Law enforcement and (ex) military should be held to the same standards as regular civilians for everything firearm related in their personal lives
Posted by Born-Breath-507@reddit | Firearms | View on Reddit | 189 comments
I've had this argument with my cousin and was curious who yall think is right. He says that because cops and veterans have already had a ton of professional training, they should be exempt or have fewer requirements to get, for example, a CCW.
My position is that there should be a distinction between their professional and personal lives. If a cop wants to get a gun other than his service weapon, he should have to jump through the same hoops every other citizen has to go through to get one. And the prior training should be irrelevant, as the training itself between cops/veterans and civilians is different. (One focuses on defense and the other on offense; I agree there is some overlap, but that shouldn't exempt them from having the same civilian requirements.) Also, your profession simply doesn't put you above the law. If our elected officials decided that these laws would provide the safest way of obtaining a firearm, then they should apply to everyone without exception. Then our argument sorta shifted towards whether civilians should have the same access to the weapons cops and soldiers have . But what do yall think? Should there be universal standards or should we treat different ppl differently?
Apprehensive_Head910@reddit
What I keep seeing discussed is whether a cop or soldier can safely handle a weapon. And while it is important, the majority of CCL training is not how to shoot but when to shoot. Cops are drilled in UOF constantly, everyday they are dealing with some aspect of the 4th amendment in every thing they do. Soldiers are subjected to ROE dependent upon the theater of operation. Your CCL class had maybe 4 or 5 hours on UOF. Cops have WAY more training in this area. And as such Cops are subjected to special laws regarding the use of force. When you shoot someone it's looked at through the lens of what a reasonable person would do in your circumstance. When a cop uses any force, be it deadly or otherwise, it's viewed through the lens of what would a reasonable OFFICER do. As a person who has been granted the powers of arrest through state and federal law, a cop is not subjected to a civilians use of force in an armed or unarmed confrontation. Which is why in some states, they are not required to attend the CCL class but can be issued a license. They can fly on major airlines armed and you cannot. They can carry a gun into a school irregardless of gun free zones, you can not.
DNCOrGoFuckYourself@reddit
Being ex-military or LEO doesn’t mean you know about guns.
Just because you were a cook or barber for the military doesn’t mean you know how to properly handle a gun, and just because you’re a cop doesn’t mean you can shoot
harley97797997@reddit
But it does mean you've had more required training than a CCW holder.
Some CCW holders go above and beyond, but most don't do more than the bare minimum required to obtain the permit.
StayStrong888@reddit
A Marine cook or band member will outshoot you any day with his service rifle.
DNCOrGoFuckYourself@reddit
I was gonna dignify this with a well thought out response with examples, but considering you guys missed the point of my comment I have my doubts you’ll understand with further elaboration
harley97797997@reddit
We all got the point and agreed with it. But it doesn't dispute the original point.
The average cop and military member has more firearms training than the average CCW holder.
The quality, amount, and proficiency are entirely different arguments.
DNCOrGoFuckYourself@reddit
I saw one of your responses, I think you get the gist of it. And you make a valid point about using military service can expedite your path into a civilian field, but I don’t think that would be fair for who gets to skip a CCW test or have fewer hoops. Also, I’ve seen a lot of people really try to stretch what this post is about, and it boils down to LEO & MIL and whether they should be held to the same standard as civilians.
You’re right, the average MIL/LEO has more experience than a civilian with firearms handling, but what about the select few who aren’t competent? What about the minority of citizens that recreationally train and research and have more than average time behind the gun and training even compared to MIL/LEOs? It’s one thing to use your service to better your opportunities, that’s one of the the reasons they can recruit many young adults. In my uncles case, he used his service history to help get a CDL.
But, that’s a privilege to do so. Not a right. Owning a gun, defending yourself? A right. And there shouldn’t need to be a slip of paper telling me I can or can’t have my firearm concealed on my person vs out in the open. And if civilians have to undergo testing for this, the MIL/LEO should have to as well. Once you take that uniform off, you’re a civilian. While I do think you guys should get other services like with the VA and the monthly check (again, not MIL so I won’t talk out of my ass. Those who served or know the procedure possibly you yourself will know) for serving your country, that’s something that comes with the service.
I also know some “gun guys” that are ex-army. My brother is ex-MIL. He bought a cheap AR, a knockoff Eotech, AR500 PC & steel plates. Eventually after he saw a scar I have from shrapnel on the range, and the rate his gear failed vs mine he changed his ways. The incompetent ones will buy junk rifles, cheap parts with abysmal setups, and I’ve been flagged by one twice in 5 minutes before he got stuck on mag loading duty. I’m not shifting goal posts or saying all servicemen & women are incompetent, just some examples.
MIL & LEO are also held to a higher standard. If they have more experience than a civ, and they know so much more, then taking a CCW test shouldn’t be a big deal and renewing it shouldn’t be any worse than the required qualifier with their weapon.
As far as anyone out shooting me? Probable. I’m “combat accurate” as my uncle calls it. I can put a group down range, but I’m no target shooter. I’m not a braggart, though. More power to anyone who can shoot tight groups effectively and rapidly at distance.
harley97797997@reddit
I generally agree with you. I was a military firearms instructor and am a former police officer. There are definitely plenty of incompetent people in both professions when it comes to firearms.
29 states don't have this issue as they are constitutional carry. Anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm can carry concealed with no permit, training, or knowledge.
The remaining states have varying qualifications for obtaining a CCW. They are very basic, one-time tests. Some written and some have a range requirement. Many people pass those without being firearms knowledgeable or competent.
For military members, the firearms training they went through in basic was more in-depth than any CCW training. To me, it doesn't make sense to make them go through another training just because everyone else has to do it. It's adding extra criteria for them as they've already completed basic firearms training.
For LE, LEOSA exists, which actually has stricter standards than any state CCW. It requires range qualification. The law itself doesn't specify how often they have to qualify. It just requires them to qualify per their agencies or state laws. There are a couple of states where former LE prefers to obtain a state CCW because it's easier to maintain than a LEOSA qual.
I don't see any special privileges when it comes to CCWs. In states that require training or testing, everyone receives training and testing. The only difference is that some people receive it from the state, while others receive it from the military.
This is true. Most comments went to the CCW route, and it's not a good example of LE and the military having different standards. I asked a couple of other commentors for other examples, and no one came up with any.
The only one I know of that's sort of a privilege is the CA firearms roster. LE can purchase off roster firearms. But they have to be purchased for on duty use, which is why I say it's only sort of a privilege.
I agree with the argument that civilians should be able to own any firearms LE and military can.
