Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Cleveland Police Chief does not like the 2nd Amendment

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616

    Cleveland Police Chief does not like the 2nd Amendment

    Police Chief Decries America’s Fascination With Handguns

    Over the weekend in Ohio, a three-year-old picked up a handgun and fatally shot a one-year-old boy. In a press conference about that tragic accident, Cleveland Police Chief Calvin Williams decided it was high time to take down America’s love of guns. “Everybody has to know [that] this fascination with handguns, not just in the city, but in the country, has to stop,” he lectured. “We need to take a long look at what we’re doing on the state, local and national level to keep these guns out of our communities.”

    As usual, those who hate guns blame the tool and, in this case, the entire pro-Second Amendment population of the U.S. That said, there’s no doubt the one who left an unsecured gun in the reach of a three-year-old was not following good safety practices, and all gun owners should be ever vigilant and diligent when it comes to exercising our rights responsibly.

    http://patriotpost.us/posts/34574

    http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index...ns_must_s.html
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  2. #2
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    Bad thing here in Mayberry. the Police chief here said , he believed in the Second amendment. he just thought citizens should not be armed. WTF
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Idoncare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Johnstown, Ohio
    Posts
    4
    Cleveland is the liberal cesspool of Ohio. the Chiefs attitude is a surprise to no one who lives in this state.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Idoncare; 04-14-2015 at 12:54 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    far sw corner of stark co. OH.
    Posts
    87
    Remember hearing his comment on the news......no surprise coming from him....normal "head up butt" attitude as usual.
    Last edited by 3FULLMAGS+1; 04-16-2015 at 01:06 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Condolences to the family. Horrible...

    That being said, anyone who leaves a pistol, much less a loaded pistol likely with no safety mechanism engaged around a 3yo and a 1yo is a complete *non-responsible person.

    *Original descriptor redacted.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Idoncare View Post
    Cleveland is the liberal cesspool of Ohio. the Chiefs attitude is a surprise to no one who lives in this state.
    The same thing is true of virtually every other metropolitan/inner-city area, in every State of the nation; and of the persons who get appointed as police chiefs by the kind of mayors and city council members who get elected in said meto/inner-city areas.

    With all respect to Grape, this is a "dog bites man" story.

    What would be newsworthy would be for a big city police chief to actually support our RKBA and effective self-defense in both word and deed.

    That said, I don't recall the last time any big city police chief personally effected an arrest or otherwise had actual, official use of his sidearm. I surmise then that these administrators wear a gun as either a fashion statement, some kind of prestige or honor, or to make a statement about their position (ie a social or political statement). (Certainly the chief would not admit to there being any personal safety benefit to carrying a gun.) In other words, the good chief is exhibiting exactly the kind of "fascination with handguns" that he decries in others. And Mr. Webster defines that as hypocrisy.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Can't help but wonder which other rights he thinks should be ignored. Or, "solved" by erasing them.

    For example, that pesky Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. C'mon, how many criminals could be locked up, prevented from victimizing honest citizens if the 4A was deleted? And, further outrage, what about all the cases zero-ed out by judges who suppress the evidence arising from violations of the 4A? Wouldn't police be able to better protect citizens if the 4A no longer applied? Think of all the danger citizens have to face because of those 4A restrictions.

    Same for the 5A. Some of Ted Bundy's victims might still be alive if police had been allowed to "persuade" him to confess, no? Isn't it high time these other safety-reducing restrictions get looked at, too?
    Last edited by Citizen; 04-16-2015 at 03:53 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Can't help but wonder which other rights he thinks should be ignored. Or, "solved" by erasing them.
    Only the ones that make his job harder....or that other liberals don't like.

    Let's see:

    Privacy (aka, being secure in our persons, papers, effects against unreasonable search and seizure);

    Prior restraint;

    Freedom of (and from unwanted) association;

    Freedom of religion (libs tend to love freedom from religion);

    Proof beyond a reasonable doubt of both intent and action (I can't you how often our local prosecutors lobby to remove or weaken requirements that a violation of laws include intent);

    Quartering of troops (I recall the case a while back where cops seized a home for a temporary command post and the owner sued under the 3rd amendment; No idea how it turned out).

    Fortunately, for all the really bad, big city chiefs out there, there also tend to be some really good, elected sheriffs, small town chiefs, and a lot of rank-and-file cops who really do desire to protect and serve their communities, to keep the peace, and to respect rights, perhaps even protect them encroachment by the feds, the other branches of government etc.

    A few years ago the small town and county where I grew up was experiencing some real growing pains. Lots of California refugees had moved in because it was such a wonderful place to live....and then started complaining it wasn't just like the place they left. Some of the old timers started complaining about dogs running lose and harassing their livestock. The county commissioner said, "Well, if you have a problem animal in the unincorporated county, call the Sheriff." At this point the Sheriff spoke up and said, "BS! You haven't given me a budget for an animal control officer and my deputies have way more important things to deal with than a stray dog. If the citizens want a county wide animal country officer, they'll have to pony up some tax money to pay for it."

    The commissioner asked, "Well then what should people do about stray dogs." The Sheriff responded, "Any dog running lose and harassing livestock can be shot, and that is exactly what folks should do if their neighbors won't keep their dogs properly contained."

