🚀 go-pugleaf

In ca.general Dick <tjdick@my-deja.com> wrote:
: In article <7r9da0$1eq@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>,
:   Merlin Dorfman <dorfman@netcom3.netcom.com> wrote:

:>      Wow!  I guess you must accept all surveys as gospel truth without
:> wondering who ran them, how the questions were phrased, whether the
:> responses were processed honestly, etc.  Apparently you regard anyone
:> who does not do that as "obstinate as a person can be."

: Touch.  If the survey only had seventeen respondents, then obviously
: the number doesn't mean much.  I *assume* that the San Diego Police
: Officers Association would not be that crooked about a survey.  I could
: be surprised, so maybe that makes me gullible.

: [Note that it was the association who ran the survey, not SDPD.]


:>  I take
:> everything I see and read--even if I agree with it--with a few grains
:> of salt.  I guess that makes me obstinate.

: I think skepticism is healthy, like many things, in moderation.  But
: what evidence would you accept?

     The important thing is for the survey to be repeatable, or to
be phrased in such a way as to show its scope of accuracy.  If
a similar survey were run by police associations, police departments,
universities, HCI, etc., and got similar results, I would accept it
within the statistical limits of accuracy.  If nobody has ever
tried a similar survey, I have to wonder why not.  If the SDPA
asked exactly 17 pre-selected officers, I would like them to reveal
that, and I would know how far to trust the survey.


:>      BTW how many chiefs are at significant risk of being shot by
:> criminals?  Not many, I suspect, compared to the ordinary officers who
:> are in physical danger every day.

: Obviously.  I'm missing your point here.

     I'm looking for an explanation of why chiefs and officers would
have such different positions on gun control.  I have a hard time
with your explanation that chiefs have become political creatures
who have given up the common sense attitudes of the officers in the
they got promoted.

: MERLIN:
:>      And according to the SDPD survey, such elitist feelings come to
:> a policeman only when he gets promoted to Chief.  Ordinary officers
:> would NEVER want to be members of an elite that is privileged to own
:> guns--they want everybody to have that right.  (If that doesn't make
:> sense to you, you will understand why I questioned the survey.)

: But it *does* make sense to me!  I detect sarcasm in your tone above,
: but do not get why it does not make sense to you.  I think that many
: guys became peace officers (as I am considering doing part-time)
: primarily to get the CCW.  Someone who becomes a chief is virtually
: assured of his CCW privilege (which all peace officers retain after
: retirement), so he gets to carry and doesn't want anyone else to.  It's
: power stinginess.  There's a personality type that feels that he must
: do everything himself and no one else can handle the responsibility --
: it applies to carrying pistols.

     But why does this power stinginess apply only to chiefs, not
to officers?  As you say, all peace officers retain the privilege
after retirement.