[harley45]

The royal robbin threads got me thinking about this, We have a guy at our idpa club who showed up dressed in a domke photo vest surplus bdu pants the emerson knife tricked out .45 (with a fiberoptic front sight) A brand new set of danner boots, and drove to the club in a new tahoe with all the trimmings. Some of us were in awe of our new guru untill he went to load his first mag and tried to put his bullets in backwards!!!
Anyone else got a true story like this, or is Indiana the only state with posers?

Before everyone yells this guys attitude toward those of us with actual wear marks on our equip warrants his poser title, even when we tried to show him how to use his new gun he was still maintaining he was a graduate of one of the biggest shooting schools in the country.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: harley45 on 2001-09-27 20:01 ]</font>

 

[Shane1911]

Just to set the record straight, I was carrying a Benchmade, not an Emerson. :grin:

 

[harley45]

I changed the names to protect the ignorant
:razz:

 

[JLM]

Are you guys sure the hollowed out part of the errrrrrr bullet 'thingy' is supposed to point to the front? :lol:

Also, what do you clean your Danners with? :grin:

 

[harley45]

Yeah the hallowed out thingy is supposed to point to the front, But more importantly the round hole at the end of the gun is also suppose to always point at the front!

 

[Mikey]

I had my bushing engraved "This Side Toward Enemy" :smile:

Mikey

 

[Monty Grubbs]

Here's something even more sad. The L.E. officer that is a tactical poser!! We have a few here in town. Gotta love these guys, all dressed up, with a badge, and no place to go, and no one to show!!

Then again, we also have a few that would probably not carry a sidearm if they were not required to. Too sad! One time I asked an officer what he thought of that Sig 220 he carried. He loooked at me dumbfounded. It took him a minute to realize I was asking his opinion of his sidearm.


Guys, don't get me wrong. 99.9% of the time, my loyalties are with the boys in blue. Especially in our area. But, it does aggravate the average citizen to see "poser" cops, or ones that are just trying to ride it out til retirement.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Monty Grubbs on 2001-09-28 12:54 ]</font>

 

[Fred]

OK, I'll play. Local gun club has a low key combat shoot second Saturday morning each month. Mom and pops show up, as do some youngins' who do pretty doggone well for themselves. 5 stages, six rounds each, so revo friendly. Newcomers are welcomed and taken care of. Any help they need they get.

Guy shows up last time out. Claims (loudly) he's a cop and is "just here for the practice". RO asks if he needs any help - he looks at the RO like he must be kidding. Cop is dressed in BDU's, two folders, big black boots, and a gut that reached to Nevada! :smile: Watched him on the first stage. Started out by violating safety rule about no mag in gun until at the firing line. He proceeded to hit the "hostage" right off, while missing the "bad guy". Pretty much the way the rest of the stages went. Didn't see the final scores, but have to believe he was way down on his. When he was done, he hitched up his pants and smugly announced that he probably wouldn't be back, because he needed "a little more competition than he could get here". Sheesh! This guy was not only an idiot, he was a scary idiot! :roll:

 

[harley45]

Monte, we've got cops around here who don't carry a gun or wear a vest at all times, still after one of the local sherrif deputies was killed a few years back, due to him not having a gun, or even his radio.

 

[SNAPCUT]

I am Cop in NJ, and I am glad that others are witnessing these comical individuals. I did not want to think of myself as being judgemental! (I am, but I didn't want to think it.) I don't know which of these groups disturbs me more; the tactical turds or the "It's a paycheck" badges. Rest assured, not all of us fall into these groups. In regard to the guys who feel the need to let everyone know of their law enforcement "status", I extend my heartfelt gratitude to them, as they are the self designated bullet sponges of society. While they are at the convenience store wearing their "shoot me first" police t-shirts, the rest of us can find cover and concealment should a situation arise. I hold more contempt for the laziness and irresponsibility displayed by the other group. They can serve no one walking around in condition "clear". (Condition White would be a step up for these folks.) These are the guys that make fun of our training and gear, yet are always asking for assistance, and borrowing said gear. Well gang, at least they give us a laugh.

 

[JM]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JM on 2001-09-30 05:55 ]</font>

 

[Pistolero]

Thanks. Still like the Domke vest I use none the less. It's professional gear even if Wilson's popularized it with the "expensive" pistol crowd.

