Please Help To Keep The
"Conservative News and Views"
on FR coming by "Clicking Here"!!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 07/24/2012 7:27:38 PM PDT by South40
Cops and Gun Control: The REAL Story
One of the driving forces behind LEAA’s founding was to dispel the false impression that America’s police favor more gun control.
We know, and research backs us up, an overwhelming majority of America’s rank-and-file cops support private ownership of firearms.
That’s because they know, better than most, that disarming honest citizens does nothing to reduce crime, but will deprive citizens of the means of defending themselves from violent predators.
Many cops are firearms and shooting sports enthusiasts. (If you doubt this, count the number of law enforcement types you see next time you go to the range or on a hunting trip!) These officers know first hand that the kind of gun control popular among liberal activists will do nothing to reduce real crime or deter real criminals. They also know that the kind of extreme gun control measures being pushed by liberals today places an inordinate burden on law abiding shooting enthusiasts and legitimate gun dealers.
And many veteran law enforcement officers can recount episodes where the intervention of an armed private citizen has saved lives often the officer’s!
So Why Do so many Americans Believe Cops Want More Gun Control In part because that is what gun control advocates want you to believe. In their campaign to pass legislation the Brady Bill and the 1994 gun ban, for example, pro-gun control forces routinely called on cops to help make their case. Mostly big city chiefs and political appointees, (what we at LEAA like to call “photo op cops”) these few police bureaucrats have helped create a public impression that America’s cops favor gun control. (In some outrageous cases, police officers who actually opposed the legislation were forced by their superiors to appear in staged photographs as if they were solidly behind gun control!)
Next time you see cops willingly participate in pro-gun control debate, notice how few of them are front-line street level officers.
Recently, a Florida sheriff created headlines when he called for renewal of the 1994 Clinton Gun ban. He even demonstrated on nationwide TV the “devastating effects” that so-called banned weapons would have in the hands of criminals. It turns out the fully-automatic military weapon he demonstrated was not even covered by the 1994 ban.
This “law enforcement professional" was then exposed for what he really was: a long time liberal politician who had been appointed to the office of sheriff as part of a political payoff. Nevertheless, people like this sheriff and other police bureaucrats, often appointed by liberal big city political machines, claim to speak for rank and file police.
This is how LEAA Executive Director Jim Fotis Addresses the Issue:
I'm a cop. I worked the streets. I learned how criminals act and how they think. I've used the sidearm my department issued to me. I've got the permanent physical reminders of a cop who more than once found himself in harm's way during years of active "street" law enforcement. I survived a "classic shootout" trading shots at a distance of roughly seven feet, something most cops don't survive. Believe me when I say I know viscerally the issues that most concern rank-and-file police. I'm not a political cop nor was I a fast-track desk jockey looking for my chance at a grin-and-grip color portrait autographed by the resident of the governor's mansion or the White House.
Today, as the Executive Director of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (LEAA), I represent other cops, corrections officers, private law enforcement, crime victims, and citizens across the nation who are fed up with the futility and hypocrisy of our criminal justice system.
When I'm asked if cops support gun control, I respond with a clarification: If by gun control, you mean taking guns away from every sullen-eyed slack who pushed rock cocaine, ripped off old ladies, mugged a pensioner, murdered an equally low-life, gang banger competitor, or defined his social encounters in terms of robbery, rape or murder, the answer is a resounding yes!
Every real cop I know is all for ripping weapons away from violent, criminal street-slime.
But that is not what gun control means to the Brady’s, the Clintons, Charles Schumer and, Dianne Feinstein. Their definition of gun control means restricting the rights of, and disarming, peaceable citizens. And the answer to that idea is a loud and clear, unambiguous "NO", at least from real cops.”
Cops for Gun Control: The Big Payoff Scheme The Clinton Administration was particularly successful at enlisting police support for gun control. They funneled millions of your tax dollars in political payoffs, disguised as "research" into the pockets of national law enforcement organizations.
