Anti-gunners want to ban private ownership of firearms but are perfectly OK with the police having guns. This is because the anti-gunners claim that the police are extremely well trained and responsible unlike us lowly peasants. Well as Jay points out the police aren’t nearly as responsible as the anti-gunners believe:
The Seattle Police Department is apologizing for an assault rifle left unattended on the back of a patrol car Monday night, and has launched an investigation into the matter.
In addition, after an officer got back into the patrol car, it was driven away with the rifle still on the trunk. A woman also saw the rifle and followed the car to try to get the officer’s attention.
I’m unaware of any gun owner who would be so irresponsible as to not only leave an expensive firearm on their trunk but then drive off leaving that firearm on the ground. Unlike the police we who are not members of “the only ones” actually have to pay for our firearms thus we usually take some care of them. Nobody who plunked down $700.00 for a rifle wants to leave it lying on the ground somewhere.
Demonstration such as this make me not only question why anti-gunners aren’t clamoring for a prohibition on police having firearms as well. After all from what I’ve seen the average police officer is no more responsible with a firearm than the individual and oftentimes the police are far less responsible.