    This caused quite the consternation among some of the newer members of the community present. The local prosecutor, sensing a chance to make some points piped up with, "We can't have people just shooting willy nilly and if anyone violates any gun laws I'll be pressing charges."

    To this, the sheriff said, "I won't be arresting anyone who safely puts down a loose dog that harasses livestock. And you'll have a tough time prosecuting anyone if I refuse to arrest them or serve any warrants. So if people don't want their dogs getting shot by ranchers, they better keep their dogs from harassing livestock as the law requires of them." And that pretty much ended the conversations.

    Since then, the area has grown a lot, demographics have changed, and the new majority probably has elected officials who behave more like they saw in Cali than what the old time ranchers were used to. The only consolation is that influx of bodies has made land so valuable as the demand for housing has soared, that most of the old ranchers have sold out and either retired rich, or moved out beyond the reaches of urban silliness and started over on larger plots than they had previously.

    The problem isn't "government" or even government officials, nearly so much as it is the ideas of our neighbors and fellow voters/citizens as to how society ought to be ordered. You and I have this silly notion that our lives, time, income, and property are our own, to do with as we see fit (within some broad limits we needn't argue about here). But a lot of our fellows are just as strongly convinced that they have some legitimate claim on our income, property, time, associations, and even expressions. In the absence of "government" some of these parasites might learn to work for themselves and then they might develop a similar affection as our own for we work to obtain. But there seems to be ample evidence that a lot of them would simply find other methods to take what they want: gang membership seems to be popular in many urban areas. I'm convinced there are no small number who--though they'd never admit it--are actually less concerned about getting what you and I have for themselves, than they are with simply doing what they can to prevent anyone from having any more than they have. In other words, if they were millionaires and had everything that bought, they'd still be very unhappy that there were billionaires with something more. They would actually be happier in poverty, so long as everyone else was there in poverty with them. They take no joy nor comfort in what they have, but only in having as much as everyone else. And that is a very dangerous position because it takes a lot less to destroy opportunity for others than it does to build anything.

    And I apologize for the OT tangent.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  9. #9
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Can't help but wonder which other rights he thinks should be ignored. Or, "solved" by erasing them.

    For example, that pesky Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. C'mon, how many criminals could be locked up, prevented from victimizing honest citizens if the 4A was deleted? And, further outrage, what about all the cases zero-ed out by judges who suppress the evidence arising from violations of the 4A? Wouldn't police be able to better protect citizens if the 4A no longer applied? Think of all the danger citizens have to face because of those 4A restrictions.

    Same for the 5A. Some of Ted Bundy's victims might still be alive if police had been allowed to "persuade" him to confess, no? Isn't it high time these other safety-reducing restrictions get looked at, too?
    The Good Chief is exercising his 1A to decry the ills of the 2A...ironic, actually.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  10. #10
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The Good Chief is exercising his 1A to decry the ills of the 2A...ironic, actually.
    AND if he were to do it as a "private person/citizen" I'd have no problem with his exercise of his 1A rights, but as an employee (Chief) of a Police Agency he has absolutely no business suggesting the unlawful and unconstitutional restrictions of the Rights of Any person!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  11. #11
    Newbie ZackAttack071309's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by The Truth View Post
    Condolences to the family. Horrible...

    That being said, anyone who leaves a pistol, much less a loaded pistol likely with no safety mechanism engaged around a 3yo and a 1yo is a complete *non-responsible person.

    *Original descriptor redacted.
    Very well stated. I could not have said it better myself

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863
    Well, it's not just the police chief who seems to have a problem with guns and their owners....


    Cleveland council passes gun law admittedly that won’t stop violence


    In a remarkable bit of candor by a public servant, a member of the Cleveland, Ohio City Council yesterday reportedly acknowledged that the city’s new gun control law was “not designed to stop gun violence,” but only reflect the “council’s values,” according to Cleveland.com.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/clev...-stop-violence

  13. #13
    Regular Member JustaShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    728
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Workman View Post
    Well, it's not just the police chief who seems to have a problem with guns and their owners....


    Cleveland council passes gun law admittedly that won’t stop violence


    In a remarkable bit of candor by a public servant, a member of the Cleveland, Ohio City Council yesterday reportedly acknowledged that the city’s new gun control law was “not designed to stop gun violence,” but only reflect the “council’s values,” according to Cleveland.com.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/clev...-stop-violence
    Not only won't they stop violence, the new laws violate Ohio's firearms preemption (ORC 9.68) and as a result, OFCC has filed suit against the city of Cleveland:

    https://www.wideopenspaces.com/ofcc-...leveland-ohio/
    Christian, Husband, Father
    NRA Life Member
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

    Anything I post in these forums is my personal opinion formed by my own interpretation of the topic.
    IANAL and anything I say is not intended to be nor should it be taken as legal advice.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    [h=3]Police Chief Calvin Williams: “Everybody has to know [that] this fascination with handguns ... has to stop,”...
    Good word choice on his part. I wonder if he'll ever make the connection on what causes the "fascination." LACK OF EDUCATION. Moron.

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    AND if he were to do it as a "private person/citizen" I'd have no problem with his exercise of his 1A rights, but as an employee (Chief) of a Police Agency he has absolutely no business suggesting the unlawful and unconstitutional restrictions of the Rights of Any person!
    Bingo! We have a winner.
    Last edited by MAC702; 04-26-2015 at 03:14 PM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •