Police chiefs call for ban on assault weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.

MD_Willington

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Messages
3,692
Location
Canuck in SE WA State.
The International Association of Chiefs of Police urged Congress to pass `an effective assault weapons ban.'

Article Link: http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/243811.html

If you're familiar with the "Joyce Foundation"... well they slipped the IACP some "spending money"...
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/ACF1875.pdf


''This is not a local issue. It has local implications, obviously. A police officer was just killed here,'' said Timoney, an ardent gun control advocate.

``The resolution of this is in the nation's capital. But there's no appetite to address that.''

U.S. Reps. Ron Klein, D-Boca Raton; Alcee Hastings, D-Miramar, and Kendrick Meek, D-Miami, all said Wednesday they support a new assault weapon ban.

''That officer was killed by an assault weapon that shouldn't have been in anybody's hands, at all,'' Hastings said angrily Wednesday.

The National Rifle Association was provided with a copy of the IACP report, but did not return phone calls for comment. Several Republican lawmakers also did not return phone calls.



Wonder why they haven't banned cars or alcohol, I mean they are just as dangerous and accessible... oh now that would be silly

Look Look, the big bad NRA has no comment...

:rolleyes:

Yes, being a LEO can be a dangerous job, I'm not making fun of that, but this guys views are typical knee-jerk reaction... since it is an election year and all, I doubt anyone will touch the issue with a 10' pole....
 
I wish they would just outlaw Death. That is the silly end that it needs to be taken to before most people would understand what good laws are and bad laws are.
 
I was going to post that Arms and the Law link, but you beat me to it.

It's not really all the police chiefs. It's just another anti-gun organization.

What's stupid is, of course, that, the officer would have been killed by the same murderer with something else, if the AK wasn't available. Of course, in Miami you can get an AKM pretty easily, as I understand it, and that's not legal for sale as it is. Of course, that might reflect on the job the police chief is doing, so they didn't bring it up.
 
I'm sorry I just don't buy the whole "to protect our officers" agrument. I sincerely appreciate the risks that our officers take for us day in and day out. But their safety should not be advanced to the point that it diminishes the rights of the people. In fact, the fact that police departments feel the need to arm their officers with "assault weapons" should justify the publics right to own them as well. Citizens should have the right to defend themselves from criminals with the same firepower as a police officer.
 
Shhhh, an AWB will STILL allow the sale of guns that
do the exact same thing,
the exact same way,
with the exact same ammo,

as the banned guns.

I can see it now:

"Ofcr. Johnson was shot and killed today by Criminal Losertelly. Good thing Losertelly was only using a Remington 7400. That would have been a tragedy!"
 
How many Florida police officers were killed by criminals with motor vehicles last year?
More than were killed by criminals with assault weapons I bet.

So therefor we should ban civilian ownership of motor vehicles, right??
Why would the actions of a criminal or the use of a particular mechanical device be the standard for the regulation of a law abiding individual?

Its the Criminals STUPID the one that shot the officer had a lengthy criminal history didn't he?
 
banned cars or alcohol, I mean they are just as dangerous and accessible

Now how would passing laws make any difference? Don't the criminals already know they are acting illegaly?

and what is with this "International" crappola? Why should we in the USA give a rat fart about gun control dictated by an International group?

Whats next? Is the UN going to start demanding to run things here?
 
I am a LE FFL and I bet you, most PD Chiefs are not in that "International Association of Chiefs of Police" or even have heard of it!
 
I am a LE FFL and I bet you, most PD Chiefs are not in that "International Association of Chiefs of Police" or even have heard of it!

What exactly is an LE FFL? Or are you saying you are an FFL that deals with Law Enforcement?

I am and FFL/SOT and have some brands that I am the desiganted Law Enforcement dealer for in my region and I am the Class III point of contact for some brands machine guns but I have never heard of an LE FFL.

On another note, I would agree with you. Most of the Agencies I deal with would not be in that orginization nor support such gun laws. Then again, this is Texas.
 
What these people are not considering is the fact that automatic weapons are already pretty much outlawed. By definition an assault weapon is a full auto. The only ones buying new full autos are some civilian city officials in Detroit and New York, illegally I might add. Idiots were using official letter head for personal purchases, no wonder they want to ban em, they got caught.
 