 

[StormMaster]

I had my bushing engraved "This Side Toward Enemy" :smile:

Mikey,

Sounds like another case of a guy who has handled more than his share of Claymore mines while in the service. :smile:

As a young infantryman, I always thought that the inscription on the Claymore (FRONT TOWARD ENEMY) was hilarious. Nowadays, I just think it's pretty cool ... and even had it stenciled on the visor of my flight helmet a few years back.

Chuck

 

[Monty Grubbs]

Harley45,

I eat lunch 2-3 times a week with some narcotics officers who consider "packing" carrying their cell phones. They are always quick to tell you that they don't really see the need to be armed at all times on duty. Granted, they do spend a lot of time on the phone, or in their office.

But they will also tell you that the ordinary citizens don't know them or their vehicles. They say only the bad guys know them, and what they drive. I am sure they are right.

It just seems that very fact would be their ultimate justification for being armed all the times. The bad guys are always on the lookout for them.

They are good guys, they just have started to slack a bit it seems.

 

[TXatty]

I'm new to this forum, and first let me say that this site has the best information on the web, bar none. Thanks to everyone who makes that happen.

Now, I'm relatively new to shooting (about 15 months) and if there's one thing I don't want to be, it's a tactical poser. However, the fact that I'm new to shooting also means that: 1) I'm early in the "accumulating" stage for all the "necessary" equipment (at least that's what I tell my wife) and 2) I don't know much about the best equipment that's out there. That's one reason I've found this site to be so valuable. I get lots of great information (both fact and opinions), and the opinions are usually backed up by real world experience.

I don't have a lot of interest in wasting my money on things that don't work, and I believe strongly in buying the best I can afford the first time, because it's (usually) cheaper in the long run. I do my homework, such as on this site, and then lay down my cash. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that means that for the moment, the quality of the equipment I do have vastly exceeds my ability as a shooter. I certainly don't want this to make me appear to be a poser, and thus my question:

What's the best thing a newbie like me can do to avoid that dreaded "poser" label?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Shane1911]

On 2001-09-29 22:20, Monty Grubbs wrote:

I eat lunch 2-3 times a week with some narcotics officers who consider "packing" carrying their cell phones. They are always quick to tell you that they don't really see the need to be armed at all times on duty.

I would really like to know what dept. these narcs work for. I guess they think they are part-time, huh? What happens if someone needs a cop and they're all that's around? Are they gonna shrug their shoulders and walk away because:

A) They might blow their cover,
or
B) A cop without a weapon is like a car without gas.

I'm glad I don't eat lunch with those guys.

 

[Monty Grubbs]

Shane,

I don't know what to tell you really. These guys are part of a multi-agency drug task force. It is made up of officers from two city PD's and the Sherriff's Department.

They usually work in two to four man groups. They say that sometimes having a weapon on their person actually can make things more dangerous at certain times. Like making buys from certain types of individuals. I don't know, maybe their just weird.

I would say overall they are actually armed about 25-30% of the time while on duty. They are of course armed when they serve warrants.

 

[Shane1911]

On 2001-10-01 20:43, Monty Grubbs wrote:
They say that sometimes having a weapon on their person actually can make things more dangerous at certain times. Like making buys from certain types of individuals.

Monty, unfortunately most of those "certain types of individuals" are packing themselves. There's no rules in that game. Narcs run the risk of getting capped no matter what happens. I'd rather have a gun (and back-up officers within 10 seconds if it's a well set-up sting), and take my chances. I have NO chance if I need my gun and don't have it.

 

[Monty Grubbs]

Shane,
Not to just stand up and defend these guys, but: I think you are simply wishing for a bit much here in SE New Mexico. Nine times out of ten, when a warrant is served, it is done by a few officers.

We simply do not have the manpower around here to call out everybody to bust a marijuana dealer. Sure, it's possible in the bigger cities where they have dozens or even hundreds of officers on duty each shift.
We just don't have the big "stings" you read about in SWAT magazine, or see on the news.

L.E. is a different world out here in the sparsely populated areas. Come out and witness if you don't believe me. Things are different.

I'm not defending these guys. I am just relating to everybody here what I see as a sad situation.

What I meant was, some dealers or informants they meet with do not want guns anywhere when they meet. They really don't want to get shot either!!


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Monty Grubbs on 2001-10-02 09:01 ]</font>

 

[Shane1911]

On 2001-10-02 08:59, Monty Grubbs wrote:
I'm not defending these guys. I am just relating to everybody here what I see as a sad situation.

Agreed.