DNCOrGoFuckYourself@reddit
I think it really boils down to personal experiences. Personally as a civilian, if LEO & Mil or ex-members of either are allowed to skip the test that feels like a “rules for thee, but not for me” scenario, also considering there’s no real way to know just how much training that person has had. Sure, you can tell on the range based on how they conduct themselves. Good groupings, good follow up shots, check clear, gun locked back and not in use, not flagging others, etc. but a lot of people can BS, especially to a civ. When you said the minority of civilians who are knowledgeable are on forums, you’re correct. My buddy just spent 650$ on his first Glock, thinks 50$ or more on a holster is absurd. That’s the kinda guy who can be fooled by a BS’er who talks the talk and uses their prior service as their way to back their claims and opinions.
The CA roster is shitty, even from a non-CA resident. All of Cali’s gun laws are horrible, because all it does is take guns and optimal setups out of the hands of law abiding citizens. I’ve seen a few posts about cops buying off-roster guns, then charging a premium with the intent to resell, so that’s another way to hurt civilians (and I’m pretty sure illegal to do, but NAL) but even for the ones who are only doing it for work, it’s shitty that they spend their money on maybe a better rifle or handgun than their agency will provide, but they can’t use it outside of duty purposes. That said, they ought to do away with the roster and the unconstitutional fuckery over there. I hear more about places like CA, NY & IL being riddled with crime for places to be so strict on gun control than places with constitutional carry or even just “free states” that don’t have a roster or any bans on features.
harley97797997@reddit
Every military member has had a minimum of basic training range time. That includes a classroom portion, practice shooting, and a qualification course. That's more extensive than any states CCW requirements.
I'm not saying it makes them better shooter, more knowledgable or safer, just that they have all exceeded the requirements for any states CCW.
I agree with your comments on the CA laws. That's part of the reason I moved out of CA.
It isn't illegal for them to resell off roster firearms, but it is illegal for them to purchase them solely with the intent to resell them. Several officers have been arrested and convicted for doing that.
https://www.monderlaw.com/news/california-officers-allegedly-reselling-illegal-guns-in-southern-california/
https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/2-gardena-police-officers-off-roster-guns-illegal-reselling-instagram/
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/former-gardena-police-officer-again-found-guilty-operating-unlicensed-firearms-business
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/former-torrance-police-officer-agrees-plead-guilty-illegally-acting-firearms-dealer-and
VolsungTrainingGroup@reddit
I shot an annual rifle qual with an 0311....he almost Unq'd , he managed to get by with pit love. Not every Marine is a rifleman, and not every rifleman knows how to shoot
bpg2001bpg@reddit
How about there should be no "hoops" to jump through, and any arm available to the military is also available to civilians, as the founders intended.
Blue_58_@reddit
Because there are too many sick people who will use said weapons to kill innocent people? I don’t understand how people in this board are so soulless. No country with gun control has the mass shootings that we do. You’re all okay with the constant fear and murder of innocent people so you can play punisher in your fantasies.
bpg2001bpg@reddit
Your perspective is just different from mine. When you don't understand or agree with someone's position, imagining us as imbeciles with infantile reasoning may make justifying your own position easier, but it only serves to widen the political gap and ultimately dehumanizes us in your mind. Half of the country believes that the benefits of widespread civilian gun ownership outweigh the drawbacks. Are we all imbeciles who just want to look like a comic book character? Are we all unthinking brutes? Your trust in the establishment with a monopoly on violence is flawed, and I think you know it. But you can't imagine another solution because you've never been responsible for any kind of violence. Violence is completely foreign to you. You've always had someone else to do your violence for you, somewhere away from you. And to you, maybe you don't love the police or a military run by G-d forbid a Republican, but better the devil you know, right. I am the other devil and I know me. And I trust any of my neighbors with guns more than I ever would the police or military.
Blue_58_@reddit
I dont have to imagine, because there are countless examples of it in this board and other similar spaces. One of the top posts this week is some dude having his mind blown that ChatGPT is able to regurgitate pro-gun talking points because he doesnt know what an LM is.
Half this country also believes in government control weather machines and that vaccines are a hoax. So you tell me.
You;re ownership of guns doesnt change the state;s monopoly of violence. You still cant use your guns to force your will on others. And if you think you do that only goes to show why you shouldnt have access to them. We live in democratic society, if you're concerned with how the state uses violence why is it that your side is always opposed to disarming the state? You're in the same side as "back the blue", the same side as the Patriot Act, the same side with the candidate with direct ties and support with the authoritarian regime of Russia, the same side that wants to give more funding to the police and the military.
You're not concerned with the state or its monopoly of violence and you know i t. You just want to enact violence on others. You're creaming your pants for it. You're this guy: https://apnews.com/article/wrong-driveway-shooting-new-york-gillis-monahan-cdca1723c6ba7afb89102a1e1aaa3fe0
So are you. You live in the same country I do. Vigilante justice is impotent. We saw what you guys do in every mass shooting scenario since the UT shooting, that is to say, nothing, you do nothing.
bpg2001bpg@reddit
It's more of a constitutional Republic, but pedantry aside, how do you think that this society with a government of the people, by the people, for the people came to be? Did a despot King or dictator who controlled vast armies and power call for a vote?
I understand that you must get the same talking points from 2a supporters with the opposite cognitive dissonance from yourself. You're all about "bring down the patriarchy, stop the oppression and also no one needs an AR-15." And they are all like "come and take it! Strong Country, Back the blue!"
It's reasonable that you might peg me as a conservative gun nut, but truthfully, you have more in common with those authoritarians on the right than I do, by a lot.
Well I'm not clicking your link, and also no. But you just proved my point about how foreign the concept of violence is to you. You don't have to be ashamed of it. Lots of people throughout history have gotten murdered by thugs or by a state because they just abhor violence. Lots though live comfortably until they die of old age. That isn't me. I love peace, and I take responsibility for violence. I prefer deescalation and friend making. I believe the vast majority of people are all good inside. I tell my kids that we only ever use violence if we have no other choice.
The second amendment isn't about saving people from mass shooters, and my right to self defense has nothing to do with whether some guy in another state who owns a gun would run in past the inept and impotent cops to save children or not. If it were my kids in there, I would.
Wetald@reddit
🫡
tex-mania@reddit
This times a billion. When they said shall not be infringed they meant we could have warships.
Lazy_Ratio1299@reddit
The NFA was founded on the idea a short barrel shotgun wasn't used in war and thus not protected under the 2a. How far we've fallen.
FarOpportunity-1776@reddit
The NFA was really trying to outlaw pistols. courts knocked that down so they turned it into what we have now
Lazy_Ratio1299@reddit
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/174/
"Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation. "
bpg2001bpg@reddit
I'm excited for when the court finally reconciles Miller with Heller.
-Scalia, Heller, 2008
And Miller was such a joke. There was not a single person or attorney present to argue the case in Miller's favor at all, and he was dead before a decision was rendered. And the US military was literally using short barreled shotguns in the military during WW1 and during the case.
myotheralt@reddit
Wasn't there a trench gun in WWII?
websterhamster@reddit
WWI had the Winchester Model 1897.
Staseu@reddit
Finally, my very own AC-130.
bpg2001bpg@reddit
That was always allowed.
Staseu@reddit
Unfortunately not with the 105mm howitzer active.
bpg2001bpg@reddit
With the right paperwork, licenses, taxes, time, and friends in the government, you could make it happen. It's not going to be cheap though.
Signal_Membership268@reddit
As a gun owner I agree. There are lots of people that should be limited to the single shot military weapons our founders based this amendment on.
websterhamster@reddit
No good take ever started with aS a GuN oWnEr
Signal_Membership268@reddit
There are gun owners and there are folks with a gun fetish. I own a lot of firearms and shoot pretty good but it’s not my identity or something I place above everything else. I wouldn’t vote for a criminal for President to avoid universal background checks and red flag laws.
bpg2001bpg@reddit
And freedom of the press should be limited to the printing presses our founders based the first amendment on?
Signal_Membership268@reddit
Could happen, Trump wants to shut down TV networks and newspapers that report on his crimes and his stupid conspiracy theories.
MarcusAurelius0@reddit
I don't know if I could be trusted with a MANPAD, the temptation to lock aircraft would be too great lmao.
uuid-already-exists@reddit
You can have one now if you get the stamps and FEL. Good luck getting someone to sell one to you though. Make your own and you’re golden.
MarcusAurelius0@reddit
I need some seeker head schematics, I've got Estes rockets. devilish laugh
websterhamster@reddit
Just enough to boop a low-flying aircraft (or obliterate its prop/engine)
B1893@reddit
No, fuck that bullshit.
If X is illegal for citizens to own, X shouldn't be available to police officers while on duty either.
If it was banned due to "public safety," then the police don't need them either. I don't give a shit if it's an 11 round magazine.
Police officers are citizens, they should be subject to the same laws as citizens, whether they're on or off the clock.
rasputin777@reddit
"The only reason you need a high cap magazine is for mass shooting!".
Gives cops mass shooting equipment
Blue_58_@reddit
This is a problem of the same side. Im pretty sure most anti gun people would be perfectly fine not giving cops any firearms.
rasputin777@reddit
Most of the time, sure. But when it's time to lock people in their houses for COVID, or say, round up pro-life protesters (or former presidents) they're certainly happy those cops have guns.
Blue_58_@reddit
This is again, and issue of the same side. You're the ones who celebrated the use of cop violence on protesters since 1968 and continued to give the police more and more riot gear and training. COVID has not stopped people on the left form believing in defund the police and from constantly asking you rightys to stop arming the state. Who's wearing the "back the blue" stickers?
rasputin777@reddit
Who?
Maybe read a history book. That shit began with the 1965 Law Enforcement Assistance Act which gave federal funds to local cops to train like the military. It was pushed for and signed by leftist hero LBJ.
It's funny but this is exactly my point. You talk a big game about cops and authority, but as soon as there's any impetus whatsoever, you don't start licking boots. You start sucking them off. You really still support governors forcing people to stay indoors and avoid exercise for a respiratory illness huh? 4 years to stop the spread.
OrganizationFunny153@reddit
Nah, cops should not be treated like citizens. Any law that restricts civilians should be more severe for cops, not merely identical. Pass a law that limits civilians to 10 rounds? Cops get 5 rounds. Ban "assault weapons"? Cops can't have semi-auto firearms at all.
mikeg5417@reddit
Honestly, this just makes you sound jealous and angry.
OrganizationFunny153@reddit
Why shouldn't I be angry that cops are given special privileges while the rights of ordinary citizens are taken away?
Odd_Shirt_3556@reddit
Well grow a pair and enlist. Lots of police vacancies right now. Step up and become special too.
OrganizationFunny153@reddit
Sorry, I have no desire to join a gang. But keep licking those boots, you're doing great!
Wulf1939@reddit
Back to the s&w model 10
purdinpopo@reddit
I have carried a model 10, and a Smith model 65 on duty. When I was a kid in Florida a deputy was ambushed by several men, then kidnapped while reloading his Colt Python. They took him out in the middle of nowhere and tried to kill him. The department switched to Glock 17 shortly after the incident.
Neither-Following-32@reddit
So to rehash...
He got six shots off against multiple armed intruders and then wasn't killed by them. They then captured him and moved him to another location, where they attempted to kill him but didn't and then he somehow got away?
Not that it justifies it but this absolutely sounds like something personal. Revenge, debt, what have you.
purdinpopo@reddit
He was checking what appeared to be an abandoned van on the side of the road, four armed men brought him under fire, from inside the van. He was walking up on the van, retreated to cover behind his patrol car, firing as he went. The four men were found a few days later shot to death in the van, one county north of the incident. It was the 1980's in south Florida. At the time the way mandatory sentences worked in Florida, you got less time for killing a cop than getting caught with dealer quantities of drugs. They had made the deputy kneel in the middle of a rural road and were going to shoot him with his own pistol. The deputy broke the chain on the cuffs, was shot through his ear, he then ran for a couple miles before collapsing on a road in front of some guy going to work, who had a mobile phone. (Not a cell phone, the original car mounted mobile phone that operated off of the old Motorola towers)
WIlf_Brim@reddit
Police officers referring to the public as "civilians" pisses me off to no end.
They aren't in the military. They are civilians as well. They are no better than anybody else. And data shows that they are more likely to be felons that your average CCW holder. So piss off with their carve outs in gun laws.
theoriginaldandan@reddit
Police aren’t civilians.
The definition of civilian - a person not in the armed services or the police force
ChevTecGroup@reddit
Thats not the definition. Military are not civilians because they are governed by different laws. Police are civilians. No matter what someone typed in Wikipedia
Odd_Shirt_3556@reddit
Confidently Incorrect. Oxford Dictionary, Britannica Dictionary, Cambridge Dictionary, and Merriam Webster Dictionary all define it as military and police.
JoeSicbo@reddit
civilian /səˈvɪljən/ noun plural civilians Britannica Dictionary definition of CIVILIAN [count] : a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force The bomb injured 12 civilians.
