• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

The Hypocriscy of Law Enforccement

fridaddy

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
47
Location
, ,
NOTICE: This post is not directed art rank and file LEO's who support our rights. This is directed at the FL Sheriffs Association and the many police chiefs who are actively working to deny civil rights and are no better than the Jim Crow CLEOs of the 60s, especially the worthless POS Chief Perry of FSU. May you be held to account on judgment day for every crime you allow to happen by your actions to deny students the right to defend themselves.


I spent the afternoon Wednesday waiting to speak to the Criminal Justice Committee of the Florida Senate. As I sat there I looked at a large collection of high ranking law enforcement officers who were present.

I am reasonably sure that it is improper for public employees to spend work time lobbying the senate so I assume they were off duty (likely different rules for Sheriffs as elected constitutional officers).. If I am wrong someone please correct me.

As I sat there with the reasonable assumption that these officers were all off duty, I began to wonder, why are they armed? They bypassed the metal detector I had to go through to bring their guns. Are they worried they may need them on the way back to their car? Are they worried they may need it when they get home? Oh that's right they are special. Their lives are more important than mine. They have more right to defend themselves.

Thank you for the job you do guys, but if you are going to restrict my right to be armed to protect myself and my family, at least have the courtesy to accept the risk yourselves that you are putting on the rest of us and leave your guns in your car.

I am not anti-LEO but these people, these "public servants" are nothing more than petty tyrants who want to restrict the right to keep and bear arms to their people not to the citizens as guaranteed by the constitution.

OK let the flames begin as to what a anti LEO person I am.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
My Letter to the FSA

Gentlemen,

People sometimes ask me, and the growing number of people like me, why we are "anti-cop". I always reply that I am not. For some reason, most of the rank and file officers and deputies I know are pleasant individuals, like most people. So when people accuse conservative libertarian types like me of being "anti-cop" I always clarify that I am usually against high ranking law enforcement officials and the various law enforcement organizations to which they belong because they are always trying to restrict my freedom.

Enter my state Senator, Charlie Dean. He does not care about my 2nd amendment rights. He doesn't care that Florida is only one of seven states that deny people the right of "open carry". He only cares about being a spokesperson for the Florida Sheriff's Association. The FSA is against SB 234, which lets Floridians with concealed weapons permits carry openly. The FSA does not care that open carry is not a problem in Alabama and Georgia. The FSA does not care that in 27 of the 43 "open carry" states there is not even a permit requirement, so that permits in most states are only to let a person legally conceal a weapon or firearm. At first, it was said the FSA would drop its opposition to SB 234 if the senator who sponsored the bill put absolutely ludicrous restrictions on open carry, restrictions that no other states have. Then the FSA even took away this little bone.

And because the FSA is against my rights, my senator is against my rights.This is not a very good way to make friends of people in the community who are productive, well educated, informed, and who put a high value on liberty, law, and order. The FSA should drop its opposition to CWFL licensees carrying openly so that my senator, who is on the criminal justice committee, can represent his constituents.

Sincerely,

Zachary Gennaro
Ocala, Fl
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Letter to Senator Thrasher

Dear Senator Thrasher,

I am writing about an article in the Miami Herald that mentioned you. I have also spoken to one of your representatives at your Tallahassee office on this subject. There is a specific quote in there that I find incredible: “Any other time I might support something like this, but I just can’t.” You were talking about recognizing the right of people to defend themselves on public college campuses. As I understand this quote, my right to bear arms will be denied because of your irrational emotions. An underage drunk shot and killed a girl you knew off campus with a long gun. Therefore, in a spasm of collective punishment, you have denied self defense rights to all law abiding citizens in the state of Florida. You are literally tying peoples' hands behind their backs. People who would like the means of self defense in and around college school campuses; an environment rife with muggers, rapists, and even murderers. If you go through with this position, and it looks like you will, I will do my small part to ensure that this move is political suicide for you. Thank you for your time.
 

fl_boy_3157

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
8
Location
Inverness, FL
E-mail sent to my state senator (Dean) yesterday...

Senator Dean,

I wrote you last month in support of SB 402; I appreciate your reply and support of that legislation.

However, this evening I was catching up on the news of the day regarding SB 234, which I supported in it's original form prior to the last minute amendments of today. As a resident of your district and a firm believer in an American's second amendment rights (not suggestions, but inalienable rights), I will share my opinions and concerns with you this evening.

1) I disagree with the removal of the campus carry provisions. While the tragic death of Ms. Cowie in January is unfortunate and emotional, the fact remains that it was an apparent negligent act that resulted in her untimely death. Unfortunately, whether campus carry was legal or not, the end result would likely have been the same. When making decisions that could potentially affect the lives of thousands of college students in Florida, we should also remember the 32 lives lost at Virginia Tech in 2007, and other mass shootings by deranged persons throughout the country, as well. A properly trained CCL holder is an asset in these situations, not a liability. Gun free zones are an open invitation to criminals to conduct their criminal acts in these areas without fear of death. To make an analogy, what do you think would be the result of a law that stated police are allowed to use firearms, except on Saturdays?

