Why are law enforcement split about firearms ownership and CCW?

H

hminsky

NES Life Member
NES Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
9,268
Likes
5,817
Feedback: 83 / 0 / 0
It seems like in all the debates over gun control I have heard, each side trots out some support from law enforcement groups (chiefs of police, etc).

Why would law enforcement professionals be in favor of restricting CCW? In the town I live in, I assume it is because they think it is another headache to deal with, and because there are so (relatively, compared to other cities this size) few assaults and murders that they figure the citizens are more likely to harm each other than the criminals are.

Anyone have any insights into this ?
 
Some of the chiefs, especially the younger ones have been bathed in political correctness. Some are flat out elitists that don't believe in ordinary people having guns.

Whenever possible, police chiefs like that need to be removed from their jobs by citizen pressure on the mayor/city council/etc. Any police chief who restricts or otherwise obstructs a citizen's right to self defense should be fired.
 
Chiefs are APPOINTED, to serve at the whim and pleasure of the appointing authority (selectmen, mayor, etc.). If they do NOT say what their "handlers" want them to say, they are out of their $100-150K/year job and have to pay for their own cars. Guess what they do?

Chiefs are POLITICIANS, first and foremost! If you ask any seasoned "street cop", most will tell you that they would never want that job and some might tell you why.

The chiefs parade out behind the anti-gun crowd. MCOPA was vehemently opposed to HR218, which allows them and their own troops to CCW in 50 states.

Rank and file officers you will most likely find will either be pro-gun or ambivalent, but most won't be the rabid anti-gun folks that you typically find at the top.

Please realize that the above is a broad generalization, and there are exceptions to every rule.
 
Chiefs may be appointed up here but back in NJ, after the appointment they obtain tenure. They cannot be removed unless convicted of a criminal act or attain the age of 65. But to make their life easier they tend to play ball with the Mayor and higher ups. The pols can cut the budget down to nothing if the Chief butts head once too often.

But they are politicians. Most of the Chiefs that I knew in NJ had no opinion of firearms. Most police officers don't have a strong opinion on that subject either way for the most part.

What I did believe is that they felt additional laws did little to solve the problem of firearm violence. Kneejeck reaction to a incident usually did nothing but get a politician a photo op.
 
What you refer to is called "strong chief" here. They were (for the most part, past tense) chiefs appointed under civil service and like you stated, couldn't be removed except for misconduct or age.

As those chiefs retired (my first chief here was a "strong chief"), they were replaced with NON-Civil Service chiefs, who had a contract of 1-3 years and could be removed with the snap of the fingers.

Thus, our chiefs in MA are now mostly a "very obedient bunch" (of politicians)! [rolleyes]
 
Some things I've noticed...

The bigger the city gets, the more likely the chief is to be an
anti, especially if the people who control his puppet strings are
antis themselves. The anti thing is definitely an "agenda" issue
and is never based on anything approaching deep logic or reasoning.

The "ground troops" on the other hand its probably more like a 60/40
split..... that first 60% is divided between strong and at least lukewarm
pro gun and the bottom 40% is either completely indifferent or are antis themselves.
(You'd be surprised at how many liberals are sneaking into
LE... it defies logic, but they are out there... ).

I think what a lot of gunpersons forget in regards to LE, is that just because
a LEO carries a gun for 40 (or more) hours a week does not make him a
gunperson. To a lot of these guys/ladies the gun is just another heavy
thing on their duty belt that they hope they never have to use. Their duty
weapon may be the only gun they -have-. The ones that invest more than
the minimum amount of effort in pistolcraft are probably a minority. That
has a lot to do with the disparity in opinion on the subject as well.

-Mike
 
Recognize also that, while it might give them a sense of security, the vast majority of street cops will go their entire career without ever firing their service weapon except for the occasional qualification and maybe even a little practice. For them it's just another tool like the pepper spray, cuffs, a radio, and all the rest hanging on their belts. They're not shooters, and quite possibly neither competent nor comfortable with guns. As a result, they might have the same sort of feelings about people carrying guns that the stereotypical soccer-mom might have.

Ken
 
I think it really varies with the community, in some areas like the more rural areas or smaller communities there really is no concern about who is armed and who is not armed as long as the requirements for the licensing are upheld. But this same approach in a larger city is probably much different.
 
clinotus said:
I think it really varies with the community, in some areas like the more rural areas or smaller communities there really is no concern about who is armed and who is not armed as long as the requirements for the licensing are upheld. But this same approach in a larger city is probably much different.
Click to expand...

I understand the above, but I don't buy it as an excuse. LEO's should be the first to realize the only people they need to worry about having guns are criminals and criminals don't follow the gun laws. There is zero reason for any LEO to be anti-gun... If they are they should only carry and ASP and Mace...
 
Last edited:
derek said:
I understand the above, but I don't buy it as an excuse. LEO's should be the first to realize the only people they need to worry about having guns are criminals and criminals don't follow the gun laws. There is zero reason for any LEO to be anti-gun... If they are they should only carry and ASP and Mace...
Click to expand...

That has been my opinion of the local LEO culture here (Jon excluded). Its just not important and, for the life of me, I can't figure that out at all. [thinking]

RJ
 
Back
Top Bottom