Odd_Shirt_3556@reddit
Well while pissed off, Oxford Dictionary, Cambridge Dictionary, and Merriam Webster Dictionary all define it as military and police. Guess you are wrong according to linguists. Oh and since you claim it, show me the data where police are more likely to be felons vs CCW holders. In the USA there are 850 thousand Police and 21.8 million CCW holders and that excludes constitutional carry. I'm guessing you're not good at at fact checking and prone to hyperbole.
lord_dentaku@reddit
I've got a friend who is a retired federal agent (DHS). After he retired we were at an airport and he hadn't gotten his TSA PreCheck yet so we were making fun of him saying things like "welcome to civvy life." He went from getting to walkthrough the scanners with them off while carrying a weapon to having to have his belt and shoes off in order to fly.
mikeg5417@reddit
Yeah that's how it works, though they don't turn off the scanners and let them walk through.
I haven't been through security in 30 years. When I retire, I will have to endure TSA like everyone else.
When your retired DHS friend was skipping TSA to carry on his flights, he was assuming some responsibilities by being armed on that plane whether he was travelling for work or on personal business.
I have many friends and co-workers who have had to intervene on flights while exercising that flying armed perk. Everything from fights between passengers to crazy/high/drunk passengers trying to open the cockpit or exit doors, attacking flight attendants, and otherwise causing trouble. I've been lucky in that I only had to intervene once and it was resolved very quickly.
Some of those friends and co-workers were on duty when they were flying and some were heading off to vacations or other personal travel.
One who was going to his brothers wedding ended up in a full on brawl with someone having a mental breakdown on his flight (tried to open the exit door). They diverted to another city and he was a day late getting home because he had to stick around and deal with the investigation.
thebonecolector@reddit
You realize that makes no sense right and your letting your hatred for cops and authority show thriugh
B1893@reddit
How does that make no sense, and how am I letting my "hatred for cops and authority show?"
If a citizen "doesn't need" any more than 10 round magazines or an AR15, then why should the police have them?
All of that shit that was banned for "public safety?"
That "public safety" also applies to the police - the bans should as well.
PrometheanEngineer@reddit
I live in a state where we have extreme gun laws. Worse than CA.
Cops can buy literally anything.
Same with active duty mil.
It's insane to me.
listenstowhales@reddit
Jesus where do you live, Korea?
Frustrated_Consumer@reddit
New York is like that, but only for cops. If you see a guy with a suppressed Ak with 30 round mags playing around at the range, he’s a cop. Meanwhile you’re struggling to load your fixed mag 10 round AR, or your bolt action if you don’t have a pistol permit with semi auto permit attachment.
PrometheanEngineer@reddit
MA/CT depending on the year. Both are horrid. CT is technically a tad bit better than MA, but only because their politicians are dumber.
Like I'd kill for a zero feature rifle
listenstowhales@reddit
Ooff, yeah I’m in SECT, it’s not super great here. But also there are some signs that some politicians are (apparently) softening their stance on the AWB, so here’s hoping you can get yourself something cool
Sliced_Orange1@reddit
Don't hold your breath. I'd bet they're trying to figure out how they can one-up the recent MA laws to make it even worse for us. To think this is "The Constitution State" makes me sick.
Can't wait to get out of this terrible place...
listenstowhales@reddit
I don’t think that’s necessarily true (although I’m an optimist). I think it’s more practical- they realized how much money they can grift out of people.
Hypothetically (or at least me spitballing because doing dishes isn’t ideal)- They drop the AWB and make it so if you want an “assault weapon” you need to pay the state $200 (or whatever) for a special permit or whatever nonsense.
The only people who will shell out for it are the people who follow the law anyway, so they lose nothing, and they can tell their constituents they’re both tough on gun laws and willing to compromise. They look great.
PrometheanEngineer@reddit
I'll bet you every single dollar I have that it will never happen in CT
Username7239@reddit
Unless they're on post, active duty military is not exempt from anything in MA. Cops have special rights here though.
PacoBedejo@reddit
Meanwhile, I keep a 300BLK "pistol" in a backpack in my truck in Indiana. State differences can be severe.
phalliceinchains@reddit
Or WA
cparks1@reddit
In my experience, the LE/mil people I've been around are some of the most dangerous to go shooting with as far as safety goes. And some of the worst shots.
SaltyPilgrim@reddit
Bruh, unless you're in an actual Combat Arns role like infantry or infantry adjacent, 95% of the military shoots less than 300 rounds a year, give or take.
I've seen people miss their 3-yd target on their Sidearm qualification.
BrightSpeck@reddit
Every single gun law is an infringement.
Also, the police have their own flag. They should be treated like the foreign army they seem to think they are.
Evening-Corgi-7115@reddit
As a cop living in Maryland, the only thing that my credentials allow me to do is get the "large capacity magazines" that come with most guns. I still have to wait 7 days, I still have to go through all the rigmarole of paperwork and if I wanted to get a MD wear and carry permit I would still have to do everything and only be allowed to bypass the training requirement. I shoot my duty weapon for qualifications twice a year and do tactical shooting and decision making type shooting. Rifle gets shot a couple times a year for the same type of qualifications. I shoot my personal firearms way more than I ever would for work.
Demon-of-Razgriz@reddit
Ok so ignoring my beliefs outside of the question at hand being leave my 2nd amendment rights and tools the fuck alone. I feel law enforcement and military and veterans should have to go through the same requirements as everyone else. The reason I say this is I have seen in the military US Army people who failed RM in basic for not hitting the broadside of barn if they were inside the fucking barn like philysics be damned they were shitty shots.
However my belief still stands government shouldn't interfere with my right to my tools
Opinions_ArseHoles@reddit
Did you know in some states barbers and stylists are required to have more training than law enforcement? I'll let someone else address the military side of training.
echo202L@reddit
No one should need a CCW, Purchase permit, tax stamp, or have to jump through any hoops. Taking away LEOSA benefits won't fix that.
Gunner4201@reddit
The only standards people should go through is the Constitution of the United States "shall not infringe" couldn't be any clearer.
PM_NUDES_4_DOG_PICS@reddit
Am former cop and military, and I completely disagree that we should have to jump through the same hoops.
There shouldn't be any bullshit hoops to begin with for anyone. Same with restrictions on mags, ARs, etc. If LE and the military can have it, so should the common man.
SOUTHPAWMIKE@reddit
I'm not aware of any codified, legal privilege that military veterans get in terms of gun ownership.
Cops definitely get special privileges though. Here in CA civilians can only buy off a specific roster of approved handguns. Cops can buy whatever they want, and they're allowed to sell off-rooster handguns in private sales. There's definitely a two-tier system here.
Similarly, when NY passed its recent 10 round mag capacity restriction, there was a special exemption for police, even off duty.
harley97797997@reddit
I find this funny. The average CCW holder did the bare minimum requirements for their state. People on shooting and CCW chats likely do more than average, but are the top 1% and not the average.
Cops and military received initial training and semi-annual to annual qualification on firearms. That doesn't mean every cop and military member is an expert, but they do have more training than the average CCW holder.