I read quotes from Senator Dockery stating her position had changed because of the feedback received by college administrators, etc. throughout the state. The fact remains, however, that Americans have a right to keep and bear arms, and any legislation that restricts these rights is unconstitutional. It is unfortunate that Senator Dockery and the rest of the Criminal Justice Committee does not feel this way and is swayed by the subjective opinion of some, while overlooking this simple truth: if Americans do not agree with the second amendment, there are provisions in the U.S. Constitution to amend it. If anti-gun supporters can accomplish that, then more power to them. I will certainly abide by the law, which is the major disadvantage I have as a CCL holder as compared to the criminal whose intent it is to commit crimes. Gun laws serve one purpose only, to further restrict law abiding citizens' second amendment rights. As a former Sheriff, you know better than most that criminals do not abide by gun laws.

2) The language amending the open carry provisions is horrid. Re: §790.053 (as amended in SB234), what constitutes a "...rude, angry, or threatening manner" and to whose interpretation is that left? I would certainly not like to be arrested because of some random person or police officers interpretation, especially if they happen to be anti-gun, even if I am within the confines of the law. §790.06 (b) and (c) (as amended in SB234) are awful in every respect and should be eliminated altogether.

I agree with a "thumb break" or some other type of manual release holder for OWB carry, but the way section (a) reads (as amended) would require the same for IWB holsters as well. What if I am concealed carrying in an IWB holster with no manual release and my outer garment moves and my gun is shown? By this reading, I am breaking the law. There is simply too much subjectiveness with this amendment to make it a feasible law.

The bottom line is this: there was nothing wrong with the bill in it's original form and it should have been left alone.

I went from being excited that real change was on the horizon, to severely disappointed that once again the political process would water down our rights (rights that should never have been legislated away in the first place). I am a native Floridian (from Sumter County originally), and I was taught an important set of values at an early age: never lie, never steal, and stand for your beliefs because if you compromise on them once, you will always compromise. The right thing is the right thing, and nothing can change it. These amendments are not right, plain and simple. They allow for the continuance of an infringement on our second amendment rights, no matter how they are dressed up to look like they are protecting the citizens of Florida.

I respectfully request that you reconsider your position on these amendments and move to have SB 234 reinstated to it's original language and voted on as such.

Regards,

Kevin XXXXXXX
Inverness, FL
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Senator Dean,

I wrote you last month in support of SB 402; I appreciate your reply and support of that legislation.

However, this evening I was catching up on the news of the day regarding SB 234, which I supported in it's original form prior to the last minute amendments of today. As a resident of your district and a firm believer in an American's second amendment rights (not suggestions, but inalienable rights), I will share my opinions and concerns with you this evening......snip......

Welcome to OCDO.

Nice opening volley - your letter is well constructed and well thought out.
 

fl_boy_3157

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
8
Location
Inverness, FL
Thanks...

Welcome to OCDO.

Nice opening volley - your letter is well constructed and well thought out.

Thanks...I was so pissed off last night, I am surprised I was able to compose a relatively diplomatic email.

I was just reading the "Open Carry Bill Killed" thread from yesterday...I did not realize Dean was the one behind the amendments (allegedly); might have changed the tone of my message, so I am glad I didn't know.

Might be time for some opposition in 2012...
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Thanks...I was so pissed off last night, I am surprised I was able to compose a relatively diplomatic email.

I was just reading the "Open Carry Bill Killed" thread from yesterday...I did not realize Dean was the one behind the amendments (allegedly); might have changed the tone of my message, so I am glad I didn't know.

Might be time for some opposition in 2012...

Dean was behind the OC amendments. Senator Thrasher was behind the campus carry amendments. The bad OC amendments have been withdrawn. Dean works for the florida sheriff's association, and they, of course, are opposed to OC so he'll vote no monday.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
If you call Dean's office his legislative assistant will claim his boss is not behind the OC amendments. Technically, true as Evers put them in there. It's a lie though because everyone knows Dean will do FSA's bidding. He told me that unless campus carry was added back into the bill, he would vote no. So, if they put campus carry back in, it passes criminal justice, BUT dies by thrasher's hand at the next committee stops, judiciary and rules. So Dean appeases his bosses either way by killing the bill now, or in a later committee.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Politics as usual, including the usual smoke and mirrors.

Remember this come nominating and election time. Get involved with election committees and have a real impact. Don't wait until your choice is the lesser of two evils or worse - none at all.
 

fl_boy_3157

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
8
Location
Inverness, FL
Dean was behind the OC amendments. Senator Thrasher was behind the campus carry amendments. The bad OC amendments have been withdrawn. Dean works for the florida sheriff's association, and they, of course, are opposed to OC so he'll vote no monday.

