Minn. police associations sue NFL over stadium gun ban

[Guest PapaB]

Of course they're suing because off duty leo's can't carry but not for those with permits.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/

 

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday by the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association (MPPOA) and Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis, claims that the policy puts members of the public at an unnecessary risk by prohibiting licensed, off-duty police officers from carrying their weapons inside a stadium.

 

They'd be more correct if they changed the words "by prohibiting licensed, off-duty police officers" to say "by prohibiting patrons with permits". Apparently they think it's okay for Barney Fife to carry but not for civilian military veterans and others with permits.

[KahrMan]

If permit holders can not carry at the stadium then neither should off duty police.  Its funny how upset they got when they had to follow the same rules as normal people.

[RED333]

If permit holders can not carry at the stadium then neither should off duty police.  Its funny how upset they got when they had to follow the same rules as normal people.

Nope not funny at all, VERY SAD that some LEOs think they are better than we are.

Edited February 19, 2014 by RED333

[diablo982]

Of course they're suing because off duty leo's can't carry but not for those with permits.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/19/minn-police-associations-sue-nfl-over-stadium-gun-ban/
 

 
They'd be more correct if they changed the words "by prohibiting licensed, off-duty police officers" to say "by prohibiting patrons with permits". Apparently they think it's okay for Barney Fife to carry but not for civilian military veterans and others with permits.

Why should the Minnesota Police Association sue on behalf of permit holders? Does the average permit holder pay monthly dues to the association to represent them like the LEO's do? I wouldn't be mad at the association funded by police officers to represent police officers. Maybe the animosity should be directed at the disorganized MN gun owners who are apparently too apathetic to stand up for themselves.

[DaveTN]

Good grief, cops file suit against an anti-gun policy of the NFL and the bad guys here are the cops???

Yes, cops are a special group. HCP holders are ….. You guessed it; a special group.

If it’s illegal in MN, do what Texas did; tell the NFL it’s illegal and they can’t stop them. I suspect it’s not illegal and that’s what the lawsuit is about. If that’s the case they will lose and have to leave their guns in their cars like everyone else.

[Guest PapaB]

I'm not calling the cops bad guys. I think the lawsuit is a good thing. My comment was about the myopic scope of the suit. There's no reason they couldn't have sued to allow legal carry but they chose to narrow the focus to only off duty LEO's.

 

diablo982, there's a big difference between suing on behalf of permit holders (as you suggested) and not excluding them from the scope of the suit (as I'm suggesting). The idea that each affected group should sue separately is, imho, ludicrous. Under that idea the NRA should sue only for its members, the NSSF should sue only for theirs and each State should sue separately. The courts don't need to be tied up with dozens of suits filed over 1 single issue.

[diablo982]

I'm not calling the cops bad guys. I think the lawsuit is a good thing. My comment was about the myopic scope of the suit. There's no reason they couldn't have sued to allow legal carry but they chose to narrow the focus to only off duty LEO's.

diablo982, there's a big difference between suing on behalf of permit holders (as you suggested) and not excluding them from the scope of the suit (as I'm suggesting). The idea that each affected group should sue separately is, imho, ludicrous. Under that idea the NRA should sue only for its members, the NSSF should sue only for theirs and each State should sue separately. The courts don't need to be tied up with dozens of suits filed over 1 single issue.

You say you don't call the cops "bad guys" yet throw out an unprovoked insult by calling them "Barney Fife." To file a lawsuit, you must bring a suit on behalf of an affected party. The Minnesota Police Association obviously solicited their ranks to find an affected party. I doubt any of the officers are permit holders, so the lawsuit is restricted to LEOs carrying into stadiums. A permit holder is a totally separate class and will have to file on their own.

I am a former police officer and frankly I'm embarassed to say I used to think the conservative, gun-toting public were our allies. My fellow officers and I detested the wefare cheats, occupy movement types, etc and voted conservative. After reading this board for a couple of years, I now realize both sides hate us equally. If I was heading up the lawsuit, I'd leave out the permit holders even if I thought it was relevant. I'm confident if a MN citizens group filed the lawsuit first, they would have excluded the LEOs too. Edited February 20, 2014 by diablo982

[RED333]

You say you don't call the cops "bad guys" yet throw out an unprovoked insult by calling them "Barney Fife." To file a lawsuit, you must bring a suit on behalf of an affected party. The Minnesota Police Association obviously solicited their ranks to find an affected party. I doubt any of the officers are permit holders, so the lawsuit is restricted to LEOs carrying into stadiums. A permit holder is a totally separate class and will have to file on their own.

I am a former police officer and frankly I'm embarassed to say I used to think the conservative, gun-toting public were our allies. My fellow officers and I detested the wefare cheats, occupy movement types, etc and voted conservative. After reading this board for a couple of years, I now realize both sides hate us equally. If I was heading up the lawsuit, I'd leave out the permit holders even if I thought it was relevant. I'm confident if a MN citizens group filed the lawsuit first, they would have excluded the LEOs too.

You just might be right in the fact that we all hate LEOs, but we dont hate all, just the ones the seem to go a bit to far.

Ya know the ones that are in the news, sad thing is we dont get to see all the good things that happen out there.

Just like you dont get to see all of us that are OK, and support the good guy LEOs.

My post was aimed more at the LEOs that dont feel as you do, more aimed at the ones that think

they(LEO) are the only ones that need to be armed.

Some times it looks like we are lumping all LEOs in one pile.

Just as you put all us in one pile.

[sigmtnman]

You say you don't call the cops "bad guys" yet throw out an unprovoked insult by calling them "Barney Fife." To file a lawsuit, you must bring a suit on behalf of an affected party. The Minnesota Police Association obviously solicited their ranks to find an affected party. I doubt any of the officers are permit holders, so the lawsuit is restricted to LEOs carrying into stadiums. A permit holder is a totally separate class and will have to file on their own.

I am a former police officer and frankly I'm embarassed to say I used to think the conservative, gun-toting public were our allies. My fellow officers and I detested the wefare cheats, occupy movement types, etc and voted conservative. After reading this board for a couple of years, I now realize both sides hate us equally. If I was heading up the lawsuit, I'd leave out the permit holders even if I thought it was relevant. I'm confident if a MN citizens group filed the lawsuit first, they would have excluded the LEOs too.

 

Gee, what's not to like?  :rofl:

[ncldwell]

Better to have some good guys with guns than no good guys with guns.

[Guest semiautots]

It's the attitude displayed by some cops that, unfortunately, gets all cops lumped into one pile.  The cop that exceeds the speed limit on his way home, the cop that believes he is better than the average citizen, the cop that looks the other way when a fellow cop breaks the law.  I have known good cops and bad cops.

But it's the attitude that I remember.

[Guest PapaB]

diablo982, I apologize that one of my statements didn't come across as intended. I should've been more specific in the Barney Fife comment. It wasn't directed at all leo's. I should have said "Apparently they think it's okay for even those leo's that are less skilled to carry but not for military veterans that may have more training." I view Barney Fife as a well intentioned person attempting to work above his skill level. All professions have their Barney Fifes.

 

If you think a lot of the TGO members are anti leo, I suggest you've not read, or ignored, the many, many posts with positive comments.

[diablo982]

I appreciate your clarification. If I made a fair assessment of my former coworkers, maybe five percent shouldn't be LEO's; the rest ranged from average to outstanding. It's probably the same percentage of competence for any job. I just wish people would not be so easily manipulated by the media. We see stories about teachers molesting students, but I'm capable of reasoning that most teachers are not predators. I submit there are a lot of negative LEO posts on this forum, although they've decreased in recent months. Last week a poster celebrated the death of an LEO so maybe I was a little sensitive. I realize many gun owners do not necessarily harbor anti law enforcement views.

[mikegideon]

I appreciate your clarification. If I made a fair assessment of my former coworkers, maybe five percent shouldn't be LEO's; the rest ranged from average to outstanding. It's probably the same percentage of competence for any job. I just wish people would not be so easily manipulated by the media. We see stories about teachers molesting students, but I'm capable of reasoning that most teachers are not predators. I submit there are a lot of negative LEO posts on this forum, although they've decreased in recent months. Last week a poster celebrated the death of an LEO so maybe I was a little sensitive. I realize many gun owners do not necessarily harbor anti law enforcement views.

 

There is a LOT of respect on this board for LEO's. We know the percentages are small. We also know that we've ALL bumped into a bad one or two. Kinda like being called a racist for hating Obama. I figure a real racist is gonna hate ALL of them.

 

When it comes down to it, good cops should dislike the bad ones a lot more than me. Bad cops don't make ME look bad. Bad gun owners do.

[Paladin132]

[quote name="DaveTN" post="1113573" timestamp="1392856332"]Good grief, cops file suit against an anti-gun policy of the NFL and the bad guys here are the cops??? Yes, cops are a special group. HCP holders are ….. You guessed it; a special group. If it’s illegal in MN, do what Texas did; tell the NFL it’s illegal and they can’t stop them. I suspect it’s not illegal and that’s what the lawsuit is about. If that’s the case they will lose and have to leave their guns in their cars like everyone else.[/quote] In some ways maybe, but I would argue they aren't bad guys but elitists. Police officers think they should have special privileges because they are or we're officers. That is a concept that places them above a citizen in the hierarchy of society, which is IMO dangerous as it reinforces the "us-them" mindset that is hard for officers not to fall into, dealing with the parts of society they often do. That leads to more bad things. I know a number of officers. Most don't shoot much, and aren't super gun folks. Competent yes, but so can a civilian. So no, not bad guys, but yes elitists that need to remember they are a civilian. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guest semiautots]

I appreciate your clarification. If I made a fair assessment of my former coworkers, maybe five percent shouldn't be LEO's; the rest ranged from average to outstanding. It's probably the same percentage of competence for any job. I just wish people would not be so easily manipulated by the media. We see stories about teachers molesting students, but I'm capable of reasoning that most teachers are not predators. I submit there are a lot of negative LEO posts on this forum, although they've decreased in recent months. Last week a poster celebrated the death of an LEO so maybe I was a little sensitive. I realize many gun owners do not necessarily harbor anti law enforcement views.

 

I think the main question that many freedom lovers have is whether or not the local cop will participate in governmental tyranny.  If cops are ordered to kick down doors and seize privately owned guns, will they do it?

 

Perhaps you can shed a little light on this subject, diablo.

[DaveTN]

I think the main question that many freedom lovers have is whether or not the local cop will participate in governmental tyranny.  If cops are ordered to kick down doors and seize privately owned guns, will they do it?
 
Perhaps you can shed a little light on this subject, diablo.

How would Diablo, me or any other cops or former cops know what other cops will do? You would have to lay out the exact circumstances of the incident for anyone to give an intelligent response.

You will have a few posts from those who serve or have served telling you what they would or wouldn’t do eclipsed by the number of posts from those who have never been a cop making assumptions about what cops would do backed by absolutely no knowledge other what they read on the internet. And it would be sprinkled by the few that openly post their hate for cops. So you might want to start your own thread instead of getting someone else’s locked.

[mikegideon]

How would Diablo, me or any other cops or former cops know what other cops will do? You would have to lay out the exact circumstances of the incident for anyone to give an intelligent response.

You will have a few posts from those who serve or have served telling you what they would or wouldn’t do eclipsed by the number of posts from those who have never been a cop making assumptions about what cops would do backed by absolutely no knowledge other what they read on the internet. And it would be sprinkled by the few that openly post their hate for cops. So you might want to start your own thread instead of getting someone else’s locked.

 

Are you the thread Police?  :rofl:  Sorry, couldn't resist :)

[DaveTN]

Are you the thread Police?  :rofl:  Sorry, couldn't resist :)

No, but it will be a pretty active thread; always has been in the past.
I thought it wouldn’t be right to get the thread locked over a cop hatin’ thread. But then I realized I’m in a cop hatin’ thread; so never mind.
 

Apparently they think it's okay for Barney Fife

[Guest semiautots]

How would Diablo, me or any other cops or former cops know what other cops will do? You would have to lay out the exact circumstances of the incident for anyone to give an intelligent response.

You will have a few posts from those who serve or have served telling you what they would or wouldn’t do eclipsed by the number of posts from those who have never been a cop making assumptions about what cops would do backed by absolutely no knowledge other what they read on the internet. And it would be sprinkled by the few that openly post their hate for cops. So you might want to start your own thread instead of getting someone else’s locked.

 

OK, here's the exact scenario:

 

The US Senate ratifies the UN Arms Trade Treaty.  President Obama then declares the private ownership of military style weapons have no sporting purpose and should be reserved for police or military use only.  He declares that Treaties take precedence over Constitutional rights.  He orders the ATF, in conjunction with the US Marshals service, to plan and remove these weapons from the formerly lawful owners.  Owners are given 30 days to turn in these weapons, otherwise ownership is a Federal felony per ATF regulation.  You are a local policeman/sheriff and have been detailed to the US Marshals.  Your first meeting is the planned execution of a no-knock warrant of a known local gun collector that did not turn in his weapons per ATF regulation.

Do you participate in this raid?  Do you warn the formerly legal gun owner about the raid?

[Guest PapaB]

OK, here's the exact scenario:

 

The US Senate ratifies the UN Arms Trade Treaty.  President Obama then declares the private ownership of military style weapons have no sporting purpose and should be reserved for police or military use only.  He declares that Treaties take precedence over Constitutional rights.  He orders the ATF, in conjunction with the US Marshals service, to plan and remove these weapons from the formerly lawful owners.  Owners are given 30 days to turn in these weapons, otherwise ownership is a Federal felony per ATF regulation.  You are a local policeman/sheriff and have been detailed to the US Marshals.  Your first meeting is the planned execution of a no-knock warrant of a known local gun collector that did not turn in his weapons per ATF regulation.

Do you participate in this raid?  Do you warn the formerly legal gun owner about the raid?

 

:hijack:

[DaveTN]

Never mind the OP didn't like the thread hijack. Edited February 23, 2014 by DaveTN

[Guest semiautots]

Never mind the OP didn't like the thread hijack.

 

OK