TacTurtle@reddit
The average CCW holder practices more than 1-2 times a year, which is clearly reflected in their much much better accuracy than police in shootings.
harley97797997@reddit
Do you have a reference for either of those claims?
Most people don't do more than what's required of them. People participating in firearms, chats, forums, etc, are the exception, not the norm.
The only stat I could find is that 61% of CCW holders have received formal training. Being generous, I'd say 25% of CCW holders actually do anything kind of recurring training.
TacTurtle@reddit
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/08/26/us/why-police-shoot-so-many-rounds-trnd
So 65-77% of police shots fired are misses.
Meanwhile for the public at large:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494
Note under "reasons for ownership" competitive target shooting was given as reason for 27.2%, recreation target shooting was given as reason for 64.3%, and hunting for 47.0%.
Generally speaking, competitive and recreational target shooters will be going to the range way more than 1-2x annually for range qualifying.
harley97797997@reddit
Your links talk about accuracy. Not training. Quality of training and accuracy are not the same as the amount of training.
I agree that competitive shooters have more training and shoot more. But that's not the discussion here.
You've just moved the goalposts.
TacTurtle@reddit
https://www.amazon.com/Concealed-Carry-Class-Self-Defense-Tactics/dp/1946267953/ if you want to read the stats compiled by a CCW instructor from his students after they got their CCW.
harley97797997@reddit
My point has nothing to do with quality of training. It has to do with amount.
100% of military and cops have received basic firearms training. States recognize this training in lieu of CCW training, in states that require training.
61% of CCW holders have any type of formal firearms training.
atsinged@reddit
Are you seriously comparing police shootings in dynamic situations with shooting at a static target at a range and using hit percentages to say the people shooting in dynamic situations suck?
jrhooo@reddit
Even if we assumed that was true, if has no relation to testing schedule
FarOpportunity-1776@reddit
Or... we just let people carry that they want and keep the government out of it....
SnakeEyes_76@reddit
Cops have tons of professional training?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha
No.
I’m a former cop. Just no. It’s possible that certain specialty units like SWAT may get higher levels of firearms related training. But the average street cop gets firearms training during the academy and then they qualify with their service weapons maybe once a year. Some depts might do more. Many will do less. I think the general public greatly over estimates how much training law enforcement gets across the board. Not just with firearms.
When you consider how anemic police training really is, it’s a miracle there’s not even more controversial/tragic incidents than there already are.
harley97797997@reddit
But, the average cop is required to have more training than the average CCW holder.
SnakeEyes_76@reddit
The issue isn’t with training per se. The issue that people have is that agents of the state should not be granted special privileges because they signed up for a job out of their own free will.
harley97797997@reddit
I agree that they shouldn't be granted special privileges. Although I do agree with LEOSA.
I don't see waiving training requirements for people who already have training beyond what's required as granting special privileges.
SnakeEyes_76@reddit
I don’t think the heartburn is with training per se. I think it really comes down to principle. Fundamentally before cops are cops, they’re citizens. Citizens who should be beholden to the same standards as everybody else. They’re not above the people they serve.
Simply put cops should not be able to do anything in their personal lives that non cops cannot. The amount of training or training disparity in this specific example of ccw, is ultimately irrelevant.
harley97797997@reddit
I agree. My initial question here to OP was about what disparity exists. What special privileges do cops and ex military have?
The only ones I can think of, by law, are waived CCW training due to prior training and LEOSA for cops.
Military training is often used to obtain civilian licensed in many career fields. Military ship drivers have an expedited path to a Mariners license. Military CDL drivers have training and skills test waivers to obtain a civilian CDL. These are just a couple of examples, but it's common for many fields.
I think it would be different if the training requirement for CCW was more stringent, or if there were military who had zero firearms training, were able to obtain a waiver.
Apprehensive_Head910@reddit
You're absolutely right. Just disregard the small minded people on here.
charlestonchewing@reddit
I mean, the training that cops get is far far beyond the minimum needed for someone else to get a carry permit (in my state). So it makes sense for them to not have to go to a permit to carry class.
lostinareverie237@reddit
A lot of that police training isn't that comprehensive, but that's not a conversation a lot of them are willing to have.
Tohrchur@reddit
it’s not a controversial opinion. the vast majority of veterans are not combat vets and only fired weapons in basic and for qualifications and that’s it.
myotheralt@reddit
I got very basic firearms from the military, but I found the hobby after I got out.
Toshinit@reddit
True, if they wanted it to be “consistent” with military they’d make SBRs down to a 14.5 inch which is what the military generally has for their troops, but either way the NFA is cringe.
prettanoi@reddit
Everyone has to qualify on their assigned weapon atleast once every six months in the army
New_Ant_7190@reddit
And in many law enforcement agencies the range fire once yearly.
purdinpopo@reddit
I have worked at one agency that only required an annual. A couple required twice annually. I worked one place that did them every three months. Even the agency that required just once, had a non qualification day, where we ran the course of fire without time limits, and without officially scoring. The instructor then discussed issues some officers were having. Then we did the course of fire again showing improvement. I do believe that one or two officers got taken out to another private range day to fix some issues.
jrhooo@reddit
And that 1 time weapons qual is basic is typicall still much more in depth than the local 18 hours or whatever course at your LGS.
If a hunter safety course can replace the training , its silly to suggest that a 1-2 week long mil qual shouldn’t
supertiggercat@reddit
In Illinois... the firearms training course is 8 hours of safety and 8 hours of legal. Veterans can be waved for the 8 hours of firearms safety. I'm a veteran and was given the opportunity to attend the entire course but only pay for half. It was a nice refresher of the fundamentals and the latest approaches.
Next-Investment-9434@reddit
Cops are most all anti gun. Many say they are pro second, but when they encounter an armed citizen, they go insane.
Been there done that.
SniperGX1@reddit
LEO and Ex Military ARE civilians and should have the exact same rights and be affected by the exact same laws.
When on a jury this is the standard I hold. If it's legal for LEO it's legal for everyone. If it's illegal for some it's illegal for LEO as well.
Legality aside, anecdotally LEO and many ex military are absolute dog shit when it comes to firearm safety and proficiency. I would expect to see better.
mreed911@reddit
Law enforcement and ex-military are regular civilians.
TouchMyPlumbus@reddit
In GA, you just fill out a form online, go to court house for fingerprints + fee, and you get a CCW 😘
No_Bit_1456@reddit
Technically there should be a blacklist for law enforcement for actions they’ve been caught of doing while in service, but you will never see that with the current demand for law enforcement
TacTurtle@reddit
Law enforcement are civilians.
theoriginaldandan@reddit
They aren’t.
Civilian: a person not in the armed services or the police force
quitesensibleanalogy@reddit
That's just like, your opinion man. Let me drop some knowledge on you.
TacTurtle@reddit
A civilian is a person not in the military or engaged in hostilities.
charlestonchewing@reddit
No we don't.
Master-CylinderPants@reddit
Yes, you do.
Agammamon@reddit
Uhm, 'veteran's already don't get any special privileges - those are only available to cops.
As for 'more professional training' for veterans', that's just not true. *Some* servicemembers handle small arms as part of their career - but even those guys don't do it on the daily. The rest of us basically get an annual (or even less) 'fam-fire' (familiarity fire) where we are 'qualified' to carry the gun on watch as long as we can operate the firearm, hit the target, and not endanger anyone near us. That's it. The first 4 years I was in the Navy I didn't even touch a firearm (in Basic the armory was closed for repairs).
Police get special privileges *not* because 'they are the only ones professional enough to handle this gun;)' but because of police lobby agencies pushing for special carveouts for LEO's in order to keep the LEO's voting for you.
Unable_Coach8219@reddit
Most cops/ military can’t shoot for shit! I see lots of them in USPSA
WesleysHuman@reddit
Correction: no class of citizens should have access to ANY kind of weaponry that any other class doesn't have access to. The only exception are criminals PRESENTLY incarcerated or under restricted release.
Mr_E_Monkey@reddit
There should be no requirement for a CCW permit. The 2a recognizes the right to keep and bear arms.
Done.
juggarjew@reddit
Most people in the military are not even combat troops, they're supporting roles and while they have gone through basic and shot a rifle. That hardly means they're somehow "better" than a civilian. I know multiple people that only shot a gun a few times in the military, shooting a beat to piss M-16 at a firing range and qualifying is something almost anyone can do, you're not special for that.
alltheblues@reddit
First, your cousin is vastly overestimating the training that most cops and veterans get. Second, they’re citizens too, and not more deserving of rights than the rest of us, especially when that’s not their job anymore and they’re otherwise just normal civilians.
Free_Road697@reddit
I know people who were military/leo and don't know jack shit about firearms. I know people who have never served a day in their life that have more firearm knowledge than officers in the military and police force.
Backround doesn't mean shit imo.
alkatori@reddit
The reason police officers are exempt is because the police unions won't support gun control if it applies to them too.
That's the reason. Full stop.
Everything said otherwise is an excuse.
Mobile_Speaker7894@reddit
Sadly people think law enforcement and the military are firearms experts. Got news for you, the majority of us (vets and leo) are not. So yes all should be held to the same standards.
David_Shagzz@reddit
For people trained in duty with it, I agree they should have exemption from certain laws. Automatic weapons, ccw, etc.
FritoPendejoEsquire@reddit
The push should be for everyone to be treated like LEOs in these situations. Not for LEOs to be treated like everyone else.
Push for more freedom, rather than more universal restrictions.
C0ldsid30fthepill0w@reddit
Are you saying the legal trainning or manipulating the weapon because the military spends weeks and 8 hr days teaching you. If you passes brm you do not need a bs cow class at all.
yourboibigsmoi808@reddit
5000000%
vuther_316@reddit
If we are going to have restrictions, they should apply evenly. Cops also ND themselves all the time, so it's not like their the paragons of gun safety or something.
Thats_what_im_saiyan@reddit
Cops should have to adhere to military rules or engagement. Amazes me that cops can use year has on civilians but it's a war crime for soldiers to do the same.
Mighty-Bagel-Calves@reddit
I've never heard of a single cop or agency that carries tear gas on them, but okay.
I've met plenty of military guys who have been exposed to OC (pepper spray) in just about all of the branches, and obviously all cops get sprayed with OC at the academy.
Seems like they have similar rules, I guess.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
Everyone should perform the same training.
No special treatment nor exceptions.
Mighty-Bagel-Calves@reddit
Training shouldn't be required to exercise a constitutional amendment.
Born-Breath-507@reddit (OP)
The issue is how would that work practically LE and military have years of training whereas civilians only have a few hour courses . Unless we say everyone has to invest years in order to qualify
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
Most LE and military do not have years of training.
Most cops shoot less than 300 rds per year, hell my underage niece shoots more in a weekend, with a 9mm pistol.
Basic firearm safety training takes minutes, perhaps an hour, with a language barrier, not years.
The entry level training required for safe firearm handling isn't rocket science, and everyone should demonstrate competency before someone let's them shoot with others.
Born-Breath-507@reddit (OP)
That makes sense . If their training is so bad why do they get to cut corners on gun applications?
OrganizationFunny153@reddit
Because the thugs of the ruling class get special privileges just like they always do. Why do you think the army in North Korea is well fed while the population starves?
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
That's a good question.
Cops have less training than a barber.
Most military training is about the same or less for firearm training.
harley97797997@reddit
While it's great your underage niece shoots that much, that's not the average for CCW holders.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
It's more than a cop is required to shoot per year.
Same goes for most military.
harley97797997@reddit
That particular person, sure. The average CCW holder no.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
Why should a ccw need to shoot a much as a cop?
I disagree with the premise of a ccw permit anyway.
harley97797997@reddit
I didn't say they need to shoot as much. My point is the average cop and military member has more training than the average CCW holder.
I also disagree with the premise of a CCW permit. Luckily 29 states also disagree with that premise.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
The public doesn't need a much firearm training as the military nor the police.
Professional carrying firearms are being paid for their ability, which includes their proficiency with its use.
Someone who is a professional should have a proficiency level MUCH greater than basic.
They're ability with a firearm skills involve active and stress situational targets in their testing.
To think the public carrying a firearm should be held to the same thing is to ignore that the reasons and likelyhood of them using.
If the private citizen is doing the same testing, perhaps we should ask why, and to what end?
harley97797997@reddit
What are you even arguing?
True
True
True
True
I didn't say this. Nor did OP.
No one said this.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
You stated the average cop or military has me training than most CCW individuals.
I don't think that's an accurate statement.
If we are talking the bare minimum training, perhaps. I don't believe that most or the average of CCW individuals have less firearm training and use that either other group.
harley97797997@reddit
It's absolutely true.
The vast majority of CCW holders, cops and military do the minimal required training.
For CCW holders that may consist of a short classroom session. Only a few states require any type of range training, and it's a one-time deal.
All cops received a week or two of range training in the academy, plus a semi-annual or annual qualification.
All military received firearms range training in basic training. Those who were required to utilize firearms on duty also received semi-annual or annual range qualifications.
This isn't even an argument. A quick Google search says 61% of firearms owners, not just CCW holders, have formal firearms training. That includes classroom and isn't necessarily range time.
100% of cops have formal firearms training and recurring range qulaificagion.
100% of the military have formal firearms training.
OG_Fe_Jefe@reddit
Depending upon the military branch their actual firearm firing might be less than 20rds.
And once completed in basic, they may never fire a weapon again in their career.
harley97797997@reddit
I don't know the basic qualifications for all branches.
True, they may never fire again, which I why is said many, and not all.
But depending on the state, the actual firearm firing may be zero for many CCW holders.
Brokenblacksmith@reddit
i say law enforcement should be held to a higher standard for everything.
how am i supposed to trust them to uphold or protect anything when they themselves are unable to follow the most basic rules and laws.
additionally, using anti-gunners argument, military and police are the only ones with 'official' training. so they should once again be held to a higher standard regarding gun use and safety. to me, this means double their wait times and have background checks that cover their on duty actions as well.
Yo_Mommas_fupa_69@reddit
He clearly hasn’t seen a single video of non combat MOS troops qualifying with a handgun, . If he had, he’d know that basic firearms training in the military basically only covers how to operate the weapon safely. Not how to grip it properly or how to shoot it competently by any stretch.
Rujtu3@reddit
You forgot to include the exceptions often made for CO’s, judges, lawyers, and small businessmen. It’s literal tyranny. No self defense for you unless you work to somehow enforce the law. So agents of the government can protect themselves and you can’t. Only agents of the government have all their rights, almost as if we’re all citizens but they’re more so. Real animal farm shit.
Germanelo@reddit
Military are already treated like civilians...we don't get special treatment in our personal lives.
divok1701@reddit
Discounts, job preferences, and automatic extra credit on civil service exams are nothing special... um, the rest of us don't get that.
islamitinthecardoor@reddit
Right but none of that is in the context of “firearms related in their personal lives.” Which is what the post is about. Veterans aren’t exempt from any firearm laws. Maybe you could find a state that considers like a military pistol qualification to be a stand in as a CCW Qual? I know at least for some of the states that require CCW classes like South Carolina, even veterans have to take the course but there may be exceptions. Otherwise I can’t think of anything that veterans have over any other civilians when it comes to gun laws.
divok1701@reddit
Correct, my response was simply to point out there are differences... though not specifically on topic, my bad.
On topic, yeah, the benefit is that veterans don't need to do the firearms safety or training course as they already have proof of competency with a firearm (... at least here in Florida.
Of course now, we don't even need the permit to carry... which is where I think this has gone off course.
The only benefit of getting the permit is that there's no 3 day waiting period when purchasing firearms.
Of course, I am sure there's a benefit in doing the class too, at least to actually know the laws and rules. I presume there will be a safe handling demonstration / range shoot as well... but I will find out when I take it next week (the shop I bought a pistol from this week gave me a CCW class for free).
islamitinthecardoor@reddit
Okay word. Yeah I’m not trying to flame you or anything
Apprehensive_Head910@reddit
If you want those benefits, go join up.
divok1701@reddit
Lol, I am too old now... I did 4 years in the civil foreign service overseas... was in the Republic of Georgia for one of their revolutions... I'm good.
listenstowhales@reddit
The reality is America both treats its veterans like Gods and like shit. Hell, look at stats for homelessness and substance abuse.
That being said, recruiters door is open, and you too can get treated like both a God and like shit!
divok1701@reddit
Oh, I know, my bil is pretty messed up physically and mentally from his time in Afghanistan seeing combat.
Fortunately, with support from family and a really accommodating wife, he's not headed beyond medical use of drugs, or became an alcoholic, or destroyed his marriage... but other guys he's served with have.
My response was just to point out there are benefits... your comment seemed to imply there wasn't any different treatment... but yeah, vets don't get either the right type or the amount of support they need in more than just one area or another.
The mental health services and support seem to be ineffective in many cases.
EdgarsRavens@reddit
Whoever told you ex-military get special treatment when it comes to gun laws doesn’t know what they’re talking about. The only people that get exempt from purchase laws, have universal conceal carry, bypass waiting periods, are cops.
The only time being ex-military comes in handy is that I can use my pistol qual on my DD-214 as proof of weapons competency for my CCW. And that’s arguably not “special treatment” since I actually had to do/earn something.
WizardMelcar@reddit
I was military. USAF in a small combat com unit. (Never saw combat - this was in the 1990’s). Our qualification was the m-16 once a year. The m9 pistol once every 4 years.
So in my 4 year career I shot the m-16 3 times. (Once in basic, then twice after joining the combat com unit). I shot the m9 once.
As a civilian, when I was shooting pistol competitions- I was shooting a couple hundred rounds a month. & shooting every week.
I am much better trained as a civilian, than I was as a military member.
brucegoosejuice@reddit
Many people in this thread not realizing that a CCW class, while it does involve teaching safe gun handling and some proper shooting principles, is also mostly about laws of when and when not to use deadly force. Makes no difference what your firearms background is when you don’t know the laws of your state and any reciprocating states. And many cops/vets do not have a great grasp on laws involving self defense in my experience.
Born-Breath-507@reddit (OP)
This! I had an 18 hour course and most of it was a guy reading a PowerPoint. However, he did let us handle guns and showed us what each part is and how to tell if the safetys engaged after all the talking we had a shooting test but 95 % was talking about the laws of carrying storing etc
theFartingCarp@reddit
I don't think there should be any hoops to jump through save for the already implemented background check we have for "hey Jack ass, are you a felon?" Like beyond that. Buy what you want. Ccw reciprocity between states, if not constitutional carry on a federal level. The onus is on people to get training or practice themselves. Same thing for military and Leo, majority of them have to do training themselves outside of what requirements they have like once a quarter/every 6 months
anoncop4041@reddit
Recently retired cop, getting my CCW permit was extraordinarily easy. The leosa permit was also incredibly easily. What surprised me was how less strict the ability to shoot in defense regular life is as when I was off duty we still had to follow the on duty models. Fewer requirements than when I was in uniform by far.
Then_Possible_9196@reddit
He’s right. They do technically have fewer requirements. LEOSA. Whether it is right or not it is the way it is. What would you prefer for these people for nationwide carry? End LEOSA or institute a national carry permit? What is your solution? Not sure that the coastal blue states will ever accept shall issue carry or constitutional carry
Not2TopNotch@reddit
My buddy is a cop and we decided to try his once a year qual while out at the range and it was easy enough that even our other buddy's 12 year old cousin was able to pass.
