I got this info from a friend of mine and want to get it out there. If you have a little time to read it you should do so. The International Association of Chiefs of Police urged Congress to pass ..an effective assault weapons ban.' If you're familiar with the "Joyce Foundation"... well they slipped the IACP some "spending money" and this is what they came up with. Lets hear what you think.
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/ACF1875.pdf
2007-09-22 21:38:14 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Outdoor Recreation ➔ Hunting
Just to clarify. I am not for the ban. I am an avid shooter who owns and loves little black rifles.
2007-09-23 01:38:55 · update #1
Their is no such thing as an assault weapon, That is a phrase the anti-gunners use. To call something like an Ar-15 and assault rifle you would have to call baseball bats assault bats, and big knifes assault knifes.
"Assault is a behavior not a device"
2007-09-24 00:40:41 · answer #1 · answered by Dustin W 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A Police Chief is strictly a political job. Many Chiefs were not involved or only marginally so, with police work. Chiefs Associations have their own agenda and do what their handlers tell them to do ( if they want to remain Chief)
The average street Policeman is more likely to be in favor of concealed carrying than the Chiefs. If they ever did a real survey ( not sullied by Chiefs) they would find a lot of support for the 2nd amendment from Police. The average street guy knows he will not be right at the scene when you are in danger. Police work is largely reactionary.
Just remember, Chiefs Associations do the political bidding of one group or another. They will also do what is best for themselves and their career.
I saw 30 years of this and once a Policeman becomes a Chief he does and abrupt 180 degree turn in his philosophy and actions.
2007-09-23 07:16:28 · answer #2 · answered by Ret. Sgt. 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Banning will not solve any of the problem and most likely will create many more problems.
Banning guns is only a very small part of what has to be done. To ban now without the other programs needed will only cause more hatred for the police.
Voters have been asked to do this many times. so far they have not. This surely must tell you something about the general public attitude.
It sure tells me a lot. First how IGNORANT most of you really are. How bad parents are about teaching their children. Parents teach their own hate and bigotry even though they think they do not.
Face the facts of what is and is not. Banning is not the answer.
2007-09-23 05:24:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
If a criminal wants to get his/her hands on a certain type of weapon , they'll get it. Baning certain guns will not make a difference.
You know the saying "where there is a will there is a way"
So the cops should let the good people have a way to defend them selves if need be. And as for the criminals having better weapons then the cops, People pay enough taxes so there is no reason why the cops shouldn't have the tools they need to get the job done. Maybe government officials should stop giving them selves a pay raise and spending money on countries that don't even appreciate your help
2007-09-23 10:02:57 · answer #4 · answered by Canadian Metis 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Gives the impression that everytime the Police have a serious incident with a criminal, it's like the firefight in the Michael Mann film Heat.
This preys unfairly on the fears of people who do not have understanding of the situation.
They are being manipulated by unscrupulous types that think private law-abiding Citizens do not have the right to actively defend themselves.
Interestingly, there are more "Right to Carry" states than not and they do not experience an upsurge in crime as a result.
Wish New York was like that . . .
2007-09-23 06:28:49 · answer #5 · answered by ZepherGeist 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Most police officers don't think an assault weapon ban would help anything. Most crimes are committed with pistols anyway, and bans only affect the people who are willing to abide by it. Does anybody remember reading about that thing we had in the 20's, prohibition? Yeah, it didn't keep anyone from getting their hands on booze, either.
2007-09-23 11:11:10 · answer #6 · answered by Curtis B 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Police chiefs are politicians. Politicians lie. Disappointing but not surprising.
2007-09-23 08:21:40 · answer #7 · answered by gunplumber_462 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
100 % of crimes are commited by criminals, there should the the same out cry for harsh and swift punishment of criminals,, cut to the source of the problem!!
2007-09-23 11:17:53 · answer #8 · answered by Orion2506 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The chiefs are doing the propper ting,You Americans got all kinds of guns even hanging of your ears and maybe more places,while here in Canada they are too fickle the other way,if some of the power to be here had their own way we wouldn't be allowed to own a water squirter.~Edit there is no law for criminals anyhow ,whatever laws are on book so as to level $fines$ to pay parasites and judges their huge salaries,
2007-09-23 10:23:26 · answer #9 · answered by hunter 6 · 0⤊ 6⤋
The police have been more poorly armed than many criminals for years, due to the unflagging efforts of the NRA. Police chiefs around the country have been pleading for years for assault weapons bans, but the current idiot administration won't have anything to do with it.
So much for Homeland Security . . .
2007-09-23 04:52:34 · answer #10 · answered by AgonyAuntie 4 · 0⤊ 14⤋