Thread: Why frontline cops should be armed

Originally Posted by Savage1

A FAL holder goes through as much vetting as a Police Applicant?! Care to quote your sources?
Trained in the law? S39,40,41,48 and 62 of the Crimes Act?
Trained in the use of a firearm? Don't remember that being a requirement to getting a FAL
Decision making tested under pressure? When? Where? What kind of scenarios?
Called to go into dangerous situations? Really?! Is there a blanket phone number for the nearest FAL holder?
Constant Scruitiny? I don't think so, not unless they do something to draw attention to themselves.

FAL holders do not hold the same attributes.

FAL holders (b endorsed in particular) hold the required attributes for the purpose of CC, and any deficiencies can be made up through classes and training. Concealed carriers wouldn't be getting the power and responsibility of a police officer, so directly comparing attributes is pointless.

Like I said, concealed carry for the public is a separate issue.

I think it's the exact same issue. The only gain police are getting from full time arming is immediate access to a firearm for their own self defense. Why should only the police be afforded that ability. Increased risk doesn't make their life any more valuable.