===
March 21, 2013
Apparently Senator Dianne Feinstein didn't get the memo from Colorado's Weld County Sheriff John Cooke that her's and her colleagues' federal gun control legislation, if it even passes, won't be enforced. How's that for having support of "all the police"?
http://www.greeleytribune.com/news/crime/5575283-113/gun-state-background-colorado
Cooke is one of now 379 individual county sheriffs and 15 sheriffs' associations who have gone public in saying they will not enforce new gun control laws. This article claims there are 340 sheriffs but if you check the following website were an active list is kept, with links to their public statements, the number has grown beyond 340.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/sheriff-i-refuse-to-enforce-gun-control/
http://cspoa.org/sheriffs-gun-rights/
Note these quotes from the WND article.
"He says the laws are “feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable” and would “give a false sense of security.”
Cooke said he and other sheriffs are considering filing a lawsuit to block the laws."
"Cooke pointed out the other law would technically ban all magazines due to a provision outlawing magazines that can be altered. He noted that any magazine can be altered to hold more ammunition."
These quotes also appear in the Greeley Tribune article, linked above.
The WND article also features a long list of statements and counter proposals by law enforcement and legislators who are supportive of our constitutional right to "keep and bear arms".
===
April 4, 2013
More evidence that Senator Dianne Feinstein, President Obama and other gun control politicians do NOT have "all the police" on their side of the debate. In addition, these Denver police officers do not want to be used a "political props" by our President.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/04/04/denver-cops-to-obama-we-dont-want-to-be-used-as-political-props-for-gun-control-n1557439
Here's a 6:08 video segment with a short interview of a Colorado Sheriff about the "cops as props" issue.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2275463333001/colo-police-refuse-to-be-obamas-political-sheep/
And another, longer article.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/04/some-colo-sheriffs-oppose-more-gun-control/
===
April 10, 2013
Every once in a while there are those times when something is said that is just plain wrong. I'll grant that there are things said that may be right or wrong, believed or not, that change to the opposite position over time. People sometimes change their minds, though probably not as often as politicians claim to when their waffling on issues during their campaigns. But there there are those rare occasions when something is said that is known to be wrong and unbelievable the moment it's said that become MORE wrong in the passage of time. In this case, it's not that much time.
If Senator Dianne Feinstein has any integrity, she should go on camera and retract her outrageous statement that they have "all the police" on the side of gun control. The evidence was already out there at the time of her statement because many county sheriffs had already gone on record saying they were opposed to the many and varied gun control proposals. That list of sheriffs has since grown substantially.
The latest overwhelming evidence of Feinstein's lies come in the form of survey data of law enforcement officers and of the coming lawsuit from a majority of county sheriffs from Colorado (37 of 62), that will attempt to overturn that state's recently passed gun control laws because they "are concerned that (the law) is unenforceable and does nothing to impede criminal activity but does infringe upon the rights of good Colorado citizens that want to own firearms."
Come on, Dianne. Show us that you're capable of a moment of honesty. Tell us all how you've lied to us all in order to gain public support and pass your decades-old gun control agenda.
Taking various quotes from the articles cited below:
"PoliceOne.com, the leading online resource for law enforcement, today released findings from a national survey of police professionals that provide insight into the opinions of American law enforcement regarding gun control policies and the root causes of and potential solutions to gun crime in the United States.
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." (emphasis added)
"...the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation's attention in recent weeks: gun control. More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals took part in the survey..."
- 99 percent said policies other than an “assault weapons” ban are most important to prevent mass shootings.
- Almost 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines would not reduce violent crime.
- More than 91 percent stated that the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime should have stiff, mandatory sentences, and no plea-bargains.
- More than 91 percent stated they supported the Right-to-Carry by law abiding Americans.
- More than 81 percent said that “gun buy-backs” do not reduce gun violence.
- 80 percent believe legally armed citizens can reduce casualties in incidents of mass violence.
- Nearly 80 percent said that a ban on private transfers of firearms between law-abiding citizens would not reduce violent crime.
- More than 76 percent indicated that legally armed citizens are important to reducing crime.
- More than 76 percent support the arming of trained and qualified teachers or administrators who volunteer to carry a firearm.
- More than 70 percent said that a ban on “assault weapons” would not reduce violent crime.
- More than 70 percent opposed the idea of a national registry of legal gun sales.
- Nearly 68 percent said magazine capacity restrictions would negatively affect them personally.
- More than 60 percent said that the passage of Obama’s gun control legislation would not improve officer safety.
- 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
Colorado Sheriffs' Lawsuit:
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22988195/colorado-sheriffs-planning-lawsuit-block-new-gun-laws
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/10/colorado-sheriffs-plan-lawsuit-challenging-state-gun-control-laws/
http://coloradopeakpolitics.com/2013/04/09/following-suit-more-than-half-of-colorados-sheriffs-join-lawsuit-to-overturn-gun-laws/
PoliceOne Survey:
The actual PoliceOne article showing survey results:
http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-findings-on-officers-thoughts/
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2013/4/survey-finds-law-enforcement-united-against-gun-control.aspx?s=&st=&ps=
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130408006439/en
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/04/09/Law-Enforcement-Poll-Obama-s-Gun-Control-Won-t-Lower-Violent-Crime-Armed-Citizens-Will
===
May 11, 2013
Just the latest evidence, this time from CBS News, that Senator Dianne Feinstein certainly did NOT have "all the police" on the side of gun control.
