Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion The Water Cooler OT: LAPD to ban big metal flashlights

In reply to:

---

and yes I'm a conservative

---

REALLY?? i hadn't figured that out yet!!

as a member of the NRA, they want me to be against ANY and EVERY form of gun control, but i aint. i dont need, nor does anyone else need, these assault and uzi type guns. they serve no functional purpose. and unless the govt does something here pretty quick, the assault weapon ban is fixing to run out in septenber. but, i do believe that i have the right to have handguns and game rifles with no sort of restrictions.

bigjohn

Yes, cops can still pistol whip people and can still use their billy clubs. But police officers have to file reports each time their guns are drawn (I'd love to see that report: 23:14 hours, pistol withdrawn from holster; suspect detained through use of pistol "whip" technique...).

Also, billy clubs are actually MADE to club people with. That is their purpose. Guns are made to threaten and inflict harm or defend if necessary. These tools are essential to protect the safety and to maintain the authority that police officers have.

Guns have to be metal (ceramics notwithstanding). They have to contain bullets. Billy clubs have to be appropriately "billy-club-ish." Flashlights, on the other hand, don't have to be metal and are meant to do anything more that cast light. If plastic can do the same thing, then why is this such an issue, especially if it takes another means of abuse out of the hands of bad cops without hindering the ability of good cops to use the flashlight for what it is meant for.

As I said in my first post, you aren't going to eradicate abuse by creating penalties - in all likelihood, these cops probably believe that they are above the law in this respect. Second, you aren't going to eradicate abuse through other means (pistol whipping) without a paradigm shift in the mind-set of abusive cops. Therefore, why not take some temptation away from those abusive cops by replacing their metal flashlights with plastic ones? If it leads to one less beating without any loss of reliable performance by the flashlight, then it is an undeniably good thing.

If cops begin pistol whipping or billy-clubbing people instead, then the problem will only have shifted. But this shift is indicative (in my mind) of the fact that the behavior CANNOT be regulated or eradicated (i.e. these abusers are going to find something with which to beat people, no matter what). I don't know what the next step is (b/c you can't take guns out of cops hands, and there probably is no good substitue for a billy club - except mace or tasers), but it seems that taking huge, heavy metal flashlights is a step in the right direction, if only a small one.

I was thinking about this one, and it seems to me that the cop will have to swing the billy club harder in order to do the same amount of damage. I mean, it's wood, not a 6 D cell-containing-metal flashlight. Sure, you can kill someone with it. But not as easily.

In reply to:

---

Chris Rock had a better solution: No gun control, but charge ridiculous amounts of money for ammo. Like $500 per bullet

---

So you can have lots of gun owners with absolutely no shooting experience? That is not a good solution. One of the problems with gun ownership is that people who own them don't know enough about them.

I have a concealed carry permit, and I own 4 handguns. I frequently go into a part of the city that is adjacent to a very high crime area, and I also frequently carry lots of money. I feel strongly that I have the right to defend myself using any means possible if I am made the victim of, or am about to be the victim of, a violent crime.

I have no problem with there being some kind of educational requirement and background check before being allowed to carry a firearm. Statistics show that wherever concealed carry laws are enacted, violent crime rates go down. The kind of people who are going to apply for a permit, take 8 hours of instruction, pay a fee, and submit to a beckground check are extremely unlikely to cause a problem.

We require people to get a license before driving a car, so why not require one in order to operate a firearm? You would have to take an approved class, and a test, as well as a background check before you could get your license, and you could just show yur license to the vendor in order to purchase a weapon. I know the NRA would say that that is the first step toward gun confiscation, but to me it makes good sense.

Mark

Hope that people "licensed" to have guns, we'll
behave better then me licensed to drive my "Diablo"

I have a friend who has a friend who's theory is that the government won't try to take away our guns, they'll just stop allowing bullets to be sold to the public. He actually buys some bullets with every paycheck, vacuum seals them and stores them for future use. It's an interesting theory.

The whole gun ban thing is pretty moronic anyway - like criminals care if it's illegal to have a gun. We just need to start shooting more criminals.

Pete

wow - that'll liven up this thread a bit, won't it?

And this friend who is stockpiling bullets - wouldn't it make more sense just to sve up your money, then buy a whole bunch of bullets all at once? You could save time and vacuum bags that way, I'd suspect. What some people will do in response to conspiracy theories astounds me.

I personally think a little healthy paranoia is probably a good thing but, your friend's friend's actions seem a bit over the top. I'm not a gun owner, but isn't it reasonably easy to make ammuntion? If so, how would the government stop you from doing that when they can't stop folks from cooking up some crystal meth?

jr

I know jack about guns except what I read in Harry Turtledove novels, but I think that modern ammo is a bit more complex. If you're just using slugs or shotgun shells, I think it would be easy. But jacketed armor piercing ammo would be a bit more difficult.

WOW, all right..

guns, armor piercing ammo, and crystal meth!!!

now we are gettin somewhere

bigjohn