Posted on 12/06/2015 5:44:37 AM PST by marktwain
Sheriff Joe Arpaio now rests near the top of those chief peace officers who vocally support defense of self and others, and exercise of Second Amendment rights. Not only did he ask concealed carriers to protect themselves and each other, but open carriers as well. From fox10Phoenix.com
Surrounded by his posse, Sheriff Joe Arpaio asked armed citizens to help protect malls this holiday season. Arpaio says nearly 250,000 Arizonans carry concealed weapons and many more are carrying in the open.In 2009, Arpaio voiced support of Constitutional or 'permitless' carry. From azcentral.com:
"I'm asking for that group to make sure that if some violent activity occurs that they take action to defend themselves, and also the people around them until law enforcement shows up," said Arpaio.
But Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio said he would support the bill, saying carriers of concealed weapons should not face permit requirements when people who carry their weapons openly do not.In 1997, Sheriff Arpaio raffled off an AR-15 that had been grandfathered in under the then recent Clinton ban on "assault weapons". From the News-Herald, 24 December, 1997.
"A gun is a gun, whether it's concealed or not," Arpaio said.
I hope that you or someone on you(r) behalf at Handgun Control Inc. is not using this single raffle (f)or a legal firearm and the national notoriety of this sheriff to pursue his or her own anti-gun agenda throughout the United States."It is clear that Sheriff Arpaio has been a proponent of an armed citizenry for a long time. He was first elected in 1992, before Arizona allowed for a concealed carry permit, and long before the state instituted Constitutional or permitless carry. To be clear, Arizona always had open carry. Constitutional carry was supposed to be protected in the State Constitution, but legislators and the courts had chipped away at that right from the beginning of statehood in 1912.
Great guy, Obamas enemy so you know he is great.
I don’t know if he would feel up to doing it, but there has to be a place for Joe in a Trump administration.
He’s got it here
>>”I’m asking for that group to make sure that if some violent activity occurs that they take action to defend themselves, and also the people around them until law enforcement shows up,” said Arpaio.<<
Am I being presumptuous when I assume that if someone takes action to defend the people around them, that they will not be held responsible if a bystander is unintentionally wounded or killed?
The same immunity that law enforcement currently has should be passed onto the citizen who uses a firearm to defend other citizens.
I carry to defend myself and my family. Not restaurant owners or store keepers or business owners. Why do I maintain this restriction? Because I seriously doubt that they will kick in a single dollar towards my legal expenses resulting from me disabling a criminal who was threatening their establishment.
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.