"In his initial push for stronger gun laws, undertaken after a December massacre at a Connecticut elementary school, the president tried to corral law enforcement groups behind his proposals. While some groups, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association, were largely supportive, other law enforcement organizations dissented."
As a side note, this was also included in the article:
"The president also cited the example of Brian Murphy, a police officer in Wisconsin who was the first to arrive at a Sikh Temple in the wake of a shooting rampage there last August. Murphy sprang into action, keeping the shooter contained until help arrived "even though he was lying there bleeding from 12 bullet wounds." "
That's right - 12 bullet wounds and still fighting back. That puts Officer Murphy into the hero category. It also points out that bad guys have more than 10 bullets and it's NOT "common sense" or "reason" to limit law abiding people with artificial restrictions. A lot has been said about the mother who protected herself and her two children earlier this year from a home invader by firing all 6 rounds from her revolver at the intruder. He was hit 5 times in the face and neck and still walked out of the house and drove away. This officer was hit 12 times and was still alive, coherent and fighting. Ten-round ammunition magazine capacity limits only serve to hurt and endanger law abiding people. Criminals will not restrict themselves when they're determined to commit crime or evil.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584049/obama-honors-cops-renews-push-for-stronger-gun-laws/
===
May 17, 2013
See this related blog, showing, once again, that Feinstein does NOT have "all the police" supporting gun control.
Colorado Sued Over Unconstitutional Gun Control Laws
===
June 1, 2013
Remember from back in March that growing list of sheriffs associations and individual country sheriffs that went public saying they would not enforce the new state and federal gun control laws?
The list is still growing. There are now 18 state sheriffs associations and 453 individual sheriffs. They are listed with links to their public statements here:
http://cspoa.org/sheriffs-gun-rights/
Here are two, before and after, articles about a 2-day conference during which sheriffs were armed with information about the Constitution and constitutional law.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/sheriffs-plan-to-put-feds-back-in-their-place/
http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/backlash-gun-control-laws-nullified/
Do you think Senator Dianne Feinstein or Mayor Michael Bloomberg attended, perhaps as keynote speakers? Do you think they were invited? Do you think they would have attended if invited? Of course not. Why would they ever get involved with any effort, regardless how large or small or attended by average citizens or law enforcement officers from around the nation, that undermines their unconstitutional efforts using the US Constitution as a justification. They're pretty clearly in the camp that thinks it's an old, outdated document subject to substantial interpretation - as long as it's THEIR interpretation.
No, Dianne, you most definitely do NOT have "all the police"! I keep saying this. They keep saying this. We're all waiting for you to retract your outlandish statement.
- CT: ME, We all support the right for citizens to protect themselves and their families. I get your message
- ME: CT, good to hear from you. Unfortunately 'all' do not support that right - at least not when it's with a firearm. There are politicians, advocates, media celebrities and citizens on record as opposing firearms rights in all forms up to and including a complete repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Some will claim to support the 2nd Amendment but they want it to conform to their ideas of what it should include, where it can be exercised, by whom, etc. There are others who want to treat it much more like a privilege instead of a right and are intending to make it as difficult or as expensive as possible to exercise. Some of these people are my friends or friends of friends. I've debated with some. I've opened a few eyes into the underlying facts in opposition to the inflammatory, misleading rhetoric and propaganda. I continue to write about the issue because the threat is still out there. The gun control advocates have not given up their fight. They have a long term strategy and it continues to appear in my news feed almost daily. I wish they'd let go of their misguided agenda and turn to the more important and more urgent issues that challenge our federal and state governments. There are so many to choose from and they all require leadership - IRS, AP, Rosen, Benghazi, Holder, immigration, border security, economy, budget deficit, debt, jobs, foreign policy, tax reform (not just raising taxes), voter fraud, Obamacare, veterans' healthcare, social security, energy...
I don't take offense when people disagree or argue logically for gun control. I don't really accept the "I don't like guns" argument as being a valid or legitimate reason to infringe on others' rights. Likewise for fear and personal tragedy. I have little or no respect for developing the arguments, rhetoric and propaganda with lies, misinformation and misleading information. I've delved into MANY of the so-called facts and it's the gun control lobby that is doing the vast majority of this. I also try to combat ignorance. Most people are not doing any of their own research and just accept the sound bites they hear on television or maybe read an article or two in their local newspaper. The problem is that there's an 8:1 ratio favoring gun control arguments in the media. It's VERY difficult to get a truthful, objective view of the issues or facts. Even the TV news segments that do attempt to be objective can't deliver it all because their formats limit most of their stories to just a few minutes, so they only hit some highlights but deliver no depth. The alternative is CNN and Piers Morgan who dedicates many of his entire episodes to advocating for gun control, bullying his opposing guest and lying to people about facts, etc. People are buried with expressions of so-called "common sense" and "reasonable" solutions like "universal background checks" or "enhanced" or "expanded" background checks, but they haven't read the proposed legislation and have no idea what it really means or what the implications or consequences are.
===
Related blogs:
Colorado Sued Over Unconstitutional Gun Control Laws
Firearms Blog Collections
California Firearms Blogs
Colorado Firearms Blogs
No comments:
Post a Comment