The survey, which was conducted in early March 2013, received 15,000 responses from law enforcement professionals. It found that the overall attitude of law enforcement is strongly anti-gun legislation and pro-gun rights, with the belief that an armed citizenry is effective in stopping crime. Response percentages varied only slightly when analyzed by rank and department size. Among the results:
- 86 percent feel the currently proposed legislation would have no effect or a negative effect on improving officer safety
- Similarly, 92 percent feel that banning semi-automatic firearms, or “assault weapons,” would have no effect or a negative effect on reducing violent crime
- Demonstrating the opinion that the best way to combat gun crime is through harsher punishment, 91 percent said the use of a firearm while perpetrating a crime should lead to a stiff, mandatory sentence with no plea bargains. Likewise, 59 percent believe increasing punishment severity for unlicensed dealers would reduce crime
- Respondents were more split on background checks, with 31 percent agreeing that mental health background checks in all gun sales would help reduce mass shootings, while 45 percent disagreed
- 71 percent support law enforcement leaders who have publicly refused to enforce more restrictive gun laws within their jurisdictions
- 82 percent believe gun buyback or turn-in programs are ineffective in reducing the level of gun violence
- 91 percent support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or have not been deemed psychologically incapable
- Likewise, 80 percent feel that legally-armed citizens would likely have reduced the number of casualties in recent mass shooting incidents
- 38 percent believe the biggest cause of gun violence in the United States is the “decline in parenting and family values”. This was trailed by “overly lax parole and short sentencing standards” at 15 percent and “pop culture influence” (e.g., violent movies and video games) at 14 percent.
via: Business Wire / PoliceOne.com
This is incredible. Don’t plan on seeing this in the MSM.
Do you know where Chicago ranks in terms of enforcement of the federal gun laws? Out of 90 jurisdictions in the country, they ranked 90th. Why doesn’t NBC News start with, “Shocking news on Chicago. Of all the jurisdictions in the country, Chicago’s dead last on enforcement of the federal gun laws?” Why doesn’t the national press corps, when they’re sitting down there with Jay Carney and the president and the vice president, why don’t they say, “Why is Chicago dead last in enforcement of the gun laws against gangs with guns, felons with guns, drug dealers with guns?
I’ve been saying this for over a year now. Exactly!!
Why is it that Anita Alvarez does not refer felon with gun cases to the federal government? Why?
Why is it that CPD Superintendent Garry McCarthy does not make news by telling people that Anita Alvarez is not referring felon with gun cases to the federal government? Why?
Why is it that Mayor Rahm does not come out and make news by telling people that Anita Alvarez is not referring felon with gun cases to the federal government? Why?
Because the WANT the gun crime on the streets because it creates the perception that there is a NEED for MORE gun laws.
It’s all a charade.
The following is the Associated Press report on the standoff between police and the man who they say opened fire at a barber shop and a car wash on Wednesday in upstate New York, killing four. But as the gun debate rages, it’s interesting to note that the gun used by the killer was not an automatic weapon, a so-called “assault weapon,” or even a handgun. Instead, it was a shotgun — the type of gun Vice President has been touting as a better protection option although it’s unclear what exact shotgun was used.
Other than the Blaze zero media mentions of this interesting fact.
Shotguns are awesome powerful in close quarters combat when you don’t care who dies around you. The damage per shot is staggering compared to that of “assault” rifles. … No matter to some. They actually want to ban everything. It’s just one gun at a time for these folks.
Most people think King would be the last person to own a gun. Yet in the mid-1950s, as the civil rights movement heated up, King kept firearms for self-protection. In fact, he even applied for a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
A recipient of constant death threats, King had armed supporters take turns guarding his home and family. He had good reason to fear that the Klan in Alabama was targeting him for assassination.
via Huff Post.
Interesting. People forget that gun control (a/k/a disarmament) was used to leave hundreds of thousands of innocent blacks at the mercy of ignorant hillbilly racist. Guns were, and are, the great power equalizer.
Of course, what the Left doesn’t want anyone to know is that all the ignorant hillbilly racist were (and currently are) Democrats. But that a whole other story.
Ok, yes some of these ladies have poor form and would be fine with some proper training.
But the truth is that an AR is far (FAR) easier to hold on target and fire than any shotgun on the market.
It’s time for a vote of no confidence in Garry.
He’s let his mouth run too much and is simply no longer credible on any topic.
Hope to see more of this guy in the future.
In 2013, no one expects to see a man dressed in a Ku Klux Clan robe mid-morning in Center City, Philadelphia. …
The man, who stood on the corner of 13th and Filbert on Tuesday, is not out to lynch or kill black people. In fact, he is black.Thirty-five-year-old Sixx King says he’s using the offensive symbol to highlight a serious problem: black on black crime.
“We’re bringing awareness to the black hypocrisy, complacency and apathy in the African-American community,” said King.
According to the FBI, in 2011 more than 7,000 black people were killed. King’s sign reads that the KKK killed 3,446 blacks in 86 years, while black on black murders surpass that number every six months. …
Phelps-Washington rallied with King. Her son, Christopher, was among the 324 murdered in Philadelphia in 2011. Police say 85% of those killed that year were black.via CBS Philly.
I wrote a couple of weeks ago about how in Chicago blacks are 32.9% of the population but represent 78.7% of gun homicide victims.
According to the census Philadelphia is 43.4% black. Here we’re told that 85% of those murdered in Philly are black. This is as I predicted two weeks ago.
It is unfair and unjust that this does not get major media attention. Years of neglect and failing schools have crippled inner cities and made them extremely violent places. We’ve failed the young people in these places.
Kudos to Mr. Sixx King for his bringing attention to the issue. I hope he gets some results in Philly.
Karl Marx summed up Communism as “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” This is a good, pithy saying, which, in practice, has succeeded in bringing, upon those under its sway, misery, poverty, rape, torture, slavery, and death.
For the saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia. The agency is called “The State,” and the motto, fleshed out, for the benefit of the easily confused must read “The State will take from each according to his ability: the State will give to each according to his needs.” “Needs and abilities” are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to “the State shall take, the State shall give.”via The Daily Beast.
This is an amazing piece. If you have not read you should.
Two more quotes:
Rule by bureaucrats and functionaries is an example of the first part of the Marxist equation: that the Government shall determine the individual’s abilities.
As rules by the Government are one-size-fits-all, any governmental determination of an individual’s abilities must be based on a bureaucratic assessment of the lowest possible denominator.
The Left loves a phantom statistic that a firearm in the hands of a citizen is X times more likely to cause accidental damage than to be used in the prevention of crime, but what is there about criminals that ensures that their gun use is accident-free? If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.
Violence by firearms is most prevalent in big cities with the strictest gun laws. In Chicago and Washington, D.C., for example, it is only the criminals who have guns, the law-abiding populace having been disarmed, and so crime runs riot.
I wish I wrote that first paragraph there.
Thank you David Mamet.