Why should we trust a guy insane enough to think it’s OK to take a job, the ultimate purpose of which is to shoot people who disagree with his employer?

game, set, match.

Cops should be able to purchase, own, and carry any weapon they want … while off-duty.

On duty, they should all be disarmed. If they need firearms to deal with a malefactor, they should call up the local neighborhood militia, and direct them as needed.

“Gun Control Is Not The Answer – Ending Police Immunity To Prosecution Is”

I couldn’t agree more. In Radley Balko’s “Overkill” one of his recommendations is for each jurisdiction to have an independant citizen’s review board with full supeana powers. I think that would be a great way to keep the police honest and hopefully end this double standard (which we both write about often).

You are quite correct. There are lots of different factors at work simultaneously. The problem is a cultural one, and will only go away when that culture goes away.

I think, however, that ending the double standard would create a great deal of incentive for policemen to change their culture to one that is more civilized and peaceable.

I’m sure we agree on much. I tend to focus on the areas that are controversial because,
1) It’s fun,
2) I am trying to differentiate my brand from Brad’s, and he doesn’t make it easy. I strongly suspect that despite his hot denials, Brad is a closet anarchist.

Actually, if you are interested in the comprehensive list of the weapons I think it’s OK for you to have, you should read my first post on The Liberty Papers, The W-88? That’s perfect for home defense.

Oh and any time a sworn law enforcement officer (or other agent of the state) calls unsworn persons (or those who are not agents of the state) “civilians”, they should be slapped across the face, hard.

But more important is the positive feedback loop of self aggrandizement. This is the worst aspect of the militarization of the police. You mention the double standard of prosecution and accountability. Just part of the same issue, which is that the police forces consider themselves above the citizenry. No doubt there are individual officers who don’t feel that way, but collectively, it’s quite obvious, at least to me. So it becomes a “we’re superior because we have better toys and since we have better toys we’re superior” sort of loop. It just feeds itself, with help from the politicians and media. And the worst part of it is that it’s our tax dollars that are being spent to create and reinforce this elitism.

Another aspect of this attitude problem is that it can infect even the most well intentioned of those who join the police force. Once immersed in the culture, it becomes difficult to not absorb it.

As for the .50 providing “just as much sport” as a smaller gun, well … I surely do enjoy plinking away with my .22s, but the .50 is at a whole ‘nother level. Kinda like the difference between pine-box derby and NASCAR, ya know? :D

Thanks for letting me know what weapons it’s OK for me to have.

Thanks for reading the entire piece.

Well done, tarran.

The .50 cal rifle, being almost worthless for hunting (blowing a part your prey leaves very little cookable meat), overkill for self defense, and providing just as much sport as a smaller gun when it comes to plinking away at targets, is similarly inappropriate for the regular citizenry.

Thanks for letting me know what weapons it’s OK for me to have.