srothstein wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 10:24 pmI agree that there are many law enforcement personnel that feel that way. Not most, but a lot. The problem is they are in one of two groups. Those supporting disarming the populace do the best politicking. That means they rise to the top and go into administration OR they go into union management. So they are the ones the media quotes and legislatures listen to, thinking it represents the will of most law enforcement.03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sat Mar 05, 2022 7:50 amTruth be told, I am betting there are many law enforcement personal that would love an unarmed population.
In reality, if you ask just the patrolmen on the streets, I bet at least 75% feel the Second is an absolute right or very near to it. Street cops support an armed populace. Administrators do not.
The closest I came to LEO was as a Corrections Officer. So, this is not for a beat cop's perspective. But I belong to several "gun" forums with a heavy LEO contingent. I was surprised, and amazed, and challenged at the number of them who not only respected law-abiding gunowners, but saw them as a resource.
I know that few people today understand that the founding father intended for law enforcement, and civil defense, to be the responsibility of every citizen. They were Leary of a standing army, and only expected a single Sheriff in most towns and counties. When more man power was needed, the Sheriff would deputize citizens for a specific action.
The "Militia" that so many liberals suggest is the military is actually EVERY citizen, armed and trained, ready to come to the country's defense. No where in the constitution is the phrase, "Leave it to the professionals."