This era spawned several police "type" organizations with blatant anti-gun agendas, such as the so-called Police Foundation, followed by a host of clones, including the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF). One particularly heavily endowed group was International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), which has adopted a consistent anti-gun political agenda.
Other police groups such as the National Sheriffs Association and the Fraternal Order of Police which, previous to the Clinton era, tended to be neutral or leaning toward a pro-Second Amendment stance, were influenced into taking pro-gun control stands by the river of political money flowing from the Clinton Administration and its allies.
In one year during the Clinton Administration, the Police Executive Research Forum, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Sheriffs Association and the Police Foundation collectively hauled in $4.4 million in Justice Department grants. Before then the Department of Justice dollars flowed just as freely. The International Association of Chiefs of Police raked in over $630,000. National Sheriffs Association cheerfully pocketed $516,943. The Police Executive Research Forum netted $447,343. The Police Foundation accepted a more modest $221,634.
Add up the totals [$1.8 million before, $4.4 million after] and you get a small peek at the economic and political clout the Clinton White House wielded in shaping public policy and buying national police groups into line. Every federal dollar dumped into law enforcement bank accounts is quite legal. Each has a perfectly "rational" explanation. It is merely coincidence that the police groups that scurried to do Clinton' bidding happen to be the same ones that were awarded the lucrative federal grants.
Even though Clinton has been out of office for several years, the liberal influence over these police groups remains strong. Though, thanks to the efforts of LEAA and others, that influence is now declining. Several well known law enforcement groups have reverted to more pro-Second Amendment or at least neutral positions.
WHAT YOU CAN DO!
The Law Enforcement Alliance of America -- the nation's largest coalition of law enforcement professionals, crime victims and concerned citizens -- gives voice to pro-gun law enforcement. We fought long and hard against the Brady Act, the Clinton Gun and Magazine Ban of 1994. We brought together officers and police organizations, representing more than 100,000 law enforcement professionals, standing shoulder-to-shoulder in defense of our Constitutionally guaranteed rights and in complete opposition to the "Clinton Crime Bill."
Today, we at LEAA constantly educate the public and take to the halls of Congress working to pass real, street-smart, anti-crime legislation that punishes criminals and protects the rights of crime victims and gun owners. When the anti-gun forces and their media allies claim that cops support gun control, we are the only group in America that is living proof that this is a lie. But the real proof of our claim is in our numbers.
We have never had the resources equal to the federal handouts dumped into anti-gun police organization's coffers. What we do have is a dedicated cadre of committed law enforcement officers and private citizens who give voice to our position on critical issues.
Every law enforcement officer, active or former, and every concerned private citizen, who shares our belief SHOULD BE A MEMBER OF LEAA.
Join or contribute to LEAA today!
~Lt. Harry Thomas: Cincinnati Police Division
Back when concealed carry was being debated in Michigan, our county sheriff opposed it. He was thrown out of office and it appears that most of his own deputies voted against him largely based on his gun control stance.
Several years ago, a magazine put out by a police supply organization did a poll on gun control.
This poll was for the cops alone, not the chiefs etc. The cops that walk the beat or cruise the highways at night etc.
Anyway the results surprised me. Fully 90% of these line cops opposed gun control. Not even close to what the media tries to make you believe by always trotting out the police chiefs in their uniforms every time a gun control law is being pushed by the media, academics etc.
***The Clinton Administration was particularly successful at enlisting police support for gun control.***
It began before that. Police organizations and the NRA got along well. Handgun Control Inc began to find a way to drive a wedge between them with the “cop killer bullet” lie.
Then the MSM and the movie made “cop killer bullets” do the impossible but the gullible public bought it.
Cops are an after the fact force. They mop up the mess after the fact. You and you alone are the front line defense against armed intruders, contrary to what any cop will tell you. You hold your ground, make your stand, and repel all invaders who threaten you and your home. The police have no say in the matter. If the police turn on you, then they are no better than than a criminal invader, and should be dealt with accordingly. Even the police are bound by the rules of law, and they are expected to behave accordingly.
