Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com

Obama says the police support his anti-gun ownership agenda. Do you?

Every time I turn around I see Obama surrounding himself with uniformed officers as he is telling the rest of the country that the majority of law enforcement officers support his attack on the 2nd Amendment. Did any of you, give your chief or anyone else the right to speak for you on such an important issue? I certainly didn't and never would. So when you see some fancy gold braid covered slick talking chief or police commisioner saying that his department supports gun control, ask yourself, did they really? Nobody but me, speaks for me. How about you? What do you think?

Comments

  • Oldschollpolice, I agree with you completely. Plus every officer I used to work with that I talk to opposes it. Like with all politicians with an agenda, he seeks out and uses only those who agree with him. And I say used to work with as I am retired now. Did 5 1/2 years as an officer, 4 1/2 years as a sergeant and 14 1/2 years as a lieutenant before a back injury forced me into a disability retirement.
  • I certainly don't! I am tired of hearing about gun bans. I am tired of politicians making smoke screens for what is really important. What about the debit ceiling? What about the money that is missing out of my pay checks because of the tax increase? What about the economy?

    Most LEOs don't support the gun bans. Most of the informed know that they won't do anything but take the guns out of people's hands that would be responsible with them.
  • I don't know even one person who supports a gun ban. I do however believe it should be made harder for the general population to buy guns. Proof of firearms training (and I don't mean 1 hour at a gun show), thorough background checks....including mental health, and a reasonable waiting period I believe would be helpful. And really.....do regular, non-law enforcement "Dick and Jane's" need an assault rifle??? All that being said, I have no intention of turning over my family's protection to anyone!
  • Chiefs, Commissioners and Sheriffs are no longer cops. Once you get to that level, you're now a politician (whether you're elected or not). Chiefs and Commissioners are appointed by the mayor, so their politics will reflect those of the Mayor you appointed them, same as supreme court justices. There are a number of Sheriffs and Chiefs coming out AGAINST gun control. The Vacationer-in-Chief is obviously only going to put those politicians that support his agenda in the spotlight. However, whether it's the military or police, the average grunt on the street does not support the President's agenda and will not support it.
  • On this topic I agree with you Old School. I certainly don't know and never will support Obama's gun control plans...
  • nobody in my dept supports gun control.
  • No. I don't know about Obama's gun control plans but they seem to be somewhat against the 2nd Amendment. I will not go against the 2nd Amendment. It's the right for law abiding citizens to own a weapon.
  • I am totally against any kind of Gun control or attack on the 2nd Amendment! Most Police and Sheriff Deputies and Fire Fire Fighters for that matter that I know are against it.
  • I've got no problem with having a permit. And the only reason for that is because I think people need to be trained. An untrained person with a firearm is an accident waiting to happen. But that's as far as I think regulation should go
  • I agree with the training requirement. Start it in school and support the Boy Scouts and other youth organizations in getting permission and funds to teach the next generation about the 2nd Amendment and the sport of hunting, shooting competitions and the most important aspect of gun ownership....SAFETY!!!
  • Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com
  • In two words - hell no. I didn't take an oath to uphold PART of the Constitution. As for training with a firearm, I think it should be mandatory. Just like schooling is.
  • Nope. We definitely need to look at more extensive checks as there has been a recent rise of legal owners committing horrendous acts. This may require amending HIPA to allow mental health and other medical information in the checks, but the government should bear the burden to prove you cannot own; not the citizen proving they should own.
  • Using kids and cops to sway the uninformed. Hell no I don't support anything that is an assault on the 2nd Amendment!
  • Nobody in my dept supports GC.
  • Everyone I work with and guys I have talked to think it is all BS. There is no support for further "gun" control here.
  • I support Obama looking into why my paycheck is getting smaller and why gas and other things are getting higher.

    The gun stuff is all smoke and mirrors. They don't want to concentrate on the important hard issue, like the economy!
  • Whenever a politician talks of "gun control" it means "gun ban". Which is what the left-wing liberal Obama supporters want!
  • Hell no! Being in law enforce for 30 years, now retired, no one that I know in law enforcement supports this bastard.
  • OrlandoGator, you said it best.
  • Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com
  • All of my compatriots oppose the gun ban. Obama and not so Feinstein are full of S@#$. Over half of the Sheriffs organizations oppose it and have written letters to our idiot of a president and said they would not enforce the gun law if passed. The president and his cronies are living in their own dream world and the world of true reality.
  • People I have talked to are not in favor, and one is not really saying much. But wether it's civis or LEO not many people I know, who have talked about it, support it. I think I know maybe 2 people I know agree with the POTUS.
  • ~X( Lies, lies, and more lies...I'm not sure if he knows the difference anymore. ~X(

    None of the law enforcement in our circle support anti-gun ownership.

    Considering the Sheriffs of various counties coming forward to make clear that they would not enforce such lunacy by the Federal Government, it is clear that all law enforcement does not support this anti-gun ownership agenda.

    I am enraged that he would claim to speak "for" us. He presents lies as truth and it is incredibly unacceptable.
    X(
  • When the National Sheriff's Association is saying they support Second Amendment rights, I'd say negative on Obama saying that all police support his gun restriction proposals.
  • As with every other Officer on this site, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States not only as a Police Officer, but also as a military veteran. That oath has no expiration date. I refuse to support any and all attacks on the Constitution, especially the 2nd Amendment.
  • Agree with jmjolly223. uphold the constitution as a whole, don't peice meal it....
  • Democrats love to piece meal the Constitution. I saw a piece on Rachel Maddow's show the other day where she was going on and on about women's Constitutional rights to abortion, through the 14th Amendment's privacy clause, but these same liberals won't concede that Americans should enjoy that same right to privacy when it comes to what firearms and ammunition they own. Not to mention that gun owners, in addition to the 14th Amendment's right to privacy, also enjoy an explicit right to gun ownership in the 2nd Amendment, something the pro-abortion people don't have. Another thing the grinded my gears in that piece was that they kept referring to pro-life people as being anti-choice. I'm very much pro-choice, but you make a million choices before you're pregnant that lead to being pregnant. Saying pro-choice and certainly saying anti-choice is a misnomer. I'm not anti-choice, I'm pro-responsibility for the choices you've already made.
  • Hell no!!!! Nobody that I know in LE does and Im tired of the president using LE for his political agenda.
  • Heck NO! I think it should be a federal law that requires each non-felon household to own at least one gun per adult occupant.
  • Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com
  • With an estimated 300 million guns in the hands of private citizens, and an estimated 2 to 3 million in law enforcement and military...I don't see the government being that crazy enough to take away all of those 300 million or so firearms. It would be beyond suicidal. If anything, I personally wish both the extreme left and extreme right would stop shouting so much, more so on the extreme political right. A lot of this disinformation about the guns being taken away is coming from a very few, but very paranoid, tin foil hat wearing types. They're also the same types who actually think that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax. As for the extreme political left, I don't like how they seem to think a drastic cutback on the number of privately owned guns in the country will somehow work. And through all of this debate about what kind of gun should be acceptable for a person to own or even what kind of background checks are acceptable...nobody seems to be talking about the fact that it is pretty easy for a person with a mental illness (the sort of illness that makes a person a threat to public safety if given a gun) to be able to legally purchase firearms. Not too many people I know are even talking about the fact that a dozen and a half children are dead, either.

    Granted, I know my thoughts may get a lot of negative comments thrown at me, but that's how I feel about the state of things. I for one would think that there should be more funding for law enforcement at the federal, state and local level to be able to deal with gun-related crimes in a far more efficient capacity. I would also like to think that a background check system that utilizes a nationwide database of convicted criminals, mentally ill individuals and individuals with restraining orders out against them (this category mainly applying to people who were involved with or are involved with a domestic violence case or something like stalking) should be able to be in place. I certainly would hope such a system would work. I personally don't think any of the ideas put forward about an assault weapons ban would do much good in the long run, let alone outlawing high-capacity magazines.

    I don't get why the NRA thinks a more comprehensive and efficient background check system is a bad idea now, when in 1999 Wayne LaPierre testified before Congress in favor of more background checks. I figure as long as you're a law abiding citizen, you're good, right? Even then, going back to the bit about mentally ill individuals...I suppose if I wanted to be more even-minded, what we truly need both at the state and national level is far more funding for mental health treatment. I was witness to a lot of budget cuts in that area when I lived in Michigan, North Carolina and even here in Colorado. And to see that happening when I have a mentally disabled relative...I'd be lying if I said budget cuts to mental health treatment services don't piss me off even just a little bit. I hope I didn't anger anyone with my thoughts. All I do ask is that any replies at least be respectful and polite, unlike some of the replies I would typically get out of a few select friends I know.
  • The NRA is not against background checks, necessarily. The NRA doesn't want bad guys having guns any more than anyone else. But we've seen with the no-fly list that the government often gets it wrong. People prohibited from flying for no reason and whatnot. The NRA just doesn't want to see the background check system be used to prohibit innocent people from being able to purchase guns either through incompetence, or, worse yet, through political engineering. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see a corrupt Sheriff or Mayor or Governor using the background check system to disarm dissidents or people who disagree with them politically, and that's wrong. Wayne LaPierre has said multiple times that he would support more comprehensive BG checks if the government could make the system infallible and prove no law-abiding citizen would get caught up in it
  • It has gotten to the point up here where the SP won't even conduct yearly quals for HR 218
    for retired LEO's you have to hunt long and hard to find a place that will qualify yearly.
  • Thanks for all of the comments. It's good to know that we haven't lost sight of why we became law enforcement officers......to protect the Constitution, not to be the ones responsible for it's destruction. God bless all of you for doing what you do.
  • As a Retired Motor Officer, I can tell you that not one Officer I know supports the Usurper or his Anti gun agenda.
  • I know of no officers that support gun control other than to put the bad guys away for a long time with anything involving a weapon of any sort instead of the slap on the hand they get now. Most of these morons pushing gun control do not have any idea about it, they are just jumping on the band wagon. Of couse if it is not gun control it will be something else anyway. Good people need to run for office.
  • I and every COP I know supports the 2nd Amendment and believes everyone who can legally own and carry a firearm should do so. Face it, we are mostly there after the fact to investigate and file a report. Citizens need to be properly trained and have the ability to protect themselves.
  • I haven't supported anything that idiot has said or done.
  • Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com
  • I have not supported anything the liar has said. I stopped watching the news and stopped the paper when he was re-elected. He is an arrogant idiot and has no respect for cops of agency. Like granny would say "the man is just outhouse breed".
Sign In or Register to comment.
Thin Blue Line Decals at FireandRescueDecals.com


Contact Us