re: #13 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

I see our basis for disagreement at it’s root. My presumption for police, ex police, reserve police that have POST training, people of good character and a demonstrable need on the same scale as myself or that guy that has to carry cash is “shall issue”.

Show me why reserve officers with the training should not be allowed to carry. The burden is IMO on you to show why not. The presumption is that good cause, good character and good training means you get to have the permit if you want it.

Any higher standard implies an ill intent on those people.

re: #14 goddamnedfrank

Older cops came up before a lot of modern practices, drug testing, dash cams, car gps logging, routine IA audits, etc. They came up at a time when society turned more of a blind eye to official abuse, institutional racism and graft. Older cops are old, and majority male, there’s a certain age when an innate crusty grumpiness sets in, why should those guys be presumed responsible enough to own a gun based on a prior life history of asserting nearly unquestionable authority.

WTF does any of that have to do with CCW? I stipulated in good standing and I will further stipulate reasonably sound body and a sharp mind still there. You are a Police skeptic assuming ill intent or irresponsibility until shown otherwise. Way to go by way of dissing people dedicated to public safety and saving your ass or mine in a jam. Wow.

You presume they just usually go bad and must prove worthiness to carry a gun. This is where you and I are a long ways apart. I presume competence until demonstrated or at least indicated by something more substantial than age.

And that will likely be my last post in this thread. Whew! Called out as a cop worshiper for respecting first responders to a crime as good guys by and large.