Posted on 07/10/2017 9:33:40 AM PDT by PROCON
A coalition of police chiefs with a history of supporting gun control initiatives are taking aim at national concealed carry legislation, saying it could “sow chaos.”
The National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, composed of an alliance of various police chief lobbying groups, on Friday penned a letter to Congress urging lawmakers to decline support for a pair of national concealed carry reciprocity bills. The measures, the H.R. 38 and S.446, respectively, would expand carry rights nationwide, in effect forcing states and local jurisdictions to respect all valid concealed carry permits, a move the group feels is a mistake.
“These misguided bills would preempt local and state perspectives on what’s best for communities by forcing states to accept weaker concealed carry standards of other states and eliminates every state’s ability to determine who may exercise the enormous responsibility of carrying a firearm, concealed or otherwise,” says the three-page letter.
(Excerpt) Read more at guns.com ...
That is exactly the situ in CA.
I’ll probably get blasted for this but I don’t care.
Certain states are more relaxed on CCW requirements than others. SC and GA for example. That’s why we don’t have reciprocity between our two states.
I personally think some people out there need to know the law and how to load, aim and shoot straight before they become a danger to the public. We have a lot of really dumb people out there who think they know everything because they like cop shows. I consider these idiots dangerous, more so with a loaded gun in public.
Training is so important.
2A is the most violated and abused right we as Americans have. It is simply disgusting as raised by previous points on this thread.
Police chiefs are political junk... hacks who are just as bad as the filthy politicians who appoint them. There are exceptions of course but overall and especially in the big democrat cities forget about it. Garbage puppets.
One would like to know the makeup of these so called group of police chiefs. How many are political hacks who never kicked in a door or made arrests, how many are homosexual, how many are affirmative action etc.
The fact is less police officers and civilians would be dead, as well as a reduction in violent crime if this reciprocity bill is passed.
Nothing new.
Police chiefs are political animals, that continue to make political decisions that are detrimental to the rank and file police officers safety.
The IACP is pro-gun control and, big-city chiefs wanted Hillary to win.
Police Group Wants Cops to Fire Warning Shots
Posted at 9:57 am on March 31, 2017 by Bob Owens
facepalm
One of the realities of law enforcement is that higher-level police brass are typically more interested in protecting their own power and advancing their own careers than they care at all about the realities officers face on the street. That detached and self-serving mindset is probably behind a new recommendation by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (and allegedly some other law enforcement organizations) that law enforcement officers should be allowed to fire warning shots.
https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/03/31/police-group-wants-cops-fire-warning-shots/
Thursday, 17 December 2015
Obama Pushes Gun Control, but Americans Oppose Assault Weapons Ban
Written by Warren Mass
President Obama continues to lobby for more federal and state gun-control laws, particularly for “assault weapons.” In fact, he specifically mentioned “assault weapons” during an October 27 speech, stating, “That’s why the IACP [International Association of Chiefs of Police ] believes we shouldn’t sell military-style assault weapons to civilians. They don’t need them. They don’t need them to hunt a deer.”
“I’ll probably get blasted for this but I don’t care.”
OK - I’ll oblige you however I don’t consider it a “blast”, just presenting an alternate view.
“Training is so important.”
There are plenty of states that don’t have that as a pre-requisite for receiving a carry permit and there’s little evidence that their law has resulted in “danger to the public.” Can you provide further support of your assertion by using data from one of these “Wild West” states that don’t require training?
Also, please quote the requirement in the language of our founding documents that requires training to exercise any of the rights mentioned. This would include speech, public assembly, publication/press, religion, etc. I anxiously await my further edification on these matters.
I always ask this question of the opponents of this type of action: Why is my marriage license and my driver’s license valid in all 50 states, but my carry permit is not? Only one of these is guaranteed by the constitution.
So is liberty.
The Second Amendment was included in the Constitution to deny the government the power to dictate who is armed and what arms they keep and bear.
History provides the solid justification. The training you want should start in kindergarten and continue until high school graduation. Adults should be presumed capable of training themselves and should be held completely responsible for the consequences of insufficient training.
Your attitude regarding training is exactly why I am not presently allowed to carry my Sig P238. I'm looking at an entire day of travel and training, after much preparation, and the payment of an as of yet unknown amount of money in order to get this pistol added to my permit. And you support this nonsense?
Very true. Problem is the rot flows down from the top. You think that NJ cops, for example, are on the side of individual gun rights? Never trust the police - any police.
Police Unions seem to do the same thing.
I’m in PA and have a concealed carry permit.
All that was required to obtain it was the completion of the sherriff’s form, and providing of 2 in-county non-blood references.
I was raised around guns and taught safety from the start. I’ve taught my kids the same. But I won’t go to a public range during prime time hours. The lack of basic handling skills will make your skin crawl. Last visit, there was a guy laying on his back, shooting an AR between his feet. Insanity.
What’s the solution?
It’s liberal police chiefs who are appointed by liberal mayors in liberal cities.
Was the firer being unsafe or just practicing from a disadvantaged position? Was the position prohibited or just unconventional on a bench rest type range set up?
He was exercising his right to practice with his arms, you were exercising yours to not like how he was enjoying his. That’s the beauty of liberty and a pair of people expressing their own version of it. You could leave or wait until he finished or complained to he RSO etc. The answer? Its called tolerating others liberty, if otherwise within bounds of the rules or context.
Me? I bought land and built my own range- anyone who visits is welcome provided they do as I say!
He was showing off, and very obviously unskilled. The people sweeping everyone else with their muzzles doing anything to help our cause, either.
I’m all for liberty. I just don’t want careless, irresponsible, or just plain stupid people giving the left more ammunition to curtail our rights.
“What’s the solution?”
I’m a big fan of natural consequences. For the range that allows unsafe acts on the firing line, the natural consequences are that people like you choose not to go there and any safety incident leads to an increase in insurance costs, thus increasing range fees and fewer people show up and they eventually close down. The market recognizes an opportunity for a range where safety is Job #1 and they start up to get your business because you feel confident when practicing there. You spread the word to like-minded PA shooters and the business grows.
All of the above occurred naturally without government interference or action. For those noobs and boobs who act unsafely in public, you have a choice. You notice them because you’re trained to have your head on a swivel so you can then avoid them. Alternatively, you could try a gentle word as one gun aficionado to another and proceed according to the response.
Is the above perfect in every instance and every unsafe individual? No but no human system can be perfect. Neither can a human-devised government action/process. Ultimately true freedom has no guarantee of absolute safety against human foible.
Good thinking. I appreciate that.
I guess I’ll just avoid the state public ranges. They don’t have range officers. Fish and game wardens stop by once in a while to ensure everyone has a permit to use the range, are adhering to range hours, and that the max loaded rounds limit is being followed. They don’t attempt to exercise control over procedures in any way.
You would avoid the public wildlife range for the same reason I don’t care to hunt on public lands. It costs my son and me money to lease hunting land so we can ensure we’re the only ones on the place. This is not the way I was raised back in the 60s & 70s but it is reality today.
Got you covered on that one. Almost afraid to defend yourself what with all the police generated bullshit afterwards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.