The Police Loophole - Or in a Rational World.

One of the things that annoyed me about the last AWB, was that police were excused from abiding from restrictions based on their "police" status.  They would get a letter from their command staff, and then would go buy NEW magazines and weapons us poor "civilians" weren't allowed to buy new.

I know that someone (perhaps not the pitiful few that read my scribble) would say that Mr Police Officer needs such things to perform his duties and that we should be willing allow them to have the tools they need to perform their duties, even if Joe American can't.

 Lets really think that through.

I like to think that I am pro-police.  They have a tough job to do, and they volunteer to do it. Police officers aren't the military as much as we hear they aren't civilians.  From what I see of the military, the average patrolman is paid more than the average infantryman.  In fact a Google search turned out an average income of $34K a year for Kentucky.  From another search, I was turning over incomes in the $40K range in the same state.  In my county it appears to be around $43K.  That's the same as an E-7 with 8 years of total years of service.  Of course they don't have the benefits either of the Military, no PX, no Govt medical care etc.

Do you think that means there is a difference between the military and Joe Policeman?

Lets look at it from this angle.  Even if police should be treated as Not-Civilians, they should abide by those restrictions.  Our military issues weapons to the soldiers they send out to do their work.  My understanding is they check them in and out of an arms room as required. The military owns those weapons, and not the infantryman.  This isn't the way my county handles things, around here the officer buys the weapons, magazines and other equipment.  The PD issues ammunition and provides training only.

I think that's another difference.

If a policeman violates the law is he tried in the state or federal court system, or is he tried in a military court (Assuming he is punished at all)?  Can he be sent to prison for failing to follow orders of his superiors or is he fired and has to find another job?

I think that has to be a big difference..

I'd love to read a real lawyer (not a ambulance chaser, not an environmental attorney, and not a freakin leftist, but a constitutional attorney, maybe a JAG officer?) explain to me what is a civilian and what isn't according to current military and constitutional law.

 So lets go back to my main though today.  What makes the weapons Frankenstein and Poli-lousy want to ban so dangerous? It seems to be based on appearances.  In modern America appearance matters more than reality.

Lets give the banners the benefit of the doubt.

If these weapons are so dangerous, then should the PD not require them to be checked into an arsenal at the end of the duty day?  They could take out the standard capacity 15rd Glock magazines and insert a Civilian Safe 10 rd magazine?  i mean it's only to protect the children. Why do police need pistol grips or flash hiders?  If police need those features, and they are so bad,  then shouldn't check in the weapon at the end of the day if only to protect their own families?

If the police require weapons that have evil features, or high capacity magazines then do we not all need them?   How about we talk about that in our next edition of The Crane Files?

Just Don't Know What to Say?

Doesn't it seem like the President and his party have the devil's own luck?

While the country has it's eyes on the man hunt there is a study  reporting that yes the DEMOCRATS and their policies brought the economy to the brink of collapse, after the repeated warnings of the Republicans.  I feel like I am in the woods screaming like a maniac about how this whole thing turned from being the fault of the liberal left and their insane "Poor people need to buy houses too" policies (among others) resulted in the collapse of the housing market.

Will you see this on CBS, CNN, or PBS?  Don't hold your flipping breath.