As a retired LEO, Citizens are facing more. Law Enforcement is a primarily reactionary force. Something happens to a citizen and LEO responds. If LEO is a reactionary, responding option, shouldn't the front line, the citizen, be more prepared?
Eh, bizarre argument... that’s like saying the common citizen should carry more anti-fire equipment than the fire department, or that the average citizen should carry a stretcher and defibrillator to work.
I am not arguing against the 2nd amendment rights, I just think your argument is hasty and sloppy. Need a bulletproof argument - and we have that. It’s our constitution.
Should we have more than they do? Every single human being should have a better equipped fire truck? A larger hose? More resistant suit? A better, more expensive respirator and a thicker boot? Every age group? You’re missing my point and assuming I’m anti-gun, which tells me you can’t read
You should definitely be allowed to have more than they do. If you want to spend the money on a better fire truck, why should that be restricted? As you're well aware, no one here is suggesting that every single human being should have a better fire truck.
Maybe I'm just bothered by their phrasing. I think our forefathers had access to warships and cannons, and the citizenry should as well. I think we're all more or less on the same page, I'm just pedantic.
Is there not health code requiring access to AED, how many smoke alarms you should have and access to all types of alarms. You can buy as many fire extinguishers as you feel you need and in what size you want. You can purchase all the equipment a fireman has most of the equipment your first responders have. I can't purchase the same equipment the military has. In some states, you can't even purchase what your local LEO has access to. It seems like a strong enough argument.
I can stop a crime with a gun that weighs less than a pound. It is unreasonable to imagine people carrying around the means with which to fight a fire.
shouldn't the front line, the citizen, be more prepared?
I think we should have access to virtually anything. I don't think every citizen should be more prepared for heart failure than a hospital/EMS... that's silly. They're specialists in their fields. Fire departments keep special anti-fire compounds on hand... I want access to the compounds, but I don't plan to buy 'em
All the same I dont think the average citizen, even the average gun owner is equipped on par with the military. even allowing for the discrepancies in what is reasonably obtainable.
view the rest of the comments →
22191933? ago
As a retired LEO, Citizens are facing more. Law Enforcement is a primarily reactionary force. Something happens to a citizen and LEO responds. If LEO is a reactionary, responding option, shouldn't the front line, the citizen, be more prepared?
22192722? ago
Eh, bizarre argument... that’s like saying the common citizen should carry more anti-fire equipment than the fire department, or that the average citizen should carry a stretcher and defibrillator to work.
I am not arguing against the 2nd amendment rights, I just think your argument is hasty and sloppy. Need a bulletproof argument - and we have that. It’s our constitution.
22202934? ago
Don't worry. You don't need a fire extinguisher. Just sit around and watch it burn while waiting for the FD to show up.
22206714? ago
Should we have more than they do? Every single human being should have a better equipped fire truck? A larger hose? More resistant suit? A better, more expensive respirator and a thicker boot? Every age group? You’re missing my point and assuming I’m anti-gun, which tells me you can’t read
22216620? ago
You should definitely be allowed to have more than they do. If you want to spend the money on a better fire truck, why should that be restricted? As you're well aware, no one here is suggesting that every single human being should have a better fire truck.
22216675? ago
Maybe I'm just bothered by their phrasing. I think our forefathers had access to warships and cannons, and the citizenry should as well. I think we're all more or less on the same page, I'm just pedantic.
22195663? ago
Is there not health code requiring access to AED, how many smoke alarms you should have and access to all types of alarms. You can buy as many fire extinguishers as you feel you need and in what size you want. You can purchase all the equipment a fireman has most of the equipment your first responders have. I can't purchase the same equipment the military has. In some states, you can't even purchase what your local LEO has access to. It seems like a strong enough argument.
22195579? ago
I can stop a crime with a gun that weighs less than a pound. It is unreasonable to imagine people carrying around the means with which to fight a fire.
22193452? ago
Well I guess if you can show me the part of the constitutional that protects my fire equipment rights I will jump right on your shillwagon.
22193276? ago
we absolutely SHOULD have access to that equipment.
22195857? ago
I think we should have access to virtually anything. I don't think every citizen should be more prepared for heart failure than a hospital/EMS... that's silly. They're specialists in their fields. Fire departments keep special anti-fire compounds on hand... I want access to the compounds, but I don't plan to buy 'em
22196011? ago
All the same I dont think the average citizen, even the average gun owner is equipped on par with the military. even allowing for the discrepancies in what is reasonably obtainable.