Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: LA Chief Beck and Constitutiona Policing

  1. #1
    Regular Member PaleoCon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Lost Angeles, California, USA

    Post imported post

    Constitutional Policing...Really

    During a Town hall meeting Thursday November 5th in which Mayor Villaraigosa introduced deputy chief Beck, the community of El Sereno was given an opportunity for Q and A of both the Mayor and Deputy Chief.

    First, let me say thank you Mayor for introducing the neighborhood to your selection of our new LAPD Chief. In the initial opening remarks by Chief select Beck, he twice mentioned the importance of constitutional policing, to which I was delighted to hear. He again mentioned constitutional policing in answering one of the audience questions.

    Councilman Huizar moderated the event and asked that the participants be succinct when asking questions so that ALL the questions could be asked. Naturally, I was surprised when Mr. Huizar concluded the QA session with out calling on me to ask the question that I had submitted.Hmm. When I thought it appropriate, I raised my hand and pointed out to the Councilman that I too had submitted a question but was not given the chance to ask it. An honest oversight by the Councilman I am sure.

    After the go-ahead, I continued by welcoming Deputy Chief Beck to the community and reminded him of his sincere remarks regarding constitutional policing. I asked the deputy chief; That with the threat of our elected officials to endanger public safety by furloughing prison inmates back into our communities early, how would he support law abiding citizens right to open carry, and would he work to make it more accessible for the law abiding to acquire concealed carry permits.

    I was dismayed in his strong denial of making it easier to issue CCW’s and he appeared extremely adamant in his decision process. He was at minimum reluctant to show any support of firearms ownership by the law-abiding citizenry in general. Repeating the mantra of too much gun violence already endemic in our communities, and allowing firearms would only escalate that violence.

    Well at least that was the broader point to his answer. I have no ax to grind with DC Beck, but do not follow the thought process of constitutional protections and the denial of firearms ownership for personal protection. Utterances of constitutional policing sounds more like constitutional double speak. The communities of LA deserve an explanation.

    First, violence comes in two forms, committing serious crimes and stopping serious crime. The only way of being on the stopping side is to have parity in tools used to stop it. That equalizer would be a firearm. DC Beck’s answer I would presume is to let the police handle it. I would hands down agree if they were on scene. The community needs to understand the significance of the old saying, when second’s count the police are only minutes away. Chances are they just are not going to be there.

    Deputy Chief Beck should issue a memo to the citizens of Los Angeles with his understanding and interpretation of the DC court of appeals case Warren v District of Columbia. Los Angeles deserves to hear about this landmark case. The court stated that it is a fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection to any individual citizen. The case involved the violent beating and rape of three women over a 14-hour period. I want to make it clear; I am not disparaging any police agency as much as I am trying to enlighten the city residence that it is their responsibility to protect themselves and their families, not the police department.

    LA Residence should not despair, survey after survey reveal that violent felons are more afraid of armed citizens than they are of the police. They should be since citizens handle serious criminals three times as much per year as city police agencies. Unfortunately, police protection from violent crime is more myth than anything else, and the police are reduced to after the fact report-taking officers.

    Let us be abundantly clear, absolutely no one should consider purchasing a firearm if they are not willing to internalize the cardinal rules of firearms ownership. They are hand in glove and mutually inclusive. Also they should schedule defensive and tactical training. They should study training films and DVDs. There are plenty of training videos now on YouTube.

    Whoever the new LAPD Chief is, and it looks like Charlie Beck, he should partner with the various communities and condition them on these facts. Now that would be constitutional policing that we can all welcome.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Sandy Eggo County

    Post imported post

    More LEO Bullsh*t. Now I have two turds in every pocket.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The rights existence is all the reason he needs.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA

    Post imported post

    Left out a syllable. UNconstitutional policing.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    , California, USA

    Post imported post

    Constitutional policing you can believe in.

Posting Permissions

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