twice as much area as 60mph.. That kind of reasoning is stupid. If it's unsafe for the people to work from their car on the phone, it's unsafe for cops to work from their car on the phone. </div></div>

If their doing 120mph then how are they paying attention to their surrounding or even maintaining a presence? You're trying to go to extremes and not really debating but getting into antics. Still no answer to my question huh?

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Question??

 

[Oleshep]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

"If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit."

Well said. Just another example of laws that are only supposed to apply to the "common folk" and not the elites..

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit.

Since cops need to be able to cover more area, I suppose you'd be fine with them not having a speed limit in their cars to make sure they cover more ground? After all, 120mph gets you over twice as much area as 60mph.. That kind of reasoning is stupid. If it's unsafe for the people to work from their car on the phone, it's unsafe for cops to work from their car on the phone. </div></div>

If their doing 120mph then how are they paying attention to their surrounding or even maintaining a presence? You're trying to go to extremes and not really debating but getting into antics. Still no answer to my question huh? </div></div>

I'm gonna throw some of your own logic(hard to say with a straight face) out there. So, by your way of thinking then LE shouldn't be the only ones allowed to have red & blue light bars because it's just a job and why shouldn't others be allowed to use them in an emergency?

 

[paulo_santos]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Paul, I can tell it really gets up your ass for "being descriminated against for being LE." But you are missing the point, and that is that you are being hampered by your own state laws. Mark Larue is not saying that you will get in the back of the line, or that you will pay more than a civilian. He is saying that you will get the same as a civilian. You arguing against by stating that you need more because the gun laws are too restrictive, well, that is the point. I believe if every manufacturer made the police play BY THE SAME RULES, people in power and people with the vote may start to feel differently about the laws. I don't think you should be limited in your weapon or magazine selection. But I don't think I should either.

You state multiple times that you are lro second amendment and anti gun law. But then you get upset when a manufacturer restricts your abilities. Which is the point. Mark is not saying the power of the police needs to be limited. He is saying that the power of civilians needs to not be limited. </div></div>

When NJ passes a law indicating that the Police can only have what the gun owners have, I'll shut up. Until then, I don't agree with Larue.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Question?? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

Wasn't hard to find if you actually read what was written...

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oleshep</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit."

Well said. Just another example of laws that are only supposed to apply to the "common folk" and not the elites..

</div></div>

Because being a cop is an "elite" position... lol... more like thankless.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Question?? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

Wasn't hard to find if you actually read what was written... </div></div>

Doctors.
Nurses.
Paramedics
Veterinarian (If you count animals lives)
National guard during emergencies such as tornadoes, hurricanes etc.
Snow plows during some situations
I'm sure there's a few others. Has nothing to do with the conversation though.

 

[paulo_santos]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

And thank you guys for getting me angry. You guys just helped me squat 335# (20# PR) @ a body weight of 160#. LOL.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it's unsafe, it's unsafe. Anything else is just bullshit.

Since cops need to be able to cover more area, I suppose you'd be fine with them not having a speed limit in their cars to make sure they cover more ground? After all, 120mph gets you over twice as much area as 60mph.. That kind of reasoning is stupid. If it's unsafe for the people to work from their car on the phone, it's unsafe for cops to work from their car on the phone. </div></div>

If their doing 120mph then how are they paying attention to their surrounding or even maintaining a presence? You're trying to go to extremes and not really debating but getting into antics. Still no answer to my question huh? </div></div>

I'm gonna throw some of your own logic(hard to say with a straight face) out there. So, by your way of thinking then LE shouldn't be the only ones allowed to have red & blue light bars because it's just a job and why shouldn't others be allowed to use them in an emergency? </div></div>


THe wohle point of the cell phone laws is because people can't pay attention to their surroundings and cause wrecks. If LE can't pay attention to their surroundings at higher speeds, they certainly can't do it while on the phone with their girlfriend.