Shhhh, an AWB will STILL allow the sale of guns that
do the exact same thing,
the exact same way,
with the exact same ammo,

as the banned guns.

I can see it now:

"Ofcr. Johnson was shot and killed today by Criminal Losertelly. Good thing Losertelly was only using a Remington 7400. That would have been a tragedy!"
__________________
In 2006 Michael Kennedy attacked officers at a Fairfax police station. He had six guns, four were handguns, one was a 30-06 hunting rifle and one rifle which was a version of the AK47. He killed a female officer and a male officer.....with the 30-06 hunting rifle.
http://www.odmp.org/officer.php?oid=18306
 
Last edited:
Hmm, trick word there = "International." Since when do the "Internationals" think they can do a damn thing about the 2nd Amendment?
 
In a Seattle newspaper that covered this story, one reaction from a visor to the feedback section noted that he is getting weary of law enforcement acting like lobbyists for a particular cause or course of action.

These people are "public servants" and should not be lobbying, period, is what this guy was saying. Interesting observation.
 
These people are "public servants" and should not be lobbying, period, is what this guy was saying.


Very true! This is what one reader commented in the Miami Herald:

As a former police officer, I recognize that the dignity that is inherent to police work is derived from a group of men and women who assume a calculated risk to enforce the law of the land, within the boundaries of the Constitution. Any police officer who seeks to undermine that Constitution in order to make his/her job "safer" does America a grave disservice. That is not to minimize the ultimate sacrifice made by many of our officers, but when we stray from "we don't make the laws, we just enforce them," we are in very dangerous territory. Any police officer who feels that his/her job is too dangerous need not remain an officer on my account, because I recognize that the primary responsibility and right for protection of my family and myself falls to me, not to the police, despite what those who favor a police state may bleat.
 
Im283,
If I remember correctly, there was an artical in shotgun news a couple of years ago saying that the UN wants to do just that. They are wanting to create a one world government.Please bear with me while I look for a link for some further info on that.
 
Well they are not as dumb as before, and if AWB2 was to pass it would not have the loopholes that make it merely cosmetic. That is why they are attacking semi auto and capacity limits now and not bayonet lugs. We the gun rights groups have been sure to educate them, and make fun of them anytime they get a term wrong. The result is most antis are much more educated on the functionality of firearms than when the AWB was passed.

I also don't think they will add a sunset clause. Keep in mind that before the first AWB most people would have thought such a thing was foolishness. After a decade of it in place it came to be considered normal and many antis felt naked when it went away.
So just like a ban on full auto seems normal now, a ban on "assault" weapons would seem normal 10-15 years after getting on the books and most new firearm owners have never known any different.

One of the more sinister approaches I have seen is the addition of a "designed for military purposes, or based on a design created for use in..." clause that is not a limiting factor, but an inclusive one. Well most durable rifles, including many bolt actions, pump actions, etc were designed or adapted for use in a military conflict, nevermind most semi autos.

Even people here were quick to go tell the Brady bunch how wrong they are on terminology when they had thier blog up. Well, educated antis are going to be much more effective in any future bans because of it.

It is ironic that we have a post up about officers getting "assault weapons" in Miami at the same time we have one about the representative of Miami calling for a civilian ban on them: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=303201

When we consider the purpose of the Second Amendment is to curb opression and tyranny, and that any tyrant's policies would be enforced through the police, it makes little sense to arm the police better than the civilians.
I respect the job officer's do, but they need to be kept one of us, subject to the same policies and laws, or corruption and elitism are the result. We don't need knights enforcing the edicts of the nobility, we need citizens holding citizens accountable.
 
Usually when you find the word "International" in an organizations name it means they are either: ineffective, nobodys with dreams of granduer, up to no good, social elitest pushing their brand "the way things should be" or all of the above.
 
The Brady Bunch loves this organization. They consider the FOP a "fringe group", despite the fact that the FOP has about a million times more members.
Still, the DOJ says "assault weapons" account for less than 1% of all guns used in crime.
 
Last edited:
By and large, the police, at least the upper echelons of their ranks, are as much opposed to Citizens being armed as Joe Stalin was.
Yes, and I suspect many officers in the upper echelons are more politicians than police officers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top