TexasCHLforum.com

E.Marquez wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

JP171 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote: Not well put. I know everybody would like to think everything get to be perfectly "fair", it isn't. The law is not written giving you the same amount of rights as an officer, or to make either actions mean the same. The officer can do things you can't in a flip flopped point of view.

Can you start digging around in your pocket just because the officer did? Is it unfair that it 's seen as a possible threat to the officer, but not to you? It seems like ya'll WANT to think you have a defense to prosecution if you pull your gun on an officer , or because you shoot an officer, because you "FELT" threatened by the officers actions. The law clearly defines the use of force you may use against an officer.

And by the same token, there are things that a "civilian" can do, that the officer cannot. There are few things in life that are truly "fair", and sometimes that's as it should be.

POLICE OFFICERS ARE CIVILIANS!!!! please stop using that term to indicate non police officers

I've always thought that too.

http://i.word.com/idictionary/ci" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;·vil·ian

\sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\ noun

: a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force
Full Definition
1
:a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2
a one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
b outsider 1

Need to find an old dictionary. All them new online dictionaries have current use so your posted definition will not state original meaning.

Why find an old dictionary, this is not an OLD conversation, it is a current one..... Not a discussion about what a word USE to mean. It was someone chastising a member for the use of a word TODAY ie currently.. and as you stated, the CURRENT use of the word civilian was properly used.

Civilian is a proper (TODAY) descriptive word to reference non Military, Non Police person.... Like it you may not, change it, you will not. Today that is what the word means. A Police officer is properly described as other than a civilian.

I suppose you like grouping PUBLIC SERVANTS with military and are comfortable with the continued MILITARIZATION of law enforcement. Would you also agree with the progressive CURRENT definition of the second amendment or the ORIGINALS as the founding fathers intended. You can't have it both ways. No I do not have to accept the CURRENT definition just to be politically and tyrannically correct.

You took a small thing and poorly attempted to turn it into a large thing that when twisted, supports your opinion..

None of what you accuse is relevant as I neither said it, nor implied it...
What i did say, and I welcome your discussion on..

I simply stated,, the word civilian as used was correct,valid and as it is commonly used today. In that you disagree with it's common use by a majority of people today is just that, your own, personal opinion. You wishing it were not so does not make it reality in my personal opinion..

I mean no disrespect in saying this, it's just an observation and apparently something we disagree on.

E.Marquez wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

JP171 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote: Not well put. I know everybody would like to think everything get to be perfectly "fair", it isn't. The law is not written giving you the same amount of rights as an officer, or to make either actions mean the same. The officer can do things you can't in a flip flopped point of view.

Can you start digging around in your pocket just because the officer did? Is it unfair that it 's seen as a possible threat to the officer, but not to you? It seems like ya'll WANT to think you have a defense to prosecution if you pull your gun on an officer , or because you shoot an officer, because you "FELT" threatened by the officers actions. The law clearly defines the use of force you may use against an officer.

And by the same token, there are things that a "civilian" can do, that the officer cannot. There are few things in life that are truly "fair", and sometimes that's as it should be.

POLICE OFFICERS ARE CIVILIANS!!!! please stop using that term to indicate non police officers

I've always thought that too.

http://i.word.com/idictionary/ci" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;·vil·ian

\sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\ noun

: a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force
Full Definition
1
:a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2
a one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
b outsider 1

Need to find an old dictionary. All them new online dictionaries have current use so your posted definition will not state original meaning.

Why find an old dictionary, this is not an OLD conversation, it is a current one..... Not a discussion about what a word USE to mean. It was someone chastising a member for the use of a word TODAY ie currently.. and as you stated, the CURRENT use of the word civilian was properly used.

Civilian is a proper (TODAY) descriptive word to reference non Military, Non Police person.... Like it you may not, change it, you will not. Today that is what the word means. A Police officer is properly described as other than a civilian.

mojo84 wrote:

JP171 wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote: Not well put. I know everybody would like to think everything get to be perfectly "fair", it isn't. The law is not written giving you the same amount of rights as an officer, or to make either actions mean the same. The officer can do things you can't in a flip flopped point of view.

Can you start digging around in your pocket just because the officer did? Is it unfair that it 's seen as a possible threat to the officer, but not to you? It seems like ya'll WANT to think you have a defense to prosecution if you pull your gun on an officer , or because you shoot an officer, because you "FELT" threatened by the officers actions. The law clearly defines the use of force you may use against an officer.

And by the same token, there are things that a "civilian" can do, that the officer cannot. There are few things in life that are truly "fair", and sometimes that's as it should be.

POLICE OFFICERS ARE CIVILIANS!!!! please stop using that term to indicate non police officers

I've always thought that too.

http://i.word.com/idictionary/ci" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;·vil·ian

\sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\ noun

: a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force
Full Definition
1
:a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2
a one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
b outsider 1