Red and blue are universally known for pulling people over, not emergencies.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Question?? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

Wasn't hard to find if you actually read what was written... </div></div>

Doctors.
Nurses.
Paramedics
Veterinarian (If you count animals lives)
National guard during emergencies such as tornadoes, hurricanes etc.
Snow plows during some situations
I'm sure there's a few others. Has nothing to do with the conversation though.
</div></div>

I said Sales. The ANY was in reference to a ANY sales position, but I can see how you might have inferred otherwise. None of those are remotely close to Sales positions which you brought up and has everything to do with the conversation that you started with me.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">THe wohle point of the cell phone laws is because people can't pay attention to their surroundings and cause wrecks. If LE can't pay attention to their surroundings at higher speeds, they certainly can't do it while on the phone with their girlfriend.

Red and blue are universally known for pulling people over, not emergencies. </div></div>

So when they're on an emergency call and they're lights are going to get people to pull off to the side so they can get somewhere fast that would be? And the earlier comments and main focus of debate being that LE shouldn't have something that civilians can't have isn't the same as the hypothetical I gave you how? Lol...

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Question?? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're seriously comparing a sales position to an emergency responders position? Really? Lol... Please tell me one sales position, ANY position, that requires running out on an emergency notice to a life or death situation where someone else's safety is on the line? </div></div>

Wasn't hard to find if you actually read what was written... </div></div>

Doctors.
Nurses.
Paramedics
Veterinarian (If you count animals lives)
National guard during emergencies such as tornadoes, hurricanes etc.
Snow plows during some situations
I'm sure there's a few others. Has nothing to do with the conversation though.
</div></div>

I said Sales. The ANY was in reference to a ANY sales position, but I can see how you might have inferred otherwise. None of those are remotely close to Sales positions which you brought up and has everything to do with the conversation that you started with me. </div></div>

Read it wrong. Sales was the first job that came to mind when thinking of a job. Lets use Dr's then. It's illegal for him to talk to the hospital about a patient on his way there if what I've read about the laws there. Why is that less important than the LE following a lead?

Again, if it's unsafe, it's unsafe...

 

[Masked]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

I, once again, don't quite see what the issue is.

Civilians have been doing it for years.

Order the upper, separate from the lower.

Add your parts, take away what's illegal and smack them together...BAM, legal gun with what you want on it.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Read it wrong. Sales was the first job that came to mind when thinking of a job. Lets use Dr's then. It's illegal for him to talk to the hospital about a patient on his way there if what I've read about the laws there. Why is that less important than the LE following a lead?

Again, if it's unsafe, it's unsafe... </div></div>

If you had said doctor to begin with then this conversation would have gone different. A Doctor IMO is a First Responder and I think should be exempt. Why? Because they may be on their way to a hospital and need to be on the phone to give life saving information en-route. I don't disgree with a Doctor being exempt. But... You did say Sales and I do still think that the comparison of a Sales persons job duties in relation to an LEO job duties are not even remotely similar.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">THe wohle point of the cell phone laws is because people can't pay attention to their surroundings and cause wrecks. If LE can't pay attention to their surroundings at higher speeds, they certainly can't do it while on the phone with their girlfriend.

Red and blue are universally known for pulling people over, not emergencies. </div></div>

So when they're on an emergency call and they're lights are going to get people to pull off to the side so they can get somewhere fast that would be? And the earlier comments and main focus of debate being that LE shouldn't have something that civilians can't have isn't the same as the hypothetical I gave you how? Lol... </div></div>

"The right two display red and blue shall not be infringed" is where in the constitution? I never said people should have all the same "Rights" as a LE, such as the right to detain etc. Just weapons, which happen to be a "Right" we do have.

 

[hlee]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Broker, you posted the horse, but I think this is more appropriate...

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again, if it's unsafe, it's unsafe... </div></div>

I have to point out that logic is flawed. EVERY first responders job, especially LEO, is with great risk in the course of helping others. They are required to do things in the course of their job that is unsafe. If you're going to apply that line of rationale to one part then why not apply it to all and in many cases the Officer shouldn't have to risk their necks because after all... It's unsafe.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Read it wrong. Sales was the first job that came to mind when thinking of a job. Lets use Dr's then. It's illegal for him to talk to the hospital about a patient on his way there if what I've read about the laws there. Why is that less important than the LE following a lead?

Again, if it's unsafe, it's unsafe... </div></div>

If you had said doctor to begin with then this conversation would have gone different. A Doctor IMO is a First Responder and I think should be exempt. Why? Because they may be on their way to a hospital and need to be on the phone to give life saving information en-route. I don't disgree with a Doctor being exempt. But... You did say Sales and I do still think that the comparison of a Sales persons job duties in relation to an LEO job duties are not even remotely similar. </div></div>

Fair enough, but unless there's an emergency, I still don't think LE should be allowed to either. Just like the Dr shouldn't be allowed to if he's calling home to tell the pool guy to make sure and change the filter. I'm opposed to cell phone laws anyway.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The right two display red and blue shall not be infringed" is where in the constitution? I never said people should have all the same "Rights" as a LE, such as the right to detain etc. Just weapons, which happen to be a "Right" we do have. </div></div>

Now you're going with misdirection? We were discussing how LEO should not be entitled to do or have anything a civilian can't, and you're gonna try to make me look like I'm attacking the Constitution? Really? Lol... yeah ok...

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fair enough, but unless there's an emergency, I still don't think LE should be allowed to either. Just like the Dr shouldn't be allowed to if he's calling home to tell the pool guy to make sure and change the filter. I'm opposed to cell phone laws anyway. </div></div>


There's a clear difference in that a Doctor when driving is typically commuting to an office and an Officer while driving is typically at the office. His job requires patrolling and creating a presence in the community yet also requires following up and working on case work at the same time. If you'd like to pay the taxes I'm sure every LEO out there would happily give up their rights to cell phone exemption in exchange for an assistant.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hlee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Broker, you posted the horse, but I think this is more appropriate...

</div></div>

At this point it should be parked in the middle of the Indian Ocean lol...

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The right two display red and blue shall not be infringed" is where in the constitution? I never said people should have all the same "Rights" as a LE, such as the right to detain etc. Just weapons, which happen to be a "Right" we do have. </div></div>

Now you're going with misdirection? We were discussing how LEO should not be entitled to do or have anything a civilian can't, and you're gonna try to make me look like I'm attacking the Constitution? Really? Lol... yeah ok... </div></div>

No, we've been talking about LEO having guns a civilian can't, and the subject of them being exempt from other laws came up somehow. I still have no idea where you were going with the red and blue lights thing..

I never said you were attacking the constitution, I just said the right to have red and blue lights weren't a constitutional guarantee like the rights to own a firearm. I apologize if you thought I was inferring that you were attacking the constitution.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The right two display red and blue shall not be infringed" is where in the constitution? I never said people should have all the same "Rights" as a LE, such as the right to detain etc. Just weapons, which happen to be a "Right" we do have. </div></div>

Now you're going with misdirection? We were discussing how LEO should not be entitled to do or have anything a civilian can't, and you're gonna try to make me look like I'm attacking the Constitution? Really? Lol... yeah ok... </div></div>

No, we've been talking about LEO having guns a civilian can't, and the subject of them being exempt from other laws came up somehow. I still have no idea where you were going with the red and blue lights thing..

I never said you were attacking the constitution, I just said the right to have red and blue lights weren't a constitutional guarantee like the rights to own a firearm. I apologize if you thought I was inferring that you were attacking the constitution. </div></div>

A firearm in LE is a tool, just like lights. We're discussing a tool that certain political asshats are trying to take away from us but exempt LE. Granted the main tool in question is also a constitutional right, but I'm not getting into that topic because it's been beat to death, brought back to life, beat to death, then propped up and beaten some more... much like this thread...

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fair enough, but unless there's an emergency, I still don't think LE should be allowed to either. Just like the Dr shouldn't be allowed to if he's calling home to tell the pool guy to make sure and change the filter. I'm opposed to cell phone laws anyway. </div></div>


There's a clear difference in that a Doctor when driving is typically commuting to an office and an Officer while driving is typically at the office. His job requires patrolling and creating a presence in the community yet also requires following up and working on case work at the same time. If you'd like to pay the taxes I'm sure every LEO out there would happily give up their rights to cell phone exemption in exchange for an assistant. </div></div>

I don't give a shit where they call their office, it's a simple fact. IF it's unsafe for civilians, it's unsafe for cops and they shouldn't be doing it. Cops often spend a great deal of time parked in their car watching roads etc, and making their "Presence" known. that's a great time for follow ups, NOT while driving around. It's bullshit.