Thanks for the update...at least the very poorly constructed OC amendments were withdrawn...guess we'll wait and see. In the meantime, EVERYONE IN FLORIDA who cares about this issue needs to fill up your Rep or Senators email inbox over the weekend. If enough noise is made, they will be forced to listen.

Sure the FSA is powerful, but are there millions of them? Nope. Are there millions who want our rights restored? You bet your ass there are...
 

Rich7553

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
515
Location
SWFL
For a profession whose primary function is to collect and process factual evidence separate from speculation, how is it that the FSA's entire argument against OC consists completely of just speculation, and devoid of any factual evidence?
 
Last edited:

Kingfish

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
1,276
Location
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
For a profession whose primary function is to collect and process factual evidence separate from speculation, how is it that the FSA's entire argument against OC consists completely of just speculation, and devoid of any factual evidence?
There is factual evidence but the evidence does not agree with their agenda, so they will ignore it.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
For a profession whose primary function is to collect and process factual evidence separate from speculation, how is it that the FSA's entire argument against OC consists completely of just speculation, and devoid of any factual evidence?

Maybe they are little or no better at collecting and processing factual evidence in their profession. I'm just sayin'.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
+1

They'd find out that their own rank and file ARE MORE LIKELY to commit a serious crime than a permit holder.

That is not speculation. That is per the FBI uniform crime report.
 

Rich7553

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
515
Location
SWFL
+1

They'd find out that their own rank and file ARE MORE LIKELY to commit a serious crime than a permit holder.

That is not speculation. That is per the FBI uniform crime report.

Zach, I've been trying to find tabulated statistical info on crimes committed by LEOs, in particular, crimes that would get a non-LEO's CWFL revoked. Do you have a link you could provide to that type of info? All I could find was some statistics on LEO certification revocation, but not actual felonies.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Zach, I've been trying to find tabulated statistical info on crimes committed by LEOs, in particular, crimes that would get a non-LEO's CWFL revoked. Do you have a link you could provide to that type of info? All I could find was some statistics on LEO certification revocation, but not actual felonies.

Going to have to dig it up. I had to compare and contrast CWFL info from the DACS (in florida) website with national rates for LEO's getting convicted from FBI and other sources. So the comparison wasn't Fl LEO vs Fl CWFL, but FL CWFL vs LEO's nationwide.

The thing that struck me when I was studying this, was that LEO's tend to get off easy. What you and I would go to jail for (much less loose the permit), an LEO would just loose his job, after a period of paid vacation.

Of course, in reality, for those starting off sound philosophically, no statistics are needed. Why? Because cops come from gen pop, if you will. Further, a sizeable few want the job for nefarious purposes- just as there are many pedophiles in Family Services. This is NOT cop bashing, just basic criminology/psychology.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP This is NOT cop bashing, just basic criminology/psychology.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaa!! God, I can't breathe! That has got to be one of the best, one of the funniest--applying basic criminology/psychology to cops!

And, to say its not cop bashing---omigod! Oh, (snork, mmmph) hahahahahahahahahahahaa!

God, my sides hurt.

Oh, that was good. Very good.

:D
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by 77zach
SNIP This is NOT cop bashing, just basic criminology/psychology.
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaa!! God, I can't breathe! That has got to be one of the best, one of the funniest--applying basic criminology/psychology to cops!

And, to say its not cop bashing---omigod! Oh, (snork, mmmph) hahahahahahahahahahahaa!

God, my sides hurt.

Oh, that was good. Very good.

:D

Don't find the gross generalization amusing at all.

Anytime the overall group's performance is outside the standard deviation curve it bears considerable justification and explanation that can hardly be defended in basic terms.

What other section of our population do you castigate so lightly?

Would be very interested in knowing what your (77zach) credentials are to make such statements credible.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP

What other section of our population do you castigate so lightly?

Would be very interested in knowing what your (77zach) credentials are to make such statements credible.

I've come across the FBI statistics independent of this forum recently. For Jan -Sep 2010. I'm no statistician, but it would seem police are 5 times more likely (per 100,000) to murder than the general public. So, Zach's information is not new to me.

As to his credentials, you know better. You know he doesn't need any other credential than to be alive and able to post. The reverse side of your coin is to imply that if someone does have credentials, then their post is that much more "factual". Thus, Obama, having taught constitutional law or history is in a better position to tell us the meaning of various clauses of the constitution.

For myself, other sections of the population do not even come close to having the power police do. But, that does not matter. Police are public officials--fair game for criticism. The First Amendment says so.

And, if the good cops don't like the rep that has been building around police for years, they can run the bad cops out of the business. The good cops can start by getting rid of the Blue Wall of Silence.

Now, take a drink and calm down a little. Just like I know better than to tangle with you on certain other subjects, I'm sure you know better than to tangle with me on this subject.
 
Top