DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Lightfoot OUT as mayor in Chicago

The CS monitor article was from 1997, and yes, those cops WERE outgunned. I believe that is partly why police departments got more high power weapons, as well as armored vehicles. (and some people gripe and complain about cops having those things)

Individual officers are outgunned at times. They have backup and backup usually brings a lot more.

The police are the first level of force for the state. If they were outgunned on the regular they would use the second level more often, which is the National guard.


In reference to outdated sources, some people look for headlines that suit and think we are stupid enough to not read and understand what is actually happening. It is a pattern that I have pointed out in the past, but some people think they can fool us nonetheless. I can teach someone who thinks they know everything, but I can call BS on it.

Yes, once you call them and have them show up that's true. But usually that's after the fact. After officers are overwhelmed by firepower. When officers are called to a scene, most usually it's a squad car and they aren't sure of the weaponry they are facing. But never mind reality when you always want to pick a side without thinking it through first.

Thank you. Of course they can call for back up which once it arrives they are no longer outgunned. But as you yourself stated, when they get to the scene they are often outgunned.

You are literally impossible.

I think what's impossible is you not being able to understand that when officers roll up in a squad car they often find themselves in the position of being outgunned.

And what YOU don't understand is ............eh, forget it. Forget you. Go ahead, Larry.

Okay Squeaky.

And there's the lie again.

You took me saying that "Individual officers are outgunned at times." and turned it into "But as you yourself stated, when they get to the scene they are often outgunned."

Those two statements are not equal. You will spin words to play an agenda. You, of course, will o your best to spin more, deflect and outright lie to say you were correct. You are not.

Yes, often times when officers show up to the scene they feel and are outgunned. What you have been describing are entire police departments and their collective arsenal. You are doing your usual game of playing semantics which does not work here. What you have been trying to use as your excuse is not what I said. It's you who have been twisting things and yes, you even admitted such in your own post.

You made up something I did not say so you could have something to argue about. You are a liar.

That is what I said, what you said I said is different and I notice you don't point that bit out. You again try to cover your lies with lies.

Here is exactly what I posted.


You admitted that when they show up to they scene they are outgunned at times. I suppose you must think they're not tired of that. Or some other silly use of semantics you will use to excuse this.

It is impossible to have a pro second amendment viewpoint (e.g. pro assault rifles) and then wonder why the police can be outgunned.

That circle cannot be squared.

I'm pro second amendment. I'm just not a gun nut. People who promote things such as no safety courses to carry a gun are doing more harm to the rights of common sense gun owners that they will ever do good. They give the left the ammunition to show just how irresponsible pro gun people are and use it like a sword against us. When extremist views rule the day they have no idea of the harm they are doing. That or they just don't care.

is not equal to

And they are. Until as you yourself stated, back up arrives. Once again all you have to rely on is semantics. No surprise there.

Simple reading comprehension is not "relying on semantics". Though semantics are clearly part of the written word. Skipping the meaning of words so they say what you want them to say is dishonest.

At times is semantics.