D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-11-2015, 10:35 AM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 10:31 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Washington D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier has long been one of the most anti-gun police chiefs in the nation. She'll be on 60 minutes tonight at 7:00PM EST. Apparently she's now advocating for the carrying of firearms by citizens due to the rise in active shooter situations and terrorist threats like the recent Paris attacks.

ummm .... yeah. I don't see anything about her advocating for carrying of firearms. Like any where in the article. What she is suggesting is the same active shooter training we get every year: "Run. If you can't run hide.. If you can't hide fight." Don't see anything about gun ownership at all anywhere in the article.


(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  "Not preparing yourself, its just not an option anymore."

ummm ... yeah. Like my comment above, I can't find that quote anywhere in the article. did you post the wrong article?
It's in the video.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 10:40 AM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 10:35 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(23-11-2015 10:31 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  ummm .... yeah. I don't see anything about her advocating for carrying of firearms. Like any where in the article. What she is suggesting is the same active shooter training we get every year: "Run. If you can't run hide.. If you can't hide fight." Don't see anything about gun ownership at all anywhere in the article.



ummm ... yeah. Like my comment above, I can't find that quote anywhere in the article. did you post the wrong article?
It's in the video.

No it is not. At least not in the way you are suggesting. You are piling a ton of your own agenda on top of what she said.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
23-11-2015, 10:41 AM (This post was last modified: 23-11-2015 11:03 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(22-11-2015 07:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-11-2015 06:47 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  If you actually listen to the interview she does not reverse course on her gun stance she merely states that in the off chance that you are involved in a mass shooting you should try to flee the scene or if the opportunity presents itself stop the gunman in contrast to the usual police advice of not trying to stop a crime yourself. She never mentioned guns so not sure where that came from.

I rather doubt she was advocating going up against a shooter unarmed. Consider

Yup. That's precisely what the training says. Don't matter whether you're armed or not. If you can't run and you can't hide, you attack them with anything you can find. Start throwing staplers, laptops, chairs, monitors, anything you got. This has been standard training for a while now. Run, Hide, Fight.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
23-11-2015, 11:38 AM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
The anti-gun Elites are the biggest hypocrites on earth. They surround themselves with armed guards. From the wealthiest Kings to the Mayor of a city. New report out recently shows going back to his days at Mayor of San Francisco, anti-gun Lt Governor of CA Gavin Newsom has spent MILLIONS of tax payer dollars on armed security. He's proposed gun control on citizens his entire political career, because he thinks his life is worth more than the very people that he serves.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 11:53 AM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
Wow this sounds like a religious debate.

'Well if they were allowed to really say what they wanted they would say this....'

This is no different than, "my religion says everyone goes to heaven if they believe in (whatever) and if you don't understand that you're not interpreting the word properly"

Drinking Beverage


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
23-11-2015, 12:02 PM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 11:38 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  The anti-gun Elites are the biggest hypocrites on earth. They surround themselves with armed guards. From the wealthiest Kings to the Mayor of a city. New report out recently shows going back to his days at Mayor of San Francisco, anti-gun Lt Governor of CA Gavin Newsom has spent MILLIONS of tax payer dollars on armed security. He's proposed gun control on citizens his entire political career, because he thinks his life is worth more than the very people that he serves.

How in the fuck did we go from the D.C. mayor to the CA Lt Governor?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 12:06 PM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 12:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-11-2015 11:38 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  The anti-gun Elites are the biggest hypocrites on earth. They surround themselves with armed guards. From the wealthiest Kings to the Mayor of a city. New report out recently shows going back to his days at Mayor of San Francisco, anti-gun Lt Governor of CA Gavin Newsom has spent MILLIONS of tax payer dollars on armed security. He's proposed gun control on citizens his entire political career, because he thinks his life is worth more than the very people that he serves.

How in the fuck did we go from the D.C. mayor to the CA Lt Governor?

D.C. police chief. We just did. It all ties together. If this cop is really not changing her position, and is only advocating for us to throw our shoes and hats at a terrorist with an AK47 as some of you suggest, then I'm countering it with they're all hypocrites. She gets to carry a gun, even when she's off duty due to her job. The politicians get armed guards on the taxpayer dime. The rest of us have to throw our shoes?

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 12:08 PM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 12:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-11-2015 11:38 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  The anti-gun Elites are the biggest hypocrites on earth. They surround themselves with armed guards. From the wealthiest Kings to the Mayor of a city. New report out recently shows going back to his days at Mayor of San Francisco, anti-gun Lt Governor of CA Gavin Newsom has spent MILLIONS of tax payer dollars on armed security. He's proposed gun control on citizens his entire political career, because he thinks his life is worth more than the very people that he serves.

How in the fuck did we go from the D.C. mayor to the CA Lt Governor?

Because Oakland. Drinking Beverage

Weeping

Honestly, no fucking clue. If the president is pro gun, then he won't need the secret service or something.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 12:12 PM
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 12:08 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(23-11-2015 12:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  How in the fuck did we go from the D.C. mayor to the CA Lt Governor?

Because Oakland. Drinking Beverage

Weeping

Honestly, no fucking clue. If the president is pro gun, then he won't need the secret service or something.

No. I'm not arguing they don't need security, I'm saying its hypocritical to say "I need protection right here right now, you need to call 911 and wait for the police."

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2015, 12:19 PM (This post was last modified: 23-11-2015 12:22 PM by Chas.)
RE: D.C. Police chief changing stance on guns??
(23-11-2015 10:31 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Washington D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier has long been one of the most anti-gun police chiefs in the nation. She'll be on 60 minutes tonight at 7:00PM EST. Apparently she's now advocating for the carrying of firearms by citizens due to the rise in active shooter situations and terrorist threats like the recent Paris attacks.

ummm .... yeah. I don't see anything about her advocating for carrying of firearms. Like any where in the article. What she is suggesting is the same active shooter training we get every year: "Run. If you can't run hide.. If you can't hide fight." Don't see anything about gun ownership at all anywhere in the article.


(22-11-2015 04:12 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  "Not preparing yourself, its just not an option anymore."

ummm ... yeah. Like my comment above, I can't find that quote anywhere in the article. did you post the wrong article?

I saw the actual interview on 60 Minutes, and her position is now flee, hide, or fight.

She stated that she has reversed her position on active shooter situations because most deaths occur in the first 10 minutes and the police can't get there for several minutes. She said if someone can take out the shooter before the police arrive, that would save lives.

Quote:"If you can get out, Lanier says, “that’s your first option. … If you’re in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it’s the best option for saving lives before police can get there,” she said.

If you don't think she meant using firearms, just what do you think she meant? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: