Tulsa Police Chief: Might be Time to Trade Some Freedom for Gun Control

[Larry in wyoming]

Are they prosecuting and jailing criminals?

Well here they are closing down a section of town, businesses closing because of the gun violence at night. We have stupid, not having a clue gun owners thinking they have the right to just pull out a gun to settle an argument. Back when you needed a permit to carry you had to take a safety class and learn when you were legally ok to pull your weapon to defend yourself. Not now, any moron can carry and you have stupid shootings. How is that progress?[/QUOT

 

[starnbar]

What ever happened to high visibility saturation patrols?

 

[armoredman]

I do not have an issue with background checks and some sort of common sense safety class, short and to the point. There have been some dumb ass people shooting others around here, because they did not know basic gun safety. I was raised with and around guns and most all here have also. But there are some really stupid people now with guns that are clueless.

No. Any requirements to satisfy some test means the government can interfere to make it impossible to pass. Imagine if there was a testing requirement to own a semi auto magazine fed rifle, and the "test" was written by Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi? Bad juju. Also, background checks are ALSO subjective - what are they looking for? Remember the Texas church murderer who was stopped by an armed citizen with an AR-15? The Air Force neglected to give his info to NICS to ensure he didn't pass a background check. A requirement to have a Universal background Check is a requirement to have universal registration, because without the government knowing who has what gun at all times, the background check is an abject failure. Before you say that sounds like a good idea, remember the Supreme Court ruled many years ago that criminals cannot be forced to register their guns as it violates their 5th Amendment rights against self incrimination.
The only thing I will support is mandatory firearms safety in school. You don't have to teach them how to shoot, just how NOT to shoot themselves. Parents should educate their kids, like I was, and like I did with my kid. Let the government do it, and you end up with CRT and DEI.

Age 11


Age 20

 

[armoredman]

Well here they are closing down a section of town, businesses closing because of the gun violence at night. We have stupid, not having a clue gun owners thinking they have the right to just pull out a gun to settle an argument. Back when you needed a permit to carry you had to take a safety class and learn when you were legally ok to pull your weapon to defend yourself. Not now, any moron can carry and you have stupid shootings. How is that progress?

Well, let me think - have you ever been to Arizona? We have had unregulated, unpermitted, unrestricted Open Carry since before we were a state, and we have less problems than many very restrictive areas. More importantly, when we went to Constitutional carry in 2010, our murder rate DROPPED 4 years in a row, check it out yourself at the FBI UCR. So, yes, that IS progress.
So, what YOU need is your little thugs being held responsible and not kicked out on zero bail, no matter what, and things might be a little bit different. People, (unlike the Bidens, apparently), need to be held accountable for their actions, and the others will take note.

 

[crstrode]

Is it me or is it always the police chief calling for gun control, whining he can't protect his citizens with an armed population? While the sheriff is denouncing gun control and calling for citizens to be armed?

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/tulsa-county-sheriff-wont-enforce-atf-gun-attachment-rule

Police Chiefs are appointed.
Sheriffs are elected.


edit: Oooops - someone beat me to the obvious . . .

 

[DustyGmt]

Well, let me think - have you ever been to Arizona? We have had unregulated, unpermitted, unrestricted Open Carry since before we were a state, and we have less problems than many very restrictive areas. More importantly, when we went to Constitutional carry in 2010, our murder rate DROPPED 4 years in a row, check it out yourself at the FBI UCR. So, yes, that IS progress.
So, what YOU need is your little thugs being held responsible and not kicked out on zero bail, no matter what, and things might be a little bit different. People, (unlike the Bidens, apparently), need to be held accountable for their actions, and the others will take note.

Same here in Vermont. We have had constitutional carry forever, permitless open/cc and our laws, or rather lack of gun laws haven't had any negative impact and are an extremely safe state with violence involving guns being pretty rare. The leftist would have you believe our more populated areas and cities are stricken with "gun violence" and advocate for Massachusetts style gun control.

Vermont and Arizona consistently ranked to be 2 of the most gun friendly states in the country, only very recently as of 2018 did we get all stupid with unnecessary gun laws.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” ― Benjamin Franklin

Oh. We are being asked to gve up some liberty and not really getting any safety in return.

 

[wgp]

You have to wonder which personal freedoms he has in mind. And which ones he would take away would actually prevent criminals and sociopaths from getting a gun and firing rounds into a crowd, or shooting children?

 

[Outlaw75]

Well here they are closing down a section of town, businesses closing because of the gun violence at night. We have stupid, not having a clue gun owners thinking they have the right to just pull out a gun to settle an argument. Back when you needed a permit to carry you had to take a safety class and learn when you were legally ok to pull your weapon to defend yourself. Not now, any moron can carry and you have stupid shootings. How is that progress?

50 years ago back in North Carolina we had places like that, we called 'em Federal housing projects. NC has never had constitutional carry and has only had permit carry since 1995, permits have got nothing to do with it.

 

[jmorris]

You understand that he’s onto something even if he can’t see it. Yes, if everyone was mandated to own and carry firearms, they would probably feel uncomfortable without one.

Only part he’s missing is we don’t have to give up safety with that solution. Like we would with more control over legal users of said devices.

 

[Larry in wyoming]

And then there is the very real fear of the consequences of actually using the darn thing. Justified or not, use your weapon and its going to be very unpleasant for you for quite some time I'd think.

View attachment 1158226

You understand that he’s onto something even if he can’t see it. Yes, if everyone was mandated to own and carry firearms, they would probably feel uncomfortable without one.

Only part he’s missing is we don’t have to give up safety with that solution. Like we would with more control over legal users of said devices.

 

[wmgeorge]

No. Any requirements to satisfy some test means the government can interfere to make it impossible to pass. Imagine if there was a testing requirement to own a semi auto magazine fed rifle, and the "test" was written by Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi? Bad juju. Also, background checks are ALSO subjective - what are they looking for? Remember the Texas church murderer who was stopped by an armed citizen with an AR-15? The Air Force neglected to give his info to NICS to ensure he didn't pass a background check. A requirement to have a Universal background Check is a requirement to have universal registration, because without the government knowing who has what gun at all times, the background check is an abject failure. Before you say that sounds like a good idea, remember the Supreme Court ruled many years ago that criminals cannot be forced to register their guns as it violates their 5th Amendment rights against self incrimination.
The only thing I will support is mandatory firearms safety in school. You don't have to teach them how to shoot, just how NOT to shoot themselves. Parents should educate their kids, like I was, and like I did with my kid. Let the government do it, and you end up with CRT and DEI.

Age 11
View attachment 1158211

Age 20
View attachment 1158212

I agree 100% my complaint was people who now can carry without a permit, sometimes are clueless about basic gun safety and when you are justified to use your weapon. We learned as kids how to be gun safe and gun handling basics. Modern kids do not always get that safety training. Its not about taking your guns away, its safety and common sense. Mandatory gun safety in schools but taught by gun owners.

 

[DustyGmt]

I once interviewed a criminology professor, who, for 30 years in his previous career had been a cop and a police chief. I asked him how many times he personally, or any of his fellow officers or the officers he supervised, had arrived at the scene of a violent crime in time to stop the crime and to protect the victim. His answer: "Not once in my entire career."

If asked the same question, I'd bet that Chief Franklin would give a similar answer. As a result, he does not understand what "protecting citizens from violent crime" means, because he has very little experience doing this.

He believes that arriving after the event is over, putting up barricade tape, initiating an investigation, collecting evidence, interviewing participants, and creating reports is "protecting citizens from violent crime". That chasing down perpetrators once they've been identified, and sometimes extracting perpetrators from holes they have crawled into are "protecting citizens from violent crime". That operating jails and building legally convincing cases against the perps are "protecting citizens from violent crime".

Actually, NONE of these activities protects me when a perp points a gun at me and demands my phone, wallet, and car keys. Stopping this threat, in the moment, before the perp can shoot me, is what "protecting citizens from violent crime" REALLY means.

Citizens are their own first responders to violent crime. Cops simply can't do this. It is pitiful that Chief Franklin doesn't understand this fact.

Best post of the thread IMO. Exactly right.

 

[I6turbo]

Once in a while the law is there in time to make a difference.

Local FBI agent told me this one. Seems there is a bank handy to the FBI headquarters where many FBI personnel do their banking. So, one day a guy hands the teller a stick up note. She is wise to the situation and says, “Say what!” The guy says out loud, “This is a hold up!” The guy behind him in line sticks a pistol in his ear and says, “This is the FBI!” Several FBI agents in the place at the time.

So if someone tries to rob a place that's already full of FBI agents, they might be able to do something. And only if they're carrying. Otherwise, it'd be up to non-FBI agents who might be already there and carrying.

The Chief's analogy to seat belts is idiotic. He probably knows that, but it's the best argument he could come up with, so he's just betting on his constituents being naive enough to go for it.

 

[theotherwaldo]

When you disarm the law-abiding then you empower the criminal.
When you refuse to punish the criminal then you no longer encourage being law-abiding.

 

[JeffG]

Thank God, and our Founding Fathers it's not up to him.

 

[I6turbo]

When you disarm the law-abiding then you empower the criminal and the government (which are sometimes one and the same).

Fixed it for you.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I think the Tulsa Police Chief has a point and I think that he could demonstrate the effectiveness of disarmament by going ahead and disarming the police to show the citizens that we are safe from them. The officers will feel safe because disarmament means safety, right?

True leaders lead from the front, not the rear.

 

[V-fib]

Criminals don't obey laws.

 

[I6turbo]

Criminals don't obey laws.

And on the general topic of criminals and laws... Are those within the "justice system" who deliberately and intentionally do not enforce laws, criminals?

 

[Larry in wyoming]

In my mind? Yes

 

[Insignificant bill]

I do not have an issue with background checks and some sort of common sense safety class, short and to the point. There have been some dumb ass people shooting others around here, because they did not know basic gun safety. I was raised with and around guns and most all here have also. But there are some really stupid people now with guns that are clueless.

Uh let's see there are 28 states that have permitless carry where is any of that happening. That position is what antigun people keep using as an excuse to infringe on our most important right. It says the Government has no legal right to interfere. The fact that we have stupidly allowed them to doesn't change that.

 

[N555]

They can have more gun control once they enforce existing laws.
How about the suspected 70,000 people who lie on the 4373 every year and get denied?
Authorities only roll up 200 to 300 of that 70,000 per year? Who believes that stops them from getting a gun?

California for example, a few years ago the state DA said "we know of at least 24,000 felons in possession of firearms but we are not going after them".

No more gun control for you.

 

[Armybrat]

Tulsa Police Chief: Might be time for a new job and place to live.

I was gonna say it looks like Tulsa needs to trade him off for a real chief of Police who will abide by his oath of office and uphold the law, rather than infringe the constitutional rights of the law-abiding citizens.

 

[Alte Schule]

As a retired LEO I have seen my share of individuals that were promoted, assigned or appointed to positions that they were horribly unqualified for. This azzhat "chief" is clearly one of those. His analogy comparing seat belt laws to 2nd Amendment rights would be laugh out loud funny if it wasn't such a serious issue.

I entrust the safety of myself, my family and my property to one person. That would be me and not someone that arrives after the fact. Although there are instances where an LEO is in the right place at the right time to stop a violent assault or robbery, that is the exception and not the rule.