Interesting police opinion

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Police Chiefs Support New Gun Laws

23 January 2013 by Joseph Spector in Other - 26 Comments
The New York State Association of Chiefs of Police said today that it’s “hopeful” the new gun-control laws approved last week “will be an additional step toward helping to protect the citizens of New York State, while still respecting the rights of hunters and sportsmen.”
The statement comes as some sheriffs are concerned about the new law, saying it could violate the Second Amendment.
The chiefs, however, are taking a more positive tone toward the law, which enacts a tougher assault-weapon ban and lower the limit on magazines on bullets from 10 to seven.
“We also hope that this legislation, as administered, will allow for the speedy processing of legal gun registration but also keep guns out of the wrong hands,” the chiefs said. “These new laws will provide our members in law enforcement with additional tools they need by raising penalties for killing a first responder, closing the private sale loophole and allowing for more thorough background checks of those who disqualify – specifically, the mentally ill.”
The statement continued, “We believe that strengthening Kendra’s Law will result in keeping our officers and the public safe. Our goals for all New Yorkers are the same – to protect and serve, to save lives, and stop the violence.”

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Maine Police Chiefs Push for Stronger Gun Laws

David Hench
Source: Portland Press Herald, Maine
Created: April 10, 2013
Three current and former police chiefs from Maine were in the nation's capital on Tuesday making their case for stronger gun laws.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Three current and former police chiefs from Maine were in the nation's capital on Tuesday making their case for stronger gun laws as the White House and advocacy groups attempted to ratchet up pressure on Congress to vote on several proposals.
Portland Police Chief Michael Sauschuck, Auburn Chief Phillip Crowell Jr. and former Lewiston Chief Larry Gilbert joined law enforcement officers from across the country who made rounds on Capitol Hill.
They also attended an impassioned and, at times, angry speech by Vice President Joe Biden, who called Republican threats to filibuster a gun control package "embarrassing" and suggested opponents of the gun bills were "in a time warp."
"I thought he did an incredible job," Sauschuck said after Biden's speech. "It really struck home."

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
DeKalb police chief to join Biden on gun roundtable

  • 1
By April Hunt
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
DeKalb County’s new police chief will appear on national television Thursday with Vice President Joe Biden to talk about gun safety efforts at the federal level.
Cedric Alexander joined a survivor of the Virginia Tech shooting, a certified firearms instructor and a gun industry lobbyist in the discussion with Biden for MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program.
Alexander, who began working as police chief in Georgia’s third-biggest county on April 1, said it was his law enforcement background that led him to back gun control advocates’ push for background checks — “low-hanging fruit we should all agree can and should be done” — and support the safety training advocated by gun rights groups. “Ninety-nine percent of gun owners are responsible,” he told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution in an interview.
Jim, I know your opinion, I just found it interesting that this was the outcome of a survey with over 15,000 policeman throughout the US participating.

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
That survey was only for members of

Here is how Americans really Feel!

88% support background checks for all gun sales.

57% favor outlawing high capacity clips

56% favor a ban on assault and semi-automaitc guns

Less than half have a favorable opinion of the NRA

When you factor in the "no opinion" folks, these are very strong numbers!

Those are election winning numbers!
Last edited:
Like I said, this was a survey of policeman, not the public or anyone else. I wasn't making a point, just showing a survey of policeman.
From the PoliceOne survey that has 15,000 active and retired law enforcement members:

Nearly 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines with more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

More than 81 percent said that “gun buy-backs” do not reduce gun violence.

Nearly 80 percent said that a ban on private transfers of firearms between law-abiding citizens would not reduce violent crime.

71 percent said that a ban on “assault weapons” would have no impact on reducing violent crime. 20.5 percent said it would actually have a ​negative ​impact.

More than 70 percent opposed the idea of a national database of legal gun sales.

Nearly 68 percent said magazine capacity restrictions would negatively affect them personally.

More than 60 percent said that the passage of Obama’s gun control legislation would do nothing to improve officer safety. Nearly 25 percent said it would actually have a ​negative​ impact.

More than 76 percent responded with either a 4 or 5 when asked on a scale of 1-5 how important legally armed citizens are to reducing overall crime.

80 percent believe legally armed citizens can reduce casualties in incidents of mass violence.

More than 91 percent stated they supported the Right-to-Carry by law abiding Americans.

More than 76 percent support the arming of trained and qualified teachers or administrators who volunteer to carry a firearm.

Nearly 45 percent said that if they were Sheriff or Chief, they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws, and would vocally join the opposition effort.

17.2 percent said they would not enforce the laws, and “quietly lead the agency in the opposite direction.” 20 percent were unsure of how they would respond.
I think the co-sponsored background check bill that we are now seeing is OK. When they were first proposing "background checks" it was actually gun registration which has historically been a big no-no. But this new bill specifically states that's not the case. Here in Illinois we have the FOID system, i see this new bill being a lot like that.

Who knows if they are going to amend it into oblivion...

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Will someone please explain to me how banning mags with "X" capacity...banning SO CALLED "assault weapons"...mandating background checks...or implementing any other additional infringements on law abiding people is going to change what loons and crooks do? Please? Anybody???

If an outright BAN on any and all firearms in a given area ("gun-free zone" laws) completely and totally FAILED to prevent Columbine, Sandy Hook, or you name whatever other mass murder you'd care to mention - WHY would any sane person think passing MORE LAWS that only law-abiding people are going to obey will prevent crooks and loons from committing future gun incidents? WHY would/should anyone believe that?


"...NO LAW INFRINGING..." (Second Amend.)
Because it gives unprecedented powers to the government, and gosh, don't your toes just tingle when something "positive" gets done in the village?

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
So let me see if I understand.....................

All members of Policeone, are "law enforcement" officers. The "Law enforcement" officers take an OATH to uphold the LAW.

These Officers take an oath to uphold the law, yet a fairly large percent say that they would not uphold laws that they were sworn to uphold and took an oath to uphold?

It appears that some "Law Enforcement" officers who have sworn to uphold the laws are liers and should be removed from there jobs!

I call for a Congressonal Investigation.
I'm going to point out something that needs to be considered regarding police supporting political viewpoints... In most cases, the police (chiefs) who publicly support antigun politicians are APPOINTED by those politicians. They are being told how to stand. This was even brought to light by a MD senator during testimony in Annapolis. Whereas sheriffs are ELECTED by the people. This why many sheriffs are saying that they will not enforce unconstitutional laws. In addition, sheriffs are not permitted to enforce federal laws...and you can thank Obummer for that when he set the precedent when he stopped Arizona law enforcement from enforcing federal immigration law.

And I'm thinking the oaths state they will uphold the constitution. Just like the oaths that every Congressman takes, but yet many voted nay on March 23 on an amendment regarding the UN small arms treaty. By voting nay, they all violated their oath and acted in a treasonous way.
How many Police Chiefs are currently, or imminently considering campaigning for elected office? Any opinions offered by such Cheifs, must be viewed with suspicion.
How many face gun crime on a daily basis, face to face?

Police officers, although sworn, are also citizens with rights and consience. Should an officer feel that the Law he swore to uphold has been chnaged to such a degree that they can no longer uphold it, they should be pensioned with full benefit, not sacked, surely? I thought the USA was a democratic society with a Consitution in place to protect All people. Or Jim, is the Police Department, simply an organised mob of government enforcers???

Ron Earp

[which enacts a tougher assault-weapon ban and lower the limit on magazines on bullets from 10 to seven.
Dang ol, my favorite revolver just became an "Assault Revolver" and illegal in NY.

But if it held one round less, well it'd be legal.

Jim Rosenthal

Ten to seven? This is ridiculous. Next thing we'll be arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

We have all the pinheads we need, we're just short of angels.
Actually Bloomdickhead and the rest of the NY legislation screwed up by limiting magazine capacity to seven. First they did not exempt police or military and second, they did not research to see if seven round magazines were available. They are in the process of changing the law to 10 rounds because all of the manufacturers said, "phuck you, we're not making them."