Police department database

[fl0at]

Awesome, thanks ko. I eat at most of those places, but I'll have to check out Abner's. Never been there.

[kopacko]

[fl0at]

I'm out by MUS, which I guess would be very East Memphis.

[kopacko]

The closest one would be on G'town parkway then...unless you go to Southaven any.

[lilredhunter]

Folks not trying to stir up an argument here but I think many of you are missing the big point. What Kopacko is trying to make everyone understand is that when he puts the uniform on and gets in his cruiser he is Officially on duty. No his shift has not started, but if he crashes his cruiser he is covered by the Workman's comp for injuries. Now when he is eating lunch it does not matter if he is eating in the car or O'Chucks or @ Subway. If he is subject to call that may interrupt his lunch THEN ALL Police Dept's. consider that on duty and as such he would be doing his sworn duty. Also I am sure his dept is like most and require him to stay in "zone" even for lunch. Which really limits them to the places they can eat. I hope I explained this so everyone can understand. Plus we have had the Civilians vs Law Enforcement for far too long. One other thing many Dept's (don't know about his particular dept) but some depts do want their officers to carry when off duty. Some Chiefs
look at it as unsafe for an officer that is off duty to not have his or her weapon on them. Mainly because certain criminal types like to retaliate for being arrested.

[redbarron06]

[C. Richard Archie]

No one is contesting the LEO's commitment.

But, given the number of on duty officers, and off duty officers, if every one of them carried a full race EBR, a couple of pistols, a shotgun and two rocket launchers, there still would be only one per every 2000 people. Now, given that a certain amount of them are going to be assigned to traffic duty, some man the radios back at base, some have to sleep, some have kids ad families that they go see from time to time, what number are out "protecting" the general populace at any one time? They are charged with the investigation of crime only, not responsible for preventing it, or providing protection to the Citizens who are their employers.

LE is comprised of men and women, not super hero's with X-ray vision, ability to fly, nor some magical metaphysical ability to be all places at all times. They can not read the minds of men to forestall evil. Like my football coach said when exhorting our poorly manned West TN small town team just prior to the State Championship game against he Big City Prep school team who had more dressed out members than the population of our whole school, “They put their pants on one leg at the time, they ain’t Superman!” He was right then, and we are right now. LE is simply a job, deserving of our gratitude and respect for sure, but there should be no special privilege regarding the possession of Arms assigned above and beyond that of the average citizen. Nothing in the Constitution says that the constabulary shall be given special Rights. They chose the line of work they are in, it is simply the avocation they desired to spend their time performing to provide for themselves and their families.

If LEO’s want to change the nature of their duty, and will sign a contract with the general populace guaranteeing that we can go about our daily lives free from concern over crime of any type, then I will gladly lay down the mantle of self responsibility for my personal safety, and that of my family. But until LEO' are willing to sign that contract putting their personal property up as collateral for MY safety, I will adhere to the guarantees given me by the documents that form the foundation of our government, i.e. the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and Article 1, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution.

I have many friends, and several family members in LE, I know the difficulty of the job. I respect and admire the good ones, I fear the bad ones. They are simply common people in a specific line of work, employees of the populace, not Masters of it.

[johnharris]

[StandingTall]

I think this is a simple (ha) matter of misunderstanding the way the law is written. My take? If I am on duty (in uniform) and I need to eat... It should not be an issue, even in an establishment that serves alcohol. I also agree that it shouldn't be an issue for those with HCPs to do the same. SO LONG AS NO ONE IS CONSUMING ALCOHOL. However, If I am off duty I should be held accountable (currently) if it is discovered that I am carrying in an establishment that serves alcohol even if I haven't consumed any myself. Until that law is reinstated, my brothers and sisters in blue should be held TWICE as accountable if we are found in violation of the law.

On duty... In uniform... should be perfectly acceptable. I am subject to call during my shift yet I have to eat just like everyone else. I get tired of Taco Bell and Waffle House like the rest of you. Applebee's is sometimes appealing, but I'm not leaving my weapon in the car when I'm in uniform, thus painting a big target on my head.

Off duty is just that. Off duty. I can't and won't carry where I am prohibited by law to do so. Too much sacrifice for an overpriced hamburger or a burnt steak.

just my .02