Good blog entry on National CCW for cops
- Thread starter jnojr
- Start date
- Status
Treylis
Member
I like it.
This should be good if it is anything like the other 500 times we have hashed out this topic...
Let me skip to the end, the article makes a LOT of assumptions and like I have heard many times, assume just makes and ass out of u & me. The vast majority of LEOs, myself included are totally in favor of nationwide CCW. There are a vocal minority of admin types that are in the pocket of the dems who will gladly say whatever their democratic masters tell them to and as proof, I would point to the number of cheifs and unions that opposed 218...they even turned on their fellow LEOs for heavens sake! To say that all cops are anti CCW or anti gun because of a vocal minority is just plain wrong. I strongly supported 218 and worked at getting it passed, even though it has no current affect on me since I could carry nationwide anyway because I believe that it is the logical first step to nationwide CCW for ALL of US, not just those carrying badges like me. The problems we as gun owners constantly run into are largely brough about by our own infighting and all or nothing attitude that leads us to not voting for pres or complaining when we don't get everything we want. Sometimes we have to take what we can get now and work on the rest as it comes down the pipe.
I can tell you though, that there is now a large swelling of resentment on the LEO side of the house because of the attempts that so many non LEOs made to defeat LEO carry and that may lead to more LEOs fighting nationwide CCW when it comes up. It really burned a lot of bridges when LEOs saw gun owners fighting against LEO carry and helped reinforce that US vs Them mentality.
Plus, all of the folks in NoVA that have felt the need to make a "Statement" by carrying openly have created a huge swelling of fear among the locals that while often unjustified, has none the less given credence and power to the libs attempts to curtail CCW rights. It is another perfect example of gun owners cutting their nose off to spite their face and now that the sheep are scared, they are far more likely to try and restrict gun laws...
All in all, I think LEO carry is a step in the right direction...it may only be a half step, but it is light years from where we were only a few years ago and hopefully we will all be carrying soon.
Let me skip to the end, the article makes a LOT of assumptions and like I have heard many times, assume just makes and ass out of u & me. The vast majority of LEOs, myself included are totally in favor of nationwide CCW. There are a vocal minority of admin types that are in the pocket of the dems who will gladly say whatever their democratic masters tell them to and as proof, I would point to the number of cheifs and unions that opposed 218...they even turned on their fellow LEOs for heavens sake! To say that all cops are anti CCW or anti gun because of a vocal minority is just plain wrong. I strongly supported 218 and worked at getting it passed, even though it has no current affect on me since I could carry nationwide anyway because I believe that it is the logical first step to nationwide CCW for ALL of US, not just those carrying badges like me. The problems we as gun owners constantly run into are largely brough about by our own infighting and all or nothing attitude that leads us to not voting for pres or complaining when we don't get everything we want. Sometimes we have to take what we can get now and work on the rest as it comes down the pipe.
I can tell you though, that there is now a large swelling of resentment on the LEO side of the house because of the attempts that so many non LEOs made to defeat LEO carry and that may lead to more LEOs fighting nationwide CCW when it comes up. It really burned a lot of bridges when LEOs saw gun owners fighting against LEO carry and helped reinforce that US vs Them mentality.
Plus, all of the folks in NoVA that have felt the need to make a "Statement" by carrying openly have created a huge swelling of fear among the locals that while often unjustified, has none the less given credence and power to the libs attempts to curtail CCW rights. It is another perfect example of gun owners cutting their nose off to spite their face and now that the sheep are scared, they are far more likely to try and restrict gun laws...
All in all, I think LEO carry is a step in the right direction...it may only be a half step, but it is light years from where we were only a few years ago and hopefully we will all be carrying soon.
Hypnogator
Member
Well said, Fed! (I'm a poet and don't know it! 
)
While I agree that National CCW (or, more Constitutionally, Federal mandated CCW reciprocity) is the ideal, allowing active and honorably retired LEOs to carry nationally is a good, logical first step in such a program. Many of the arguments fronted by antis and even police executives against this law (Blood will run in the streets! Officers whom we don't recognize will suddenly lose all memory of their training and do something to cause us to shoot them!
) are the same arguments marshalled against national reciprocity. And yes, I resent the sometimes active efforts of so-called "gun rights" people to thwart this law. Grow up, people. You don't see the anti groups going denegrating each other's efforts because they don't jive with each organization's goals!
And I think Fed hit the nail on the head about the unintended consequences of gun owners exercising their right to carry openly, causing panic among the, yes, sheeple. The attitude often expressed on this board is, "They're just going to have to get used to it." We have to remember, there're a lot more of them than of us, and if the public alarm level becomes too great, we'll be stuck with legislation against carry, both open and concealed, that we may believe is unconstitutional, but will nevertheless be enforced.
With public concern high over terrorism, we should all be supporting the initiative it has given us to roll back some of the anti legislation. If having armed LEOs everywhere makes the public feel safe, why don't we point out how much safer if there would be 100 times as many responsibly armed citizens able to travel throughout the country.
)While I agree that National CCW (or, more Constitutionally, Federal mandated CCW reciprocity) is the ideal, allowing active and honorably retired LEOs to carry nationally is a good, logical first step in such a program. Many of the arguments fronted by antis and even police executives against this law (Blood will run in the streets! Officers whom we don't recognize will suddenly lose all memory of their training and do something to cause us to shoot them!
) are the same arguments marshalled against national reciprocity. And yes, I resent the sometimes active efforts of so-called "gun rights" people to thwart this law. Grow up, people. You don't see the anti groups going denegrating each other's efforts because they don't jive with each organization's goals!And I think Fed hit the nail on the head about the unintended consequences of gun owners exercising their right to carry openly, causing panic among the, yes, sheeple. The attitude often expressed on this board is, "They're just going to have to get used to it." We have to remember, there're a lot more of them than of us, and if the public alarm level becomes too great, we'll be stuck with legislation against carry, both open and concealed, that we may believe is unconstitutional, but will nevertheless be enforced.
With public concern high over terrorism, we should all be supporting the initiative it has given us to roll back some of the anti legislation. If having armed LEOs everywhere makes the public feel safe, why don't we point out how much safer if there would be 100 times as many responsibly armed citizens able to travel throughout the country.
cracked butt
Member
While I agree with you for the most part FED, its very hard for us nonLEOs to support a law that puts a certain class of individuals above others. Idealistically and realistically I do support the law, but it really bites me hard when the same people you try to support are in many cases more than willing to fight against my rights. I live in one of the most conservative counties in my state, yet my Sheriff and Chief of Police were both fighting the passage of CCW in my state earlier this year.:banghead: 
Marko Kloos
Moderator Emeritus
That law would remove all incentive for LEO brass to support citizen CCW, and it would be yet another "Some animals are more equal than others" type law.
It is a lot easier for a LEO to get a CCW in his home state than it is for a regular Joe Citizen to get a badge.
It is a lot easier for a LEO to get a CCW in his home state than it is for a regular Joe Citizen to get a badge.
Sergeant Bob
Member
You're probably right about that.
I do know that the FOP fought against a bill which would have granted nationwide CCW to civilianS, in favor of 218, which granted it only to police.
--------------------------------------------------------
Further, H.R. 339, introduced by Congressman Cliff Stearns, contains nearly identical language to that of Senator Hatch, giving qualified active and retired law enforcement officers the authority to carry their firearms when engaging in interjurisdictional travel. However, the National Fraternal Order of Police is unable to give this bill our support because it also contains language changing current Federal law with respect to the carrying of concealed firearms for private citizens. We, as an organization, believe very strongly that the issue of concealed weapons for private citizens is one best left to the States.
F.O.P. WEBSITE
Hypnogator
Member
I've got to admit, that's just plain wrong, and hypocritical. We (the FOP) support overriding states' rights to arm LEOs nationally, but not citizens.
Wrong on so many levels. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Several things. First, it is the LEO groups that are participating in the "us vs. them" mentality. THEY are the ones that have fought tooth and nail virtually ever CCW law in every state. The NRA and other gunowners worked to pass these laws, and even after the LEO groups pissing all over us, did we seek to exlude them from being "allowed" to carry? No. All they had to do was pay a fee just like the rest of us.
Before this bill became law, out-of-state cops were already able to legally carry in about 35 states, thanks to the efforts of "gunowners", and despite the roadblocks of most LEO organizations. If your average cop should "resent" anyone, it should be their own worthless leaders, not the NRA or other gunowners. Heck, if LEO organizations had gotten behind CCW in other states, we would have already had nationwide CCW 5 years ago.
As for LEO organizations opposing nationwide CCW for us peasants, you seem to imply that they would *support* it, but now they won't because a few gunowners made them mad. That is total BS. The politicians running these organizations would still oppose it no matter what gunowners did. The reason for this is that they are elitists, who care neither about the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights, nor their bosses (we the people). The only exception to this that I'm aware of is the LEAA, which supports the RKBA for ALL Americans, not just police officers.
As for police organizations opposing CCW for us peasants, all I can say is "bring it on". We don't need your support. We've passed CCW in many states without it. The Constitution is on our side. The truth is on our side. The people are on our side.
As for "burning bridges", know this: there are a lot more of us than there are of you. Traditionally, conservatives have supported the police on funding, manpower, getting new toys, writing letters to newspaper in your support, etc.... Continue with your anti-gun propaganda, and fewer conservatives are going to support you guys when it comes time to get more money or better equipment.
But if you guys still want to "burn bridges". Go for it. You have a lot more to lose than we do. More and more Americans are losing their patience with this "one set of rules for us, another for you" crap. And rightfully so.
Well, it seems like some "gunowners" here want to enforce "imaginary" laws against open carry anyway. It is not illegal to openly carry in Virginia, nor is it immoral, nor does it infringe upon any one else's Rights.
People in Virginia have the Right to open carry, and a Right not exercised is one that is lost.
The VCDL has been *the* most successful state-based gun organization anywhere in the United States. They got passed some 15 improvements to the gun laws there.
They did this even with a Democrat governor. I suspect that many folks here would have taken the position "let's not rock the boat, and let's wait for a GOP governor before trying to pass anything". Fortunately, the VCDL did not do this. They took the offensive and dared Warner to veto the bills. The fact that he did not veto them tells me that he is aware that even vetoing pro-gun legislation (let alone signing new gun edicts) is bad for his political career.
Furthermore, nobody is going to ban open carry in Virginia. Even politicians in anti-gun states like Maryland are starting to realize that enacting gun control is bad for them politically. Maryland couldn't even get an assault weapons bill out of committee, let alone out of the legislature, which still wouldn't have mattered since it would have been vetoed by the governor.
All this open carry business in Virginia will result in 5 things happening (none of them bad):
1) The VA legislature will change the law legalizing concealed carry in restaurants. They will NOT make it illegal to openly carry there.
2) Those of us that support the RKBA will see who our real allies are by noting those that publicly support open carry. Also, we will see who are enemies are, and we will replace them at the ballot box by those that support open carry.
3) More folks will get acclimated to seeing an armed public, which is good for gunowners and good for the cause.
4) The more leftists and other control freaks that complain about citizens carrying guns, the more voters will vote against them. Even Democrats are starting to realize this.
5) Gunowners in more states will push for open or concealed carry without a license. If folks in Virginia can open carry, the rest of us should have that Right recognized also.
Shovelhead
Member
On several BBs on the internet, uninformed 'Sheeple' in the Wash DC area still think we need a permit to OWN a firearm in Virginia.
These folks need Edjukaytin'.
Ed
These folks need Edjukaytin'.
Ed
cropcirclewalker
member
218 is unconstitutional.
10a
14a
If the supremes let it stand (If it gets that far) they will be in a further bind with the full faith anc credit clause.
You leos should enjoy it while you can. It will be history.
10a
14a
If the supremes let it stand (If it gets that far) they will be in a further bind with the full faith anc credit clause.
You leos should enjoy it while you can. It will be history.
I think the courts will probably overturn it also.
And "resentful" cops, via their professional organizations, will likely delay implementation of CCW laws in the few states that don't have them.
The irony of this situation (should this outcome occur) will be that many out-of-state cops won't be able to "legally" carry in some states SOLELY because other cops sabatoged CCW efforts in those states.
Prudent police organizations should therefore support efforts to get CCW in the 15 or so states that don't recognize it.
atek3
Member
I agree with treylis and the blogger.
"some animals are more equal than others" is an apt description of the situation.
atek3
"some animals are more equal than others" is an apt description of the situation.
atek3
What about the GI's?
I just found out about this bill passing. and I know that I am out of the loop but, what does this do for the defence of those that are not/ have never been Cops? And does this mean that because I kill bad guys on the other side of the world that I am less qualified to carry at home than those that kill bad guys here? Just a question? And also does this affect states that have no CCW? By that I mean does this create national CCW for cops only. (Can a retired LEO carry in DC?)
I just found out about this bill passing. and I know that I am out of the loop but, what does this do for the defence of those that are not/ have never been Cops? And does this mean that because I kill bad guys on the other side of the world that I am less qualified to carry at home than those that kill bad guys here? Just a question? And also does this affect states that have no CCW? By that I mean does this create national CCW for cops only. (Can a retired LEO carry in DC?)
And Im quite sure that the reason it will ever even go to court is some resentful fool like yourself who raises the issue, only to have it stripped.
I am an LEO, and I am for national CCW for civilians, but I see the two matters as being independent of one another. Im pretty sur eit wont be going anywhere.
More than likely, some anti-RKBA thug like Mayor Daley will bring suit after one of his goons arrest an out-of-state LEO for travelling armed through Illinois. Or some gun-grabber in NJ will arrest an out-of-state cop for carrying hollowpoints. Then some ambitious DA will tack on a charge of "illegal" CCW, and take it to court. Or a police officer and his wife will be travelling through DC, and one of "DC's finest" will arrest the officer's wife for CCW since the weapon was in the glove box.
If you've read the bill, you'll see that Congress is justifying their jurisdiction under the "interstate commerce clause". This is a real stretch, but the only thing they could base it one, since by either using the 'full faith and credit clause' or the 2nd amendment, they would then have to apply it to ALL of us, and just not cops.
How the courts rule is anyone guess, but I suspect they will overturn it, since they seem to be more pro-statist than pro-Freedom. Then again, it affects agents of the state directly, so it will be interesting to see how it goes.
Like I said earlier, cops would be wise to work with the NRA and other pro-RKBA groups to accelerate the passage of CCW in other states, if for no other reason than as a "backup" in case HR 218 gets tossed by the courts.
cropcirclewalker
member
Somebody up there got all ad hominy and called me a resentful fool.
If that means that whenever I see my constitution further corrupted by a bunch of statists with the assistance of a bunch of leos (who both have vowed to uphold the constitution and then wink), then, well, let it be so.
I think that when a person swears an oath to protect, defend, follow, obey or whatever the constitution and then goes out and enforces a gun control law (which we all agree here to be unconstitutional) he has sold his soul.
Either that, or he is stupid. (which I consider to be the charitible alternative)
If that means that whenever I see my constitution further corrupted by a bunch of statists with the assistance of a bunch of leos (who both have vowed to uphold the constitution and then wink), then, well, let it be so.
I think that when a person swears an oath to protect, defend, follow, obey or whatever the constitution and then goes out and enforces a gun control law (which we all agree here to be unconstitutional) he has sold his soul.
Either that, or he is stupid. (which I consider to be the charitible alternative)
- Status