Arming Peace Officers

Discussion for firearms and less-lethal equipment.
User avatar
Sk82
Veteran Member
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:21 am
Location: AB
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby Sk82 » Sun Mar 27, 2011 2:25 am

I can almost see the same thing happening to Alberta CPO's that happened to Sask Highway Patrol when they tried to get side arms. They asked for sidearms because of the danger of stopping private vehicles, the Government turned around then told them to stop pulling over private vehicles :crazy:

Although it is of my own personal opinion that any LEO conducting any type of traffic stop should have a side arm, I don't see this happening in my lifetime.
Police Constable

Flagstaff
Regular Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby Flagstaff » Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:43 pm

The Sol Gen's Office made it very clear that there were six things that they would not be looking at during this review and sidearms was one of them. So nothing is going to happen.

User avatar
RJB
Lord of the Poobahs
Posts: 1261
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:01 am
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby RJB » Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:09 pm

CourtOfficer wrote:I think RJB typed a few comments at the bottom of the articles! :mrgreen:

CO
haha.. I didn't. But those dozens of concerned citizens share my opinion on it. Just say no to prop 423!

Tactical
Rookie Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby Tactical » Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:19 pm

Flagstaff wrote:The Sol Gen's Office made it very clear that there were six things that they would not be looking at during this review and sidearms was one of them. So nothing is going to happen.


What were those six things that they weren't going to be looking at?

Flagstaff
Regular Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby Flagstaff » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:31 am

Tactical wrote:
Flagstaff wrote:The Sol Gen's Office made it very clear that there were six things that they would not be looking at during this review and sidearms was one of them. So nothing is going to happen.


What were those six things that they weren't going to be looking at?


They are not going to be changing any of the current rules requiring any of the following things. Sidearms, unmarked vehicles, impaired driving, criminal code, 1 & 2 digit highways and file review requirements.

HTP
Rookie Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:41 am
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby HTP » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:38 pm

One of my partners said he was reading about one alberta community that was trying to arm their peace officers. Anybody hear that?
POLICE OFFICERS: Because firefighters need heros

Flagstaff
Regular Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby Flagstaff » Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:21 pm

HTP wrote:One of my partners said he was reading about one alberta community that was trying to arm their peace officers. Anybody hear that?


Go back and look on page 3.

User avatar
FedCO
King Poobah
Posts: 1605
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Ontario,Canada
Contact:

Re: Arming Peace Officers

Postby FedCO » Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:39 pm

Bald Man wrote:Got to love our laws that would rather see the good guys handcuffed. CO's should have full police powers for everything. In the states, a peace officer whether police, corrections, conservation etc...all have the same powers. Should be that way here for us.


I 110% agree!


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest