Suarez vs. Assam: Let’s Get Ready to Rumble!

Jeanne Assam famously stopped a spree killer, Matthew Murray, at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs in December of 2007. He’d killed four people and wounded five others when Assam, a former Minneapolis cop and security volunteer at the church engaged him. Her action and heroism that day — not to mention the lives she no doubt saved — have become prime examples held up by those on the pro-2A side for liberal concealed carry laws and the elimination of “gun free” zones. So, as you might expect, she’s been a go-to source for an informed opinion on the matter of active shooters since Sandy Hook. But much to the disappointment of pro-gunners, her views on the matter aren’t quite what they’d hoped for . . .

In a recent blog post, Assam agrees with most in the gun control industry on the NRA’s School Shield proposal. Basically, she thinks cops are really the only ones trained and qualified enough to deal with an active shooter situation.

Arm teachers? Isn’t that a bit irresponsible? I thought the same thing when they wanted to arm pilots. Let teachers be teachers, let pilots be pilots, and let the police be the police.

Folks, there is a reason police officers have to go through so much specialized training to carry a firearm. The NRA acts as if anyone who carries a gun will automatically know what to do should they encounter an active shooter. Are you kidding? I find that incredibly naive, but also very disrespectful to the law enforcement profession of which I was a part of for over 15 years.

And assault rifles? Don’t get her started.

And I don’t believe private citizens need assault rifles. Think about it. Do you really need an assault rifle?  For what reason? For dove hunting? Deer hunting? No. You don’t need one. Let them be used only by the police and military.

The emotion and anger from some of the gun rights guys at the thought of them not being able to buy assault rifles anymore kind of reminds me of someone taking a baby rattle out of a baby’s hand. The baby doesn’t need it. It doesn’t really serve a purpose other than for the idea of ownership, but since it was taken, the baby throws a fit . . . These are obviously the weapons of choice for the cowardly, psychotic mass shooters.  Keep them off the streets and take them off the shelves of gun stores.

As you might imagine, pro-gunners tend to disagree, and few more strenuously than firearms trainer extraordinaire, Gabe Suarez. He penned a response to Assam and posted it yesterday on his warriortalknews.com website. We re-print it here with his permission:

Ms. Assam,

First off I want to point out to you that you would get a stronger following, and maybe even customers, from the Armed Citizen Community, whereas I suspect the Police Community would not likely give you the time of day, much less any business.

I too have a very strong police background including SWAT, Gangs, Crime Impact Teams, Narcotics both “Drug Raid” and UC, as well as street patrol. I will say this with no reservations at all. The police community is not and has never been the bastion of skill-at-arms that it is thought to be. The gunfighter cop is a rare exception rather than the perceived norm. I suspect there are plenty of LEOs here that will agree with that.

The NRA means well, but they go a bit overboard at times…in being politically correct.

But on to your points -

1). Arm teachers? Isn’t that a bit irresponsible? I thought the same thing when they wanted to arm pilots. Let teachers be teachers, let pilots be pilots, and let the police be the police.

Actually not at all. Not all pilots are armed and not all teachers will be either. The role of protector is a self-selected one. One that not even all of those with uniforms accept by the way. As I recall, there were several police within spitting distance of the Virginia Tech event, and yet their presence did not stop Cho. And letting police be police will not change anything now. The wise preventive measure is allow those who self select as protectors of the weak to do as they have been called, rather than hinder them with asinine laws intended to do nothing but control the masses.

2). Folks, there is a reason police officers have to go through so much specialized training to carry a firearm.

And yet so many rounds that they fire miss the target altogether. I would pit the skills of any private sector trained civilian against a police officer, with an equal number of hours. The “specialized training” focused on today deals more with liability avoidance than with stopping a killer. And let’s not forget that even the most skilled and aggressive HRT unit will still have to get there, whereas the intended victim is already there.

3). The NRA acts as if anyone who carries a gun will automatically know what to do should they encounter an active shooter. Are you kidding? I find that incredibly naive, but also very disrespectful to the law enforcement profession of which I was a part of for over 15 years.

And yet you assume that anyone that has a badge would. You know in your heart that such is simply not true. I find that presumption to be arrogant. Which will stop the killer best?  Armed Irreverence or Marginally Skilled Arrogance?

4). I know private citizens who want to carry a concealed weapon have nothing but good intentions. Let me please make that clear. But to assume that the extensive training cops receive will automatically “download” into the brain of a an untrained civilian at the touch of their gun is ridiculous and foolish, and that belief could get a good person who means well, killed.

You are assuming that “Police Training” is automatically superior to anything a lowly civilian would get. I am here to vehemently disagree with you on that. Now if you are comparing some low rent CCW class done on a Saturday afternoon by some 300 pound chain smoker to a police academy class, you are right. But by the same token, one cannot compare a tier one training program specifically designed for the “on scene” armed civilian with anything short of a full on SWAT school.

5). I don’t want anyone associating me with the NRA. No offense, but I don’t. I can’t tell you how many times men from gun rights organizations have contacted me, asking me to join their public speaking circuit or asking me to be their spokesperson to represent the cause for the “private citizen to bear arms”.

Actually I don’t really care for the NRA either, but they seem to have the right people by the ba…necks so as to keep stupid laws from becoming a reality. To me they seem not extreme enough but there it is.

6). When I told these men that I was not a civilian, but a well-trained police officer, they all insisted it would be better if I not say that I was a police officer so they could use me to further their cause. Sorry, but I don’t compromise the truth for anyone or anything. I was a very well-trained police officer from an excellent and very aggressive police department. And the reason I successfully (successfully, meaning I didn’t get killed nor did anyone else) shot and killed the gunman at New Life Church is because of that very reason.

Jeanne, with all due respect, I have read a full debrief of the New Life Church event from an insider, and there was absolutely nothing that you did that could not have been done by someone else whom God placed on that spot. The bad guy finished himself off after your shots…or so I am told.

Gallant, courageous, accurate? Absolutely. But something only a highly trained cop could have done? No…sorry.

7). No, I never once had active shooter training, but my other training taught me that neither did I need to wait for SWAT. God bless SWAT, but don’t wait for them because more people could die if you do.

And yet you ask men, women, and yes…children now, to wait for the highly trained officer (and one that will run to the fight rather than away) to magically appear on scene in some tactical deux et machina? Nope…you are asking for two standards and your argument does not hold water.

8). And I don’t believe private citizens need assault rifles. Think about it. Do you really need an assault rifle? For what reason? For dove hunting? Deer hunting? No. You don’t need one. Let them be used only by the police and military.

I think you need to re-examine some of that police training you wave about…specially that first part where you swore something about the Constitution. Grab up that document…I would be happy to send off a copy if you like. Then scroll down to the amendments. Pay particular note to the second one.

I don’t need an assault rifle, even though I own several dozen. But I do want them. It is nobody’s business, including yours, what I need or do not need. That “need” thing is a hallmark of the communist’s argument. I suggest some further study. I will tell you what we really do not need…a socialist government in the USA telling anyone what to do…or its enablers.

9). The emotion and anger from some of the gun rights guys at the thought of them not being able to buy assault rifles anymore kind of reminds me of someone taking a baby rattle out of a baby’s hand. The baby doesn’t need it. It doesn’t really serve a purpose other than for the idea of ownership, but since it was taken, the baby throws a fit. I’m not trying to be disrespectful. I’m just saying what comes to mind when I see the emotional reactions of some regarding the very thought of having this particular kind of weapon taken off the shelves. These are obviously the weapons of choice for the cowardly, psychotic mass shooters. Keep them off the streets and take them off the shelves of gun stores.

Wow. You discuss emotion and anger being a point of the gun community arguement, yet your argument is filled with anger and unreasonable – almost hysterical – emotion. “These are obviously the weapons of choice for the cowardly, psychotic mass shooters.”

So our soldiers fighting for ungrateful people in Iraq and Afghanistan, the SWAT guys you so kindly ask God to bless, and even people like me and my students are “cowardly, psychotic mass shooters”? Really?

No Ms. Assam, you are wrong on so many points. What I see is a poor woman who was given a chance at redemption by God now siding with the ranks of Mordor in the push to move America to the left. No thank you.

