Looks like cops in New York will soon be gunless
 

if this catches on

Group of Second Amendment-Supporting Gun Makers Now Refusing to Sell Arms to Law Enforcement in New York
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...icting-states/

Welcome to Obama's America.

:1orglaugh never going to happen...

Obama runs a group of Second Amendment-Supporting Gun Makers?

About Time.

I've said this all along, If you are affiliated with Government in any way, shape or form; you should NOT own or be allowed access to guns.

Take guns away from Government and Now.

It happened in Europe...it can happen here

Sure, the NYPD will run out of firearms. It only collects them off the street on a daily basis, and I would imagine a "no questions asked" buy back program would supply them with enough firepower to carry them for the next few decades.

http://www.rochardsbunnyranch.com/rock/yawn.gif

Can you imagine the trial of a cop shooting a civilian (criminal or not) where said cop used a confiscated or even "buy back" weapon? Hell let me try that case.

you should be gunless all - could be the best thing ever happened to this world :disgust

And when the federal government yanks the permits those manufacturers need to sell guns... They will be replaced.
Little known fact, the 2nd amendment says we all have the right to own a gun, it doesn't say anything about a right to sell a gun.

The only U.S. Supreme Court ruling that actually focused on the Second Amendment, U.S. v. Miller, found that there is no individual right to bear arms independent of national self-defense concerns.

The Supreme Court has spoken only once, it has spoken in favor of the civilian militia interpretation, and it has not spoken since. If the Court has held a different view, it has certainly had ample opportunity to rule on the matter since then.




A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Are you suggesting that the cops should go in their back collection room and use whatever weapons they find that were formerly owned by criminals?

Except for Olympic Arms, those other companies listed on that page are smaller manufacturers or 3rd party sales agents. This is nothing more than a PR stunt by them to drum up sales.

If Glock, Sig, or M&P came out and said that it would be a much bigger deal.

Incorrect.

"The Supreme Court of the United States first ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.[1]

In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions officially establishing this interpretation. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home within many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court as being consistent with the Second Amendment.[3] In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.[4]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_...s_Constitution

Do you nitoce the comma's? That means they are seperating things. The State is one entitiy which would protect itself. And the People are another.


1. well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
2. the right of the people to keep and bear arms

Otherwise it would read something along the lines of this

a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, lead by the people have a right to keep and bear arms, and this shall not be infringed.

The second amendament has a lot to answer for. Right to bare arms my ass.

America needs an amnesty on guns immedietly and anyone found carrying one without a licence should ne procecuted.

We already have laws on the books for that.. You liberal gun grabbers are amazingly ignorant.

And in time all of those newly passed laws will be declared unconstitutional just like it was in Illinois.

Wouldn't matter to me as a juror.
I have no problem if they use equipment they BUY or
legally confiscate that legally can be used in their job?

They use confiscated drugs in sting operations all the time.
They don't cook up a batch of meth in the station. :1orglaugh

yes take guns away from cops thats a genius idea! :1orglaugh what a bunch of fucking retards...

like guns are something hard to make that the government, army, NASA,FBI,CIA,NSA,MIT could not possibly engineer and create for themselves! :1orglaugh

oh and the government could not possibly import the stuff nooooooooo that would be too technically challenging and the logistics would simply be too much for them to handle...

oh and that would teach cops a lesson! :1orglaugh cops are to blame! and firemen!


what a bunch of retards....

They can't use evidence in a on going case in any manner. They don't use real drugs in sting operations. The majority gets burned up a period after the trial. Believe me I've seen lots of it go up in smoke. They do however facilitate transactions of real drugs. Weapons are generally destroyed or sold back to the public. Yes imagine that they put them back on the streets. It's called job security.

I'm sure in both cases (drugs and guns) some do slip through the cracks but those are generally off the record. I know of someone who had two guns confiscated and there was no record of them. But this person wasn't complaining since they got off with a slap on the wrist.