They keep repeating the same pablam.
Kentucky's sheriffs and street patrolmen are a different matter.
NOTICE THIS SENTENCE. He is not thinking about preventing crime. He is thinking about
Before you can solve a crime it must be committed. And if is is commiteed on you, you are the victim.
He is saying that you haveing a gun, does not help him catch your killler.
But if you have a gun you will not be killed.
They can't deny this occurance with my friend Joe, however.
Carrying concealed did save his life that day.
The press just can't resist slipping in at least one backhanded slap at concealed carry laws. In this example, the writer implies that some CCW holder somewhere may have committed a violent crime. The writer doesn't have any facts to support this premise (which would certainly have been included if any such facts existed), so the issue is instead left in the theoretical realm.
Following the same line of reasoning, pigs may fly, or there may be life on Pluto.
''I don't think our membership have changed their minds,'' said Birdwhistell, a former Georgetown police chief. ''They don't think that putting more weapons out on the street is the way to solve crime.''
"No amount of FACTS will convince ME, I'm... LIBERAL MAN the steadfast bastion of Left-Wingedness! Some Superheroes wear capes, others tights, but you'll know LIBERALMAN when you see him because of the big L on my forehead. Of course, sometimes I wear tights, too, but not as part of my superhero gig..."
SECOND, I think Police Chiefs are generally horses-petuties based on the fact that most of them are kiss-butt politicians and most of them only want cops to have guns while defenseless civilians remain unable to defend themselves from armed assailants, to wit:
"The Kentucky Association of Chiefs of Police opposed the bill, saying that more guns would mean more incidences of gun-related injuries. Craig Birdwhistell, executive director of the association, said so far that hasn't happened."
Birdshistell said, ''No, we haven't experienced the problems that some of our chiefs of police have anticipated,'' but said despite the statistics, the Kentucky police chief's association is still against an armed populous.
Must be a card-carrying ACLU liberal type. Once again, he doesn't want the fact that armed civilians are perfectly harmless to society to interfere with his preconceived "feelings" that it is unsafe. Typical liberal idiot. How much longer are we going to have to put up with POS Police Chiefs like this brain-dead Nazi. (And no, I did not use the word Nazi casualty. Don't forget the Nazi's held the exact same point of view disarming people as this imbicile Police Chief.)
Go figure.
Where are THESE Demon-Rats when the assualts on our 2 amend are initiated by their own.
He's a former police chief and yet he's the Executive Director? Does this mean he doesn't own a gun anymore or does he carry illegally and it protected by his police chief friends?
Is there anyone living in Kentucky that can find out more about this person and see if he isn't a hypocrite like I think he is? Did he apply for a permit?
Did he finish him off?
Hmmm......so far? Well that sounds like he still expects it to.
BTW thanks for the flag
Yeah, forget the evidence that contradicts our "doctrine." let's not let reality get in the way of sticking to our P.C. guns.
The lesson of reality is that, in order for a crime to be "solved," a crime must first have taken place. Doesn't look like the police chiefs' standard take on this problem would have done Mr. Megerle much good.
Reality says that we're talking crime avoidance here, not crime solving.
The police chiefs' standard dogma just leaves people ripe for helpless victimhood. Their "braces-on-the-brains" approach to this problem is not only intellectually dishonest, but quite shameful in its disregard for the personal security of citizens. JMHO.
GREAT article, the irate magistrate. Thanks for the bump! best, bb.