I have an uncle (my dad’s brother) who is a CA police officer and he doesn’t carry when he’s off duty.
Not the ones I’ve known, and that includes two uncles…
Depends on their department policy. Every department I know of dictates that officers who are on duty have all their equipment, including duty belt, weapon, etc… I’ve been to several conventions representing a department. Even the times I wasn’t being paid I was mandated to have my duty belt on as I was in uniform.
Heres the thing: one never knows when a place is going to be harmless or not. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
That nut that killed all those people in Omaha, Nebraska did it in a “harmless shopping mall”.
And the "No guns allowed’ signs that Dio is so fond of didn’t do a goddamned thing to stop him. But it did give him a multitude of unarmed victims to choose from, didn’t it?
I have to challenge this. Can you provide a cite that says this? Law enforcement officers are mandated by their individual departments official written policy. I know of few that dictate such a policy, and I know of no statewide mandate. But I may be ignorant.
You made the claim, back it up please.
The idea that having dozens of John Waynes blasting away at each other in a situation like that is going to make things better is laughable. I’ll ask the same question I always ask. If multiple people have guns out, how is everyone (most importantly, law enforcement) supposed to know who the bad guy is and who the heroes are?
“Danger” isn’t the point anyway. The point is that I don’t appreciate people scaring my kids unnecessarily by swaggering around with open firearms.
This is a good point but it is not laughable. With hundreds of millions of guns and 49 states having some kind of civilian carry this is not a scenario you can just scoff at. It is possible, probable, and inevitable. It’s happened before and it will happen again.
People who carry weapons, including off duty cops, need to know how to act when on duty police arrive. Both the department I retired from and the department I’m on now had mandatory training in off-duty shooting situations. I would encourage civilians to seek the same type of training where available. Overall, armed law abiding civilians are a boon to law enforcement, not a hindrance.
How will the John Waynes know who to shoot at?
How can the John Waynes behave when the cops get there that the real bad guy can’t also behave?
As has been said many times before, we do not owe you any explanation, justification or rationalization. And more to the point, you certainly aren’t going to get one if your only aim is to act like a prick in these sorts of threads.
The irony. It burns.
There are people who don’t appreciate their kids being exposed to Teh Gay Lifestyle[tm]. Shall we accommodate them as well?
Really? Show me where I have acted like a prick in any gun-related threads. I’ll cite all the times that you have, and we’ll compare. It’s not like I have anything else to do this weekend, because that’s about how long it will take me to cover my end. It would take even longer if the word “nut” were searchable, as that is your favorite pejorative in these types of threads.
For you it’ll be much easier, because 1) you won’t find too many instances, and 2) we’ve firmly established recently that while you can demand citation after citation, when it comes to you your post is your cite.
If I saw a fat asshole walking around an Omaha mall dressed like a ninja, using an AK clone to mow down civilians, I guess I’d start with him.
They can stow their carry gun, find cover and wait for the cops.
I not sure what point you are trying to make. Isn’t the ideal outcome when the uniformed police show up, that everyone puts their firearms on the floor and the police don’t have to shoot anybody?
That applies to plain clothes police officers also. Too many police officers have been killed by mistake by other police officers.
Use the term redneck instead. Second most favorite… :rolleyes:
Firt of all, there’s no such thing as a gay lifesty;e, so therefore, there’s no way to expose anybody to it.
Second of all, I already said I had no legal problem with it, so what is your point? I just said I wouldn’t ring my kids there.
Who’s going to be the arbiter of what constitutes “being a prick?” You?
What if you see 12 fat assholes walking around with guns? How do you know which one the bad guy is (and where are you getting this “ninja” shit? Most spree shooters don’t wear costumes).
Why can’t the bad guy do that too?
Yeah, it always works that easily and neatly in a chaotic situation, where people with firearms can be scattered throughout a building, none of them with any idea who’s a good guy and who’s a bad guy.
Required? That’s up to the dept. Permitted? Always.
Allowing deputies to remain armed while off duty is important for public safety, said Jim Cunningham, executive director of the Riverside Sheriff’s Association.
“When they’re off duty, they’re never really off duty,” he said. “They can be pressed back into duty at a moment’s notice.”
It is also important to allow deputies to remain armed while off duty for personal protection, Cunningham added.