Not2TopNotch@reddit
For anyone curious on Omahas requirements
STATE OF NEBRASKA REVOLVER AND SEMIAUTO QUALIFICATION COURSE TARGET: Two FBI Q AMMO: 50 rounds of handgun ammunition Stage 1 3 yard line - Standing 12 shots fired - two 6 round magazines Draw and fire 1 round on first target, 2 rounds on second target and 1 round on first target in 5 seconds, holster; Draw and fire 1 round on each target, reload and fire 1 round on each target in 15 seconds (10 for SA), holster; Draw and fire 1 round on first target, 2 rounds on second target and 1 round on first target in 5 seconds, holster; Stage 2 5 yard line - Standing 12 shots fired - two 6 round magazines Draw and fire 2 rounds on each target in 5 seconds, holster; Draw and fire 1 round on each target, reload, and fire 1 round on each target in 15 seconds (10 for SA), holster; Draw and fire 1 round on first target, 2 rounds on second target and 1 round on first target in 5 seconds, holster; Stage 3 7 yard line - Standing 12 shots fired - two 6 round magazines Draw and fire 3 rounds on each target in 8 seconds, holster; Draw and fire 3 rounds on each target in 8 seconds, holster;Stage 4 10 yard line - Standing 8 shots fired - two 4 round magazines Draw and fire 2 rounds on each target in 6 seconds, holster; repeat Stage 5 15 yard line - Kneeling 6 shots fired - one 6 round magazine Draw and fire 2 rounds on each target in 8 seconds, holster; Draw and fire 1 round on each target in 5 seconds, holster
Apprehensive_Head910@reddit
Firearms training begins in the academy and covers use of force, shoot don't shoot training, force on force training, dry fire training and live fire training. The training goes on several months. The annual qualification for some agencies is normal but many cops shoot more than that, and many agencies have quarterly qualifications, night shoots, rifle qualification, shotgun qualification, shoot don't shoot and every year they hold use of force training to stay up to date on new legal updates.
The average CCL class is 8 hours with about an hour of qualification at a distance of 10 yards. So the training is not even close.
The officer is covered by state statute in each state that grants them the ability to carry as long as they are employed. If they leave before retirement, they are no longer covered. My state allows any officer during their employment to obtain a CCL at no charge. If an officer make it to retirement they are covered under federal law by the LESO ACT.
PacoBedejo@reddit
If anything, higher standards because, psychologically, they're more likely to have problems. But, same standards would be acceptable.
906Dude@reddit
One way the left fights is to divide people against each other. They have done that with law enforcement by granting them access to firearms and to carry them that citizens who are not law enforcement do not have. When laws against carry were passed, police were bought off by making them an exception.
StayStrong888@reddit
La enforcement is defense. Military is both offense and defense. There is no time where law enforcement can preemptively shoot at targets without a defensive reason whereas the military can take out targets without a defensive reason.
Put it this way, a SWAT team approaches a drug den and sees a sentry. The SWAT sniper can't just shoot the guy from a distance without another reason such as the sentry raising his gun to shoot at the SWAT team members making entry. They'll have to figure out a way to arrest or distract the sentry without firing a shot if possible.
A military sniper can take out everyone he sees on a mission without having any other people being in danger.
harley97797997@reddit
You need to be more specific. Which standards are you talking about.
LE has a nationwide CCW permit. In some states, they have certain extra privileges.
Military and ex military, in some states, have fewer requirements for a CCW (aka training, because rheyve had that training), but nothing else different than civilians.
99.9% of the standards are the same. Except when they are on duty.
firearmresearch00@reddit
I figure that if their professional training is harder and more advanced then they should have no problem fulfilling the "easy" requirements, and if for some reason civilian training is too difficult for cops then we have a bigger issue. I'm in a middle level state and it is not difficult at all to get a permit to carry or to get a gun. Cops should be held to the same level as "civilians" because they are civilians. They should also be bound by the same firearms laws for their area imo, whether that be full auto, mag capacity, barrel length, import restrictions/rosters etc. If cops had to fight criminals with CA compliant 10rd ars they would be fighting for the rights of the people they protect instead of looking down at them as a second class citizen
LMAO_try_again@reddit
That’s honestly dumb. A gun is a tool. It’s not rocket science. If I can handle it safely as a “professional” and get qualified, there’s no training a regular civilian can do that can make them MORE SAFE than me. That’s all the training for ccw is about. Being able to say you can safely handle a tool.
Being able to hit a bullseye at 25 yds is something else and probably somethin 95% of regular people with guns will (hopefully) never have to do other than at the range.
I already got saftey training in the military and you want me to get more? Gtfoh…and that’s probably what vets said 50 years ago, which is why it’s the way it is now.
ShiftyGaz@reddit
Many firearm permitting requirements need some form of certification showing firearm competence.
Law enforcement is required to certify on firearms in the academy, and then usually at least once a year for the rest of their career. A law enforcement officers badge IS certification that they have completed some form of basic firearm competency course.
Civilians can take any variation of a basic firearms course to obtain that certification (which obviously varies by state and locality).
tl;dr: That standard already exists, and law enforcement certifications are typically higher than the average civilian certification course.
prettanoi@reddit
Former army, I agree with this just in the sense that I hate having special treatment for being a vet. Also I think that cops have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that whatever "training" they have is no where close to where it needs to be to handle a paper bag, not to mention a weapon.
Mountain_Man_88@reddit
Compare the amount of firearms, use of force, and shoot/don't shoot training that a cop gets to the amount of training required to get a CCL. Some states require no training, some require classroom only, some have a super basic qualifications shoot. Even the shittiest cop firearms training is light-years ahead of civilian CCL requirements.
Cops also have LEOSA and can carry just about anywhere in the United States.
Military is a bit different because most people in the military don't get trained on handguns and don't carry them daily. Military handgun quals tend to be super basic so that officers and POGs can pass. Military also doesn't have any focus on domestic legality, they're more focused on combat applications.
But it's all a moot point because Shall Not Be Infringed. Everyone should be able to carry a gun with no permit or training required, but with the knowledge that if you're legally responsible for every bullet that leaves that gun, so it's best to have respect for it and it's best to seek your own training.
Electronic_Camera251@reddit
They have already been vetted just like having a ccw exempts you from having to pass an ncis check . What absolutely should be true and isnt to a large extent is that police should be held accountable for their actions to a much much higher standard and while they will protest that they are the most targeted and vulnerable the statistics and the resistance/sabotage to bodycams say otherwise . The levels of police law breaking at almost every level are through the roof (fun statistics are to look at the number of former police who are in some stage of the criminal justice system as compared to their total percentage of population then check out where that number is in comparison to the general public or minorities in some stage of the system…happy hunting and when you understand how hard it is for them to be successfully prosecuted the issue is shocking )modern police system has only existed since the 1890s and at no point during its history has it not been rife with corruption,violence,graft and extrajudicial corporal punishment and murder
bdash1990@reddit
They should be held to a higher standard as they have received significant amounts of training above and beyond your average citizen.
EliteEthos@reddit
Why would the training that LE and Mil be irrelevant?
It typically far exceeds what is required for a civilian.
You’re clearly bitter… but go off bud.