After the Stockton Ca shootings the MSM jumped on the anti rifle bandwagon.
To show how devastating the semi auto AK-47 was they shot at a watermelon. It did not explode. They shot more, it did not explode.
So they used a special soft nose bullet fired from a different firearm to make the watermelon explode, and spliced it into their film.
On the evening news you saw the firing of the AK, then they cut to the watermelon exploding, but that bullet did not come from the AK.
Unfortunately, many city Police Cheifs and county Sheriffs are political positions. Lib denizens demand much of them,
My impression of LEOs is that they are just a different type of union thug with contacts that increase their wages year after year while the rest of us foot the bill while we haven't had a raise in four or five years. They are only a little bit better that teacher union scum.
I much rather have a constable show up and take into custody a criminal that has been detained by a private citizen than to have the police show up 15 minutes too late. It is a matter of personal responsibility. There is no personal responsibility when you belong to a union that acts as a collective and holds taxpayers hostage while using taxpayer dollars to lobby and negotiate contracts that taxpayers cannot afford.
I agree.
I would rather have an armed society as intended in the US Constitution than an overly proud highly paid standing army propping up a two tiered corrupt legal system.
Anecdotal but my son is a police officer here in Illinois, where there is no form of carry legal for ordinary law abiding citizens, he polled the 45 uniformed officers in his department and every single one is in favor of concealed carry. None of those officers, in a tight spot, would turn down assistance from an armed citizen.
One of the most despicable rip-off groups in existence.
Nothing but a bunch of flatulent, fat-a**, do nothing windbags on the constant search for $$$$'s from the gov't and public.
Paid political thugs wearing the trappings of LEOs.
Disgusting group of lay-a-bouts, ner-do-wells and banquet bums.
Hear,hear!
Exactly. Police do not protect any one citizen or family. Let me say that again, because I'm sure it will come as a shock to the lib lurkers here. The police cannot and will not protect you or your family from harm.
The job of the police is to protect society from criminals. They do this through two-fold deterrence. One, criminals know that if they get caught, they are going to have to answer for their crimes. Unfortunately, courts and sentencing is often a joke, so the value of this as a deterrent is slowing eroding away. Two, after the fact they may catch a criminal and remove him/her from society.
So in the long run, the police address crime after the fact and hopefully prevent future crimes. However, that does absolutely nothing, NOTHING, to protect you or your family, friends, and neighbors if they are becoming the victims of a crime RIGHT NOW.
'round these parts the average code-3 response (lights and sirens) is on the order of 10 minutes. I don't know about you, but I can raise a lot of h*ll in 5 min and be long gone. So could your average criminal. I will not risk some {expletive} putting my family through 5 minutes of {diety} knows what. I will end his/her life in seconds and be done with it.
Recently I was stopped by the local police for driving the wrong way down an access road that I had been driving on for years. Due to construction it had been recently changed to one way and I did not notice the sign.
When the officer came to my car I had my hands on the dash and informed him that I was armed and where the weapon was.
I then displayed my permit to carry, my drivers license and insurance. He was very gracious and asked me to be more careful. He also said that my actions were the reason that I did not receive a citation.
Most of the Cops are good guys if you work with them. There are a very very few cops that are not good guys, be careful.
Since the big prestigious jobs are in major urban areas,Democrat mayors, those who want to get those jobs must conform to the Bloombergs of this world. Anytime you hear the argument that the Chiefs of Police Assoc. is for gun control, remember the above fact.
I'd bet most, if not all of those officers, in a loose spot, would run somebody in if they came across an armed citizen. That's called "situational ethics."
"Happens all the time. CHLs are real good about doing that. But, you know, by that time, we aready know they are a CHL holder -- it comes up on our screen when we run their plate number.Actually, we're glad to see a CHL come up -- because then we know we are dealing with one of the good guys!"
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.