I support the Police...

[Pototan]

...by supporting common sense gun restrictions. I want the police to have protection on the job from armed assailants. I don't want them outgunned by mentally unstable crazies who can purchase weapons of war. I don't think there is any need for a civilian to be able to purchase or obtain body armor. Gun registration and licensing, stringent background checks, as well as making it more difficult to carry weapons outside of a person's home are restrictions I favor. I want our police to not be afraid to enter a facility, fearing that the culprit is better armed then they are.

The problem is that I support this effort more than the police do, themselves. You would think that wanting to be safer at a dangerous job would be issue one in their minds. Yet, police unions and officers, individually, support elected officials and candidates for office who make them less safe.

It's another example of some Americans voting against their own best interest.

[elleng]

1. and getting bad 'news.'

Hearing from daughter now, married to deputy sheriff.

[orthoclad]

2. Facing a heavily-armed public,

it seems like the blue solution is an arms race. Tanks, armored vehicles, machine guns, chemical weapons, heavy body armor...

The military model.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

3. If you think people who take the time to vote are doing so against their "best interests," that just

means you don't understand what their interests are.

[Pototan]

4. or they don't know what their interests are...

Max Neuman headed up a group of 6,000 jews in the late 1920's and early 1930's who thought that supporting Nazis and Hitler was a good idea. I think we can both agree that, in retrospect, Max and his group voted against their own best interests.

So, I respectfully disagree. Some people have voted and acted against their own best interests throughout history.

Link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_German_National_Jews

[WhiskeyGrinder]

5. People know what their interests are.

Naumann's interest was assimilation and nationalism, both things that were well established among the German Jewish population in the 1920s, and which many organizations and parties were trying to navigate during that time.

[Pototan]

6. How'd that work out for them?

...as well as so many pro-choice women following Susan Sarandon's advice in 2016 and voting for jill Stein. 3 Supreme Court Justices latter, they have lost the right to control their own bodies for themselves and their daughters.

Or union members who supported Reagan, for various reasons, only to see their union crumble and their livelihoods put in jeopardy.

I think where we diverge is that people think they are voting in their interests, at the time they vote. But later, history bears out that they voted against what was best for them.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

7. In every example you give, it's pretty simple.

People make those decisions because what they are voting for -- someone who says what they feel is the right thing when it comes to assimilation, someone who is in a third party, someone who says what they want to hear about Black people, whether explicitly or coded in welfare terms -- is more important than what they might actually lose. There are plenty of people who believe it's more likely that a strongman will level policies at the right people -- such as Jews who insist on not being more German than Germans, or Black people in general -- than turn on his supporters. And even when supporters get hurt, their interests are generally making sure that people they don't like a hurting *worse.*

Assuming that we think we know what's "best" for anyone is why Democrats have so much trouble with messaging tbh.

ETA: I mean, you hit right on it in your OP:

You would think that wanting to be safer at a dangerous job would be issue one in their minds. Yet, police unions and officers, individually, support elected officials and candidates for office who make them less safe.

"Being safer" might actually be "issue one" in their minds. They feel it makes more sense to "be safer" through larger budgets rather than other policies. Larger budgets make them feel safer than more gun control might, that's all.

[Pototan]

10. I understand your reasoning...

...but I disagree with your assessment.

Thank you for your interaction.

[RSherman]

8. Law enforcement unions suing their states....

Law enforcement unions in at least 4 states were suing to stop proposed legislation for permitless concealed carry because it would be unsafe for them on the job. (duh)

https://apnews.com/article/police-laws-gun-politics-41ba4360548ddc25672c797cd024af98

States with more guns have more incidents of law enforcement being injured/killed on the job.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/police-shootings-states-with-more-guns/

I live in Fulton Co., NY. We have a constitutional sheriff. He goes around to diners, etc., all day and gets people all ginned up about culture wars. He likes driving fear into people. He has totally radicalized my uncle. Then the sheriff held 4 rallies to remind people of their 2nd Amendment rights. He distributed "concealed carry welcome" signs to local businesses. Hmmm, getting people all fired up, then pushing guns. Seems like a great combination, huh?

In June, a state trooper was shot in I88 in Schoharie County. The shooter had just served 11 years in prison and been paroled. Instead of wondering how this man so quickly got access to a gun, the sheriff blamed Dems for being easy on crime.

https://wnyt.com/top-stories/suspect-dead-after-duanesburg-trooper-shooting/#:~:text=New%20York%20State%20Trooper%20recovering%20after%20shooting%20on%20I%2D88%20in%20Duanesburg,-By%20WNYT&text=A%20suspect%20accused%20of%20shooting,Medical%20Center%20and%20pronounced%20dead.

[Duppers]

13. Omg!.... Thanks for posting this!

Wingers should be listening to law enforcement officers for the facts.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

9. More than one interest?

I think all people have more than a single interest or single metric by which they measure their success or wellbeing. Money is a common example, but it is not the most important interest for everyone.

I will not speculate on what interests other than "not getting shot" law enforcement official have, but it occurs to me that if their own safety was their primary motivator, they might not have volunteered for such a profession.

But I could be wrong.

[Pototan]

11. We all look at issues through our life experiences...

I was a union Business Agent, representing workers in the construction industry, primarily electricians. Statistically, these are among the most dangerous jobs in the US. I negotiated contracts as part of my job.

The wages were great ($55 an hour), with top notch benefits. 100% health care and dental paid by the employer, defined pension and a great annuity. But safety was number one. What good are high wages and great benefits if you are maimed or killed on the job.

Safety was always number one, whether in contract negotiations or grievances. So, although I agree with you that people have more than one interest in the workplace, safety was always my top priority and a vast majority of the members I represented agreed.

I feel the same way about the police.

[leftstreet]

12. ftp n/t

[treestar]

14. True. And they would be less likely to get into trouble

for shooting a civilian where they could not claim the fear that they were going to be shot as easily. Now any person they encounter could well have a gun.

[Mysterian]

15. I support every citizen for the same reason

Every citizen has the same right to life as the police. Police work is not even in the top 20 most dangerous jobs in the USA.