Originally Posted by sdsbwc
im not 100% sure about this, as i am pretty new to airsoft, but i was just playing at TTAC in toronto the other nite, and the instructor was saying things about how in the past they had members of Toronto's ETF playing there, and from my readings through all these forums we also have a lot of cops playing with us in their off time, so one thing i dont understand is why are they against us when they're on duty, but with us off duty, i mean, if anyone has some sort of contact with one of these officers, or etf members... etc, wudnt we be able to use them as some sort of reassurance that airsoft is a safe "sport" and there is no danger to the public and if it does come down to the point where the media gets involved, couldnt they defend the sport... i suppose we'd only need that defence if worst comes to worst, but its just an idea.. So i suppose this goes out to anyone who has organized an event, or has some sort of contact with an airsofting member of any police force, isnt it possibly sit down and talk with him/her.. have some sort of discussion with that person, and they maybe they cud bring that topic to their higher in command.. etc.. OR we need to find a politician that's an airsofter in thier spare time, i can see harper as a player, maybe he's hiding his lil secret from all of us..anyways just a suggestion, as i really dont wanna see this sport go down into the dirt, esp after the investments me, and im sure all of u, have already put into airsoft..
That is easily the longest run-on sentance I've ever seen.
Police don't set law, they enforce it. Laws are set by the courts and the Government, who does what's in the best interest of their continued employment. If the massive public outcry against guns and replica guns looks like a vote-swaying issue, then the Government will easily pass a useless law to swing more votes.
Things to remember:
1) It's easier to ban something outright, which costs nothing, then to legalize it with restrictions and controls (like gun registries), which cost millions.
2) The appearance of doing something (weapon bans) is usually interpretted by the general public, or the uneducated masses, as an effective control against violence of that type; even if what's done does nothing to address the root cause (criminal behavior).
3) The public, who doesn't understand or is unwilling to acknowledge the root cause, will gobble up any bullshit law if they think it makes them safer and doesn't force them to acknowledge their own poor parenting skills or their children's mental instability. I.E, Little Johnny shot his schoolmates because he was corrupted by violent video games, as opposed to asking why the parent did nothing while Little Johnny played the same game they blame for his behavior; the excuse that it was unknown to them (the parents) illustrates that the parents aren't involved in the child's life enough to recognize and react to poor behavior.