Gabe Suarez

 

75 Responses to Suarez vs. Assam: Let’s Get Ready to Rumble!

  1. avatar16V says:

    Very standard attitude and response. Part of the LE ‘super citizens with magical training’ rhetoric. The only surprise would be if it were something other than what we got.

    • avatarJohn Boch says:

      Ditto.

      For all of Gabe Suarez’s warts and occasional douche-baggery, he sure nails this one to the proverbial church door better than Martin Luther.

      Good work Gabe. You earned this attaboy.

      John

  2. avatarRob says:

    I guess all of the retired police officers that are conducting civilian training classes are too stupid to pass on their training to lowly civilians, in her opinion of course.

    If that’s the case, maybe she’d agree that a former police officer (her) shouldn’t be allowed to carry a gun since she is no longer keeping up with her police supervised training as an active officer would be.

    • avatarBrent says:

      +1

      My instructor was a retired state trooper.

    • avatardirk diggler says:

      BTW – do we know why she is a “former” police officer??

      • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

        She was fired for lying during an internal investigation. She was handling some kind of problem on a bus, and after she was done and getting off of the bus she swore at the bus driver. The driver filed a complaint, she lied during the investigation, and she was fired for lying, at least that’s what the internet said. SO, this attitude of superiority is nothing new, she was one of those cops who felt like they ought to be able to abuse people without repercussions because she’s a Super Citizen. This is why people should stop being so reflexively worshipful and submissive to anyone and everyone who has a gun and a uniform.

  3. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Absof’nlutly, she was given a bionic eye & bionic arm(to hold the gun) when she joined the cop shop, so certainly no “mere mortal” could handle a stress situation. Get a life bitch, Randy

  4. avatarAlphaGeek says:

    Excellent point-by-point response. Bonus points for the Mordor reference at the end!

  5. avatardirk diggler says:

    I am glad Gabe stated the obvious: she didn’t take out the shooter. She just made him reassess his decision and then kill himself. Something we would expect would happen with a well-armed concealed carrier.

  6. avatarPulatso says:

    The former cop who runs my FLG disagrees with you lady. And he moved to my little city to get away from the hell hole he was a cop in. Yet he sells cowardly murder weapons to us untrained baboons by the ton.

    • avatardirk diggler says:

      My class was taught by an active duty cop who owns the range. He emphasized practice, practice, practice since most cops don’t. I would put my skill set (or frankly any of us active here) against most cops any day. At another range, one of the range officers was impressed that I can do head shots with my off hand. How many cops practice like that or go shoot 200+ rds every week?

    • avatardirk diggler says:

      My class was taught by an active duty cop who owns the range. He emphasized practice, practice, practice since most cops don’t. I would put my skill set (or frankly any of us active here) against most cops any day. At another range, one of the range officers was impressed that I can do head shots with my off hand. How many police men practice like that or go shoot 200+ rds every week?

  7. avatarRalph says:

    Wow. It seems like Jeanne Assam gets a little testy when she has the cramps.

    • avatarDryw says:

      Suarez statement re: “hysterical” is definitely pointed code. Could have gotten the point across without the dig, but I understand the why of it.

      Frankly; I feel the entire response was spot-on. May logic prevail.

      “Forces of Mordor”. Brilliant.

      • avatarRalph says:

        Suarez statement re: “hysterical” is definitely pointed code.

        Yeah, I caught that too. And it’s even more funny when you consider how testy Suarez can be when he’s the one PMS-ing.

  8. avatarMatt in FL says:

    An excellent deconstruction of a stupid argument. Her entire post offends me because the whole thing has a “more equal pig” stink to it.

  9. avatarmatt says:

    I dont know why so many people Gabe Suarez is such high regard. He is a corrupt ex-cop who plead guilty to defrauding Santa Monica out of over $100k in workmans compensation.

    • avatartheaton says:

      And that makes his comments here less valid? Nope, he was spot-on.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Do those things have anything to do with his level of tactical knowledge or his ability to relay that knowledge to others?

      • avatarmatt says:

        Gabe is also a would-be spree killer, who planned to kill the cops investigating him, and was only stopped when he had a hallucination where god talked him out of it. Do you want to give someone like that your money? Do you want to be involved in a DGU, and then have the States Attorney or Plaintiff’s attorney bring up you were trained by a disgraced ex-cop who is mentally ill and a self admitted criminal?

        • avatarNot Your Mother says:

          You do realize that– even if you are an atheist or whatever your bent here is– that you do a disservice to the entire “gun community” by calling somebody’s religious experience “mentally ill”, right?

          By invoking those terms, you are suggesting that anybody’s First Amendment rights, when used, can trump their Second Amendment rights, i.e. say something politically incorrect or “religious” and we’ll call you “crazy”. And in the wake of Sandy Hook and Aurora, “crazy” means “take away the guns”.

          Just wait until you say something that crosses the politically correct “crazy” line. You might as well go give away your guns now.

      • avatarmatt says:

        Gabe, also just like James Yeager, shows his mental instability by challenging people to duels over the internet:


        Gabe Suarez
        11-02-2012, 08:03 AM
        …And any gun guru out there that wants to test himself against our “games”, I can arrange a plane ride to a remote place in Colombia where we can play it for real with whatever guns he wants to use. We will only need one ticket back.

        http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?76039-Dynamic-simulation-training/page2

        And what tactical knowledge does Gabe have? All I can find on the internet is that he was a run of the mill cop in a suburban police department.

        • avatarmatt says:

          got the date wrong, it was 2010

        • avatarNot Your Mother says:

          Unlike Yeager, Suarez did NOT run away from several real gunfights on duty in California. Bad guys no longer live as a result.

          But let’s go ahead and detract from the point of this thread, i.e. “cops can have guns and civilians cannot” while you take cheap shots on somebody you don’t like from the safety of your living room, or quite possibly your mom’s basement.

  10. avatarST says:

    To quote Assam, her post assumes police will know what to do when they encounter an armed attacker. As the NYPD demonstrates, if anyone should be subject to 10 round magazine limits and training requirements IT IS THE POLICE!

    I don’t post this to insult the LE community, but lets call a spade a spade-most cops see their guns as just another casual tool on the belt. A rare few go beyond the department mandated training and actually develop a genuine skillset. 100 rounds semi annually ain’t it.

    Lets look at a spree shooter situation that proves Suarez right and Assam wrong; the 1994 Fairchild AFB incident. The cop who terminated the scumbag did it with a Beretta 92 loaded with 9mm NATO FMJ at a confirmed distance of 70 yards. There’s no way in hell he could have made that killshot if his only background was “military ” pistol training, all 100 rounds of it. Turned out he practiced shooting every week with a personally owned PT92 to sharpen his skills. I shudder to think of how many more innocents would have died that day had he listened to Assam and others of her flawed perspective.

    • avatartheaton says:

      You should want to insult the LE community. They are mostly arrogant criminals in uniform. The few supposed good ones are too scared or lazy to report the bad ones so there really aren’t any good ones at all.

    • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

      I can bear witness to this. Military training is by and large a joke, at least if you’re talking about the conventional forces. The Navy doesn’t even use a real gun, they familiarize with a FATS machine, and unless your rate specifically requires weapons training, that’s it for your marksmanship training!

      • avatarTom says:

        So I guess that M16 that I earned 9 expert medals with was fake…the 8 expert medals with 1911 .45 were fake…the 6 expert medals I earned with the m92 were fake…the 4 expert medals earned with the M14 while stationed aboard ship were all fake? BS! My rate of SK did not require weapons training yet not once do I ever remember qualifying with a machine during my 25 years of service from 1981 -2006. That service ranged from ships to Seabees to medical facility in Kuwait, but never any security duty. I spent as much time on the range as I could get away with and knew plenty of other Sailors that made the effort to better themselves.

    • avatartdiinva says:

      While military qualification standards won’t turn you into Doc Holiday they are not cream puff requirements like the NYPD. The standard is 75% (38 out of 50) rounds on target at ranges from 7-25 yards. You must have six head shots. As an MP/SP you qualify quarterly and a failed qualification does not do your career any good.