 

[golden_311]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

I have been laughing at this whole post. I can agree with the LE guys in the fact that they shouldn't be hindered while doing their job. I can make hundreds of important phone calls in California while driving everyday. Speaker phones are on every cell phone and are legal in NJ. I would think that everyone can use speakerphone. If its life and death, you would be making the call regardless of the law. I also find it amusing that LE guys hold themselves in such high esteem. Take a look at the LAPD and what they have proven in the last few days. That they have members of their department who have a hard time not shooting civilians...delivering newspapers...in a different make of vehicle...who are women. Whether Mark Larue is correct or not is not the issue. It is that the 2nd ammendment allows men to protect themselves with "arms". It doesn't go into great detail as to what arms because those men obviously understood that a flintlock would be a thing of the past. Just as we no longer use a trebuchet. It sucks that any of us would even have to discuss the fact that we lose these rights.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Back to the OP... Larue is an asshat that merely did this as a sales gimmick which is why he didn't include Mil/Federal. If he really stood in opposition to the current political climate and wanted to make a statement then he'd cut them all off... But he didn't because the people he just cut off probably accounted for less than 5% of his total revenue stream.

Larue = Sales Gimmick
Other example:
Dillo Dust
Dillo Bottle Openers
Dillo Hookers

Ok maybe not the last one, but you get the point.

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The right two display red and blue shall not be infringed" is where in the constitution? I never said people should have all the same "Rights" as a LE, such as the right to detain etc. Just weapons, which happen to be a "Right" we do have. </div></div>

Now you're going with misdirection? We were discussing how LEO should not be entitled to do or have anything a civilian can't, and you're gonna try to make me look like I'm attacking the Constitution? Really? Lol... yeah ok... </div></div>

No, we've been talking about LEO having guns a civilian can't, and the subject of them being exempt from other laws came up somehow. I still have no idea where you were going with the red and blue lights thing..

I never said you were attacking the constitution, I just said the right to have red and blue lights weren't a constitutional guarantee like the rights to own a firearm. I apologize if you thought I was inferring that you were attacking the constitution. </div></div>

A firearm in LE is a tool, just like lights. We're discussing a tool that certain political asshats are trying to take away from us but exempt LE. Granted the main tool in question is also a constitutional right, but I'm not getting into that topic because it's been beat to death, brought back to life, beat to death, then propped up and beaten some more... much like this thread... </div></div>

Still not making any sense with the lights thing. One "Tool" is a constitutional right, the other isn't. It's a tool for me too. there's one in my truck, and another in my tractor as well as many in my house. I have no need, nor a right for the lights.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I don't give a shit where they call their office, it's a simple fact. IF it's unsafe for civilians, it's unsafe for cops and they shouldn't be doing it. Cops often spend a great deal of time parked in their car watching roads etc, and making their "Presence" known. that's a great time for follow ups, NOT while driving around. It's bullshit. </div></div>

Then they shouldn't be serving warrants, chasing fleeing felons, stopping assaults, SWAT & EOD should take up knitting, etc... Almost every aspect of an LEO's job is unsafe for civilians.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Still not making any sense with the lights thing. One "Tool" is a constitutional right, the other isn't. It's a tool for me too. there's one in my truck, and another in my tractor as well as many in my house. I have no need, nor a right for the lights. </div></div>

The topic started off about LE not deserving the right to anything a civilian can't have. You dragged the constitution into the argument after the fact...

 

[adrenaline junkie]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back to the OP... Larue is an asshat that merely did this as a sales gimmick which is why he didn't include Mil/Federal. If he really stood in opposition to the current political climate and wanted to make a statement then he'd cut them all off... But he didn't because the people he just cut off probably accounted for less than 5% of his total revenue stream.

Larue = Sales Gimmick
Other example:
Dillo Dust
Dillo Bottle Openers
Dillo Hookers

Ok maybe not the last one, but you get the point. </div></div>

What about Barrett? are they asshats too for not selling in CA? or is that a gimmick too?

 

[country888]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

I cant believe people on here are acting like this. I am a LEO & I think we all need to pull together to help fight this crap, not fight one another. I will not take any person's firearm, nore will the guys I work with, they all say they willquit first. I believe every person has the right to own any firearm, and as many as they.can afford to protect them selves, hunt, shoot or what ever they desire as long as they arnt out killing people. We need to get our shit together & stop fighting each other. I love my guns, i love to get out & shoot my guns, & no one is going to take my guns or stop me from having my guns!

 

[Gildoom]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

When cops get mad that they are being limited to the same level as the citizenry, I start to wonder if they are trolling.

If the citizens can't have the weapon, then neither can the cop. Oh the criminal still has those weapons? So you need to protect yourself? Weird, that is what we were saying and you didn't stop the enforcement of our rights being stepped on.

I think that is the final end game to this. If I am being told 7 rounds max, welcome aboard pal, after all, this law has just made those other guns go poof. They didn't go poof you say? Then what the hell was the point of the law?

Pandora's Box has been opened, I fully expect within the next two weeks to suddenly not hear a damn thing about gun control. There will be some new thing to chase after, since no arguments being made by the gun control people are remotely making sense.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: adrenaline junkie</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back to the OP... Larue is an asshat that merely did this as a sales gimmick which is why he didn't include Mil/Federal. If he really stood in opposition to the current political climate and wanted to make a statement then he'd cut them all off... But he didn't because the people he just cut off probably accounted for less than 5% of his total revenue stream.

Larue = Sales Gimmick
Other example:
Dillo Dust
Dillo Bottle Openers
Dillo Hookers

Ok maybe not the last one, but you get the point. </div></div>

What about Barrett? are they asshats too for not selling in CA? or is that a gimmick too? </div></div>

Depends... I haven't read up on the Barrett statement.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I cant believe people on here are acting like this. I am a LEO & I think we all need to pull together to help fight this crap, not fight one another. I will not take any person's firearm, nore will the guys I work with, they all say they willquit first. I believe every person has the right to own any firearm, and as many as they.can afford to protect them selves, hunt, shoot or what ever they desire as long as they arnt out killing people. We need to get our shit together & stop fighting each other. I love my guns, i love to get out & shoot my guns, & no one is going to take my guns or stop me from having my guns! </div></div>

There it is people straight from an LEO... Or is it not good enough because he's not in uniform and on the 6pm news?

 

[BCP]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gildoom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When cops get mad that they are being limited to the same level as the citizenry, I start to wonder if they are trolling.
</div></div>

Cops are people, views will depend on where they live, their upbringing, and the politics of their depts. Don't forget there are plenty of non-LE people out there who think only cops should have "bad guns" and everyone else should have at most a pea-shooter, provided they pass a thorough background check...

edit: look up the emeryville police chief's statement that cops carry guns not for defense but to intimidate people, that's the kind of retarded BS we are weathering here in CA. And oh yeah, they want 6rd mag limits and no more pump action shotguns

 

[bm11]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

Again, the point is not to hurt LE's ability to do their job. The point is to not limit 2nd amendment rights under the pretense of laws that tell you that you don't need an AR and don't need a thirty round mag, all while allowing the same to police because it is essential to fight the criminals. The same criminals we have a right to protect against that is supposedly not limited by these new laws? Political double talk much?

If every manufacturer did as larue did, I think the populace as a whole would re examine these new laws under the light of the police not having the proper tools to protect us. After all, most gun grabbing liberals don't think we NEED guns to protect ourselves, because that is what the police do. Your new laws limit the ability of the police to protect you? Time to reconsider.

 

[-Nick-]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again, the point is not to hurt LE's ability to do their job. The point is to not limit 2nd amendment rights under the pretense of laws that tell you that you don't need an AR and don't need a thirty round mag, all while allowing the same to police because it is essential to fight the criminals.
</div></div>

And again if Larue really wanted to make that the point then he should extend that policy to Mil and Federal sales... but he didn't.

 

[bm11]

Re: mark larue is a great guy

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

And again if Larue really wanted to make that the point then he should extend that policy to Mil and Federal sales... but he didn't. </div></div>On that we can agree.