-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Guns Reduce Crime Debate
- Thread starter Gene Beasley
- Start date
shad0wfax
Regular Member
imported post
R. Gil Kerlikowske has a view that is very typical among LEO's, especially long-term career LEO's and Unionsupporting LEO's: He buys into this "common sense" and "reasonable" gun-control nonsense. He probably feels that his entire career is threatened by law abiding citizens having firearms, because he'd rather have us call him if we have trouble than defend ourselves.
It's a typical big-city (and big state)LEO attitude and it makes me want to puke.
I know that not all LEO's are like this guy, but enough of the high-level administrators are in the big-city and state branches of law enforcement. It seems like the only decent high-level LEO's are elected County Sherriffs in rural counties.
EDIT: It comes as no surprise to me that National Public Radio is hosting yet another anti-gun debate near election time.
Worst of all, he quotes research that says when gun numbers increase, gun murders increase but non-gun murders don't. Later, he cites the Union that represents the bobbies in the UK, stating that they don't want to be armed. (Never mind that the violent crime rate with knives in the UK has skyrocketed...)
Then he brings up recent campus shootings (where firearms are already restricted) and makes the assertion that students/faculty with guns won't solve the problem... Well, Comrade Kerlikowske, the police sure didn't deter or stop the shootings quickly or effectively, did they?
R. Gil Kerlikowske has a view that is very typical among LEO's, especially long-term career LEO's and Unionsupporting LEO's: He buys into this "common sense" and "reasonable" gun-control nonsense. He probably feels that his entire career is threatened by law abiding citizens having firearms, because he'd rather have us call him if we have trouble than defend ourselves.
It's a typical big-city (and big state)LEO attitude and it makes me want to puke.
I know that not all LEO's are like this guy, but enough of the high-level administrators are in the big-city and state branches of law enforcement. It seems like the only decent high-level LEO's are elected County Sherriffs in rural counties.
EDIT: It comes as no surprise to me that National Public Radio is hosting yet another anti-gun debate near election time.
Worst of all, he quotes research that says when gun numbers increase, gun murders increase but non-gun murders don't. Later, he cites the Union that represents the bobbies in the UK, stating that they don't want to be armed. (Never mind that the violent crime rate with knives in the UK has skyrocketed...)
Then he brings up recent campus shootings (where firearms are already restricted) and makes the assertion that students/faculty with guns won't solve the problem... Well, Comrade Kerlikowske, the police sure didn't deter or stop the shootings quickly or effectively, did they?