      I agree that Navy requirement for requalification is kind of a joke except for medics, seabees and masters-at-arms but first time an officer or officer candidate qualifies it is under the same standards as stated above.

      Try it one handed with a 1911, then tell me how good you are.

  11. avatarTim says:

    Extremely well said Mr. Suarez!

    Assam has lost all respect she may have had for doing the right thing at New Life Church.

  12. avatarstateisevil says:

    I stopped going to the public pistol range near me because cops frequented it and many of them were employing unsafe gun handling practices. One morbidly obese female whale cop lasered me several times and she was offended when I asked her to stop.

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      I have heard from a couple of range owners (not in the SF Bay Area, in case anyone assumes so) that they make a point of giving the cops a separate range area whenever possible “as a professional courtesy”… Which is code for “many of you exhibit piss-poor firearms handling safety and I don’t want you shooting my non-LEO customers”.

      On the other hand, every time I’ve seen Federal LEOs getting in some range time, they’ve been top-notch in their safety practices. They do get slightly more range time than their local LEO counterparts, but not enough to account for the difference — it’s all in the training that’s drilled into them throughout their careers.

      • avatarBarstow Cowboy says:

        Feds are safer than others?

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycTwaROa1I0

        I didn’t post the infamous ATF guy because we’ve all seen it.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          The plural of anecdote is not data, and I was simply sharing my own anecdotal evidence that federal LEOs seemed to be safer on the range than your run-of-the-mill patrol cops.

          Likewise, the individuals I have talked to about this (again, anecdotal evidence, not data) cited the training they’d received over the course of their career as the reason for their safe practices. I’m perfectly willing to believe (*cough*ATF*cough) that there are entire Federal agencies with crap firearms training programs.

        • avatarSanchanim says:

          Ha, when I was taking shooting at a local community college near Cupertino, AlphaGeek knows which one I am talking about, the instructor pointed to all the holes in the walls and ceiling. He said not one of those were made by students. All were by cops.
          Nothing against LEO’s, but it made a point!

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        I wasn’t even aware that they had ranges open to the public in the SF Bay Area! Maybe you’ve got anti-gun cops up there who only train to pass qualification. I’ve managed to miss the ceiling with every shot so far.

        • avatarSanchanim says:

          Actually there are many indoor ranges, one outdoor range in SF.
          Once you get a little more rural there are more outdoor ranges with 100 yard lines etc.

        • avatarAlphaGeek says:

          Note that the ranges I mentioned that have had to segregate cops from citizens were not in the SF Bay Area. I actually haven’t run into more than a handful of LEOs at local ranges, and those few were all at the Chabot outdoor range. And they were behaving themselves. :)

          SFPD and SJPD have some pretty nice private facilities, from what I understand. The rest of us have the choice of frequently-crowded indoor ranges or longish drives to the outdoor facilities, but we DO have them.

          On the other hand, don’t get me started on the limited choice of local gun stores. It’s indicative that one of the top CalGuns/SAF court cases right now is concerning plans to open just one new gun store in Alameda County.

  13. avatarScott says:

    Geez, settle down folks.

    If you take 100 people with their CCW, how many have had any training beyond the bare minimum required to get the license? My guess is 25, maybe 30%.

    Are there cops that make Barney Fife look like a high speed, low drag operator? You betcha. Are there CCW holders that could out shoot and out perform a SEAL in a SHTF situation? You betcha.

    Who do you want to see with a gun when it gets ugly, a standard issue cop or Tex Grebner?

    Just saying.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      “Who do you want to see with a gun when it gets ugly, a standard issue cop or Tex Grebner?”

      Whoever gets there and stops the threat first. Assuming that’s not me.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Mr. Scott, with all due respect, what does that have to do with more f’n infringement on A2?

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      Who do you want to see with a gun when it gets ugly, a standard issue cop or Tex Grebner?

      The better question Scott, is when it’s your butt on the line or the lives of your family on the line, would you rather someone at the scene can act to protect you or would you rather wait 45 minutes for a cop to show up and set up a perimeter?

    • avatarSanchanim says:

      I have to agree with Matt on this, ok shocking I know.. ;-)
      Really the point the lady has made is somewhat invalid.
      Let me explain..
      Could a cop who happens to be visiting the school make a difference, sure.
      Could a CCW teacher pounce and make a difference, sure.
      Could an armed guard at the school make a difference, sure..
      Could a cop with a 20 minute response time make a difference?
      Based on history not so much..

      The point being is whether you have armed private security, armed teachers, or armed cops in the school right there the determining factor is proximity to the conflict.
      The faster you can put lead in the BG’s direction the better. Regardless of who it is, it could also go horribly wrong, but I would rather, my kids have a fighting chance rather than praying for a miracle.

  14. avatarJamaal says:

    The first time a teacher has a ND in the classroom we will have even more insane ban proposals. God forbid the discharge injure a child…. Do NOT condone teachers carrying.

  15. avatarPeter says:

    And how much training would it take to realize that the person shooting innocent children is the monster?
    Teachers and staff who know the layout of the building and what personnel are at the scene, that day, will be superior to even the most highly trained individual, arriving minutes too late, trying to determine who is the bad guy and who are the victims while wandering around an unfamiliar building.

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Absolutely. Only teachers and school staff will have the “Know you’re target” portion mastered. Every other reponder will be behind the power curve in that regard.

  16. avatarm.ia says:

    My father in law is a college professor and a police chief that retired a year ago. Teachers can be police as well as teachers

  17. avatarwabiker says:

    To Ms Assam,
    I find Item 2 especially interesting…as are the military references.

    I (We) trained harder and more throughly at firearms proficiency as a USPSA competitor in one yr, then I ever did in my 4 yrs as a US Army Infantryman.
    At minimum, 500 rounds per week, every week.
    ie:
    50 yd Upper A-zone shots, Firing on the move, from cover (under, thru, around), multiple/partially hidden and moving targets. timed fire, slow fire, Speed drills, from the draw/table/storage. Under all weather conditions…because due to the nature of the sport, one never did know before hand, what the course of fire/weather conditions at any given match would be.

    No way, shape or form did my Military training even come close to that kind/quality of range time.
    But in all fairness to the Military, I did learn how to hump a rucksack for 25 miles, endure the nastiess of weather conditions, learn physical and mental disipline, vehicule maintenance, how to pick up cig butts, shine my boots and press my uniform, clean my AO and plethora of *other stuff*.

    So to that end, the capabilites of the *Civilian Corner* should not be underestimated or worse…flat out dismissed.

    • avatarMark says:

      Ditto. I outperformed most others on the range in both military and law enforcement training I received by applying what I learned on my own from civilian sources.

  18. avatarChrisH says:

    Excellent response from Gabe Suarez. Though one thing I’d like to see more of in these type of rebuttals is on points like #3, “The NRA acts as if anyone who carries a gun will automatically know what to do should they encounter an active shooter.” We need to be pointing out that’s not even a valid argument, it’s a textbook case of the strawman fallacy. The NRA never said that, none of us ever say that, yet the anti’s will argue as if we did because they know it’s an easy to defeat argument.

    • avatarwabiker says:

      +1
      I always try to point out that the NRA has another face, besides the 2nd Amendment.
      The fact that the NRA has been in the vanguard for the furtherment of *Fire Arms Safety/Training/Education. The foundation on which most Programs have been built.

    • avatarMister Fleas says:

      +1

  19. avatarSammy says:

    Was “am” added to the end of her name to conceal her real true perspective?

  20. avatarRob says:

    “When I told these men that I was not a civilian, but a well-trained police officer…”

    Ahem… Sweatheart, you are a civilian. The Geneva Convention does not apply to you.

    If a Soldier, Marine, Airman, or Sailor is killed in combat by a hajji it’s called a “casualty of war”, and their buddies keep up the fight.

    If you get killed by a meth-addicted thug it’s called a “tragedy”, and your fellow armed, overpaid bureaucrats get ready for a funeral in their dress uniforms.

  21. avatarMatt in SD says:

    Wasn’t she a private citizen at the time this happened? Only slight hypocrisy there. Also, she needed 10 rounds at fairly close range to dispatch ONE bad guy who ultimately still had to off himself? Her 15 years of specialized police training seems to be on par with LEO performances we’ve all seen recently.

  22. avatarLevi B says:

    Ah yes, the sporting purpose clause to the second amendment. It’s in the REALLY fine print in the margins, I guess?

    • avatarFrank Williams says:

      It’s right under the clause of the First Amendment that says the “press” – which at the time of writing referred to books, magazines, and handbills (you know, those things which came off of a printing press) – includes TV, radio, the internet and any other form of electronic journalism.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      It’s right next to where it says “the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall be subject to such restrictions as the current government officials deem reasonable”.

  23. avatarW C says:

    “He’d killed four people and wounded five others when Assam, a former Minneapolis cop and security volunteer at the church engaged him. ”

    Wait, I thought I’d read on this board that mass shootings only happen at gun free zones?

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      I’be seen that as well, but its wrong. Shootings happen in and out of gun free zones.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      Police (and retired police) are not required to obey the same laws as us peasants. As long as there’s not a politician around (and that might be iffy even), they can carry anywhere they want.

      Remember the slogan on the side of every police cruiser – “Know your place, citizen!”

  24. avatarRoss says:

    Gab’s response was great, the only thing I would ad: “Why does someone need an assault rifle”? 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or sport, it’s about killing people… period.

  25. avatarjbarr says:

    “…kind of reminds me of someone taking a baby rattle out of a baby’s hand. The baby doesn’t need it. It doesn’t really serve a purpose other than for the idea of ownership, but since it was taken, the baby throws a fit. “

    Actually, this is a great analogy…but only if you view the citizens of the United States as unthinking, emotion-driven infants controlled by a manipulative parental government (and some would argue that is the case.) But that’s NOT what the U.S. Constitution was written to define. It was written to spell out rights of the citizens and limits of the government, not the limits of its citizens and the rights of the government.

  26. avatarTotenglocke says:

    Wait, so you mean cops are arrogant and think they’re superior to us peasants? How can this be?!

  27. avatarjosh says:

    Absolutely awesome response. That is all I can say.

  28. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    Once they start arguing that you don’t need something they expose themselves as neo-liberals (non-classical liberal). You don’t that “assault rifle”, you don’t need that big house, that 4 wheel drive pickup, that 20 ounce sugared soda, etc. To each according to his need, from each according to his ability. Outside of a studio apartment and a hotplate everything you want is subject to the whims of those least qualified to make judgements about what you should or shouldn’t be allowed to own. These people just simply can’t keep their noses out of other people’s business.

    • avatarEnsitu says:

      That’s why Ayers figured he’d have to Genocide 10% of the US population before he’d convince the other 90% that HIS WAY was The Only Way

  29. avatarFrank Dio says:

    When I first trained Police Officers it was in the day’s of Gun Belts with a Model 19 S&W and Ammo in little slots around the belt.(No Cracks guy’s) Yes I’m old but still devilishly good looking) How much DUST on those rounds depended on how many times a year 85% of those officers, Troopers included were forced kicking and screaming to the Range. Mr. Gabe Suarez is spot on. I have seen some N.O. cops miss the paper completely at 50 feet. 25′ was better but forget the 4″ Bulls eye. Only after shooting the targets myself, letting them know I knew a little about what I was trying to teach them, would they show a little interest in being there. When they left the range I felt a bit better about them but wondered about the rest who only qualified when they had too, and tried to teach the teacher while wasting everyone else’s time. Probably I’ll bet all relations to Ms. Assam, all show no go.

  30. avataruncommon_sense says:

    I particularly despise Ms. Assam’s training paradigm. She totally misses the aspect of natural ability. According to her thinking, the likes of Led Zeppelin and Genesis are impossible because the members didn’t go through exhaustive training programs at music schools.

    If you have natural ability at something, you need minimal training to excel. And that applies to self defense. If you have natural ability to shoot and natural defensive skills, you need minimal training to respond effectively to an active shooter situation. I am not saying that everyone has the ability. What I am saying is that plenty of citizens do have the ability and they don’t have to go through SWAT training to be an assett.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.