That’s what Chris Fitzsimon says:
Sheriffs and police chiefs are also among the most respected officials in many local communities, another reason why they have such tremendous influence with state lawmakers.
So you’d think that a major policy report from the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the largest nonprofit organization of police executives in the world, would have some impact in the state and create a buzz in the local media.
But it didn’t happen when the Association issued its recent report “Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities,†and it’s not hard to figure out why.
Politicians are all for law enforcement when it means getting tough on criminals, but when it means confronting the National Rifle Association and other gun groups, the love for law enforcement seems to disappear.
Might have something to do with that study being bought and paid for the by the anti-gun Joyce foundation, as we’ve documented here on the blogosphere. Sometimes I wonder if they are deliberately trying to pull the wool over our eyes, or just don’t bother to do research.
Might also have something to with police chiefs being political appointees, who serve at the behest of their typically anti-gun big city mayors, and who represent the views of ordinary beat cops about as much as Mickey Mouse.
NRA being anti-cop just really gets my goat, especially when the current president is a former police captain, that thousands of NRA certified instructors train any numbers of officers in a given year. How many police officers who attend the National Police Shooting Championships feel like NRA isn’t supporting them?
But no, doing a little research would have ruined the whole point: That the National Rifle Assocation is anti-police. Just because Mr. Fitzsimon wishes it were so, doesn’t make it true.
I agree with your sentiment, the NRA is anything but anti-police. In fact I would say they are pro-police and military, with the activities you have mention and many more you didn’t.
I would say and hope you would agree, that many police chiefs /sheriffs being the one’s who are anti-NRA and anti-gun (in the hands of citizens).
Do we really expect anything different? An “Authorized Journalist” who does no research and publishes another biased screed.
Color me shocked.
Actually, the NRA is very much anti-police. The fact the NRA can trot out a few cops is very much akin to the GOP trotting out JC Watts and Clarence Thomas.
Police are just like regular people. Some of them don’t like the idea of civilians having firearms at all. Some of them are for some moderate controls, and some of them ally with us. Polling would indicate otherwise though. Consider this poll, which is chiefs and sheriffs, and not rank and file:
I’ve seen other polling that indicates support for gun rights among police officers is pretty widespread. My anecdotal experience bears that out as well. I’ve yet to meet a police officer who thinks gun control is really going to affect a criminal’s ability to get a gun.
Just another instance of “if you repeat it enough times, it must be true!” Be buggered if the statistics back them up, or if reality shows any relation to what they are saying, or any of that nonsense. Simply because they believe it to be true, and repeat it enough times, it has to be true.
Linoge, they don’t believe it to be true. They just hope the ignorami, like JG,who read it will.
I must say, in this case, the NRA has been falsely accused. And you all know how I feel about the NRA.
The NRA has had FOP support on several topics spanning over several years. Saying we ‘trot out a few cops’ when we’re citing the single largest police officer’s group in the world is just plain ridiculous.
FOP isn’t a principled supporter of gun rights. They have been known to support measures that don’t affect law enforcement. The assault weapons ban being among them.
Yeah, and the FOP head’s had to constantly fight attempts to get the people in the group polled on the matter. They’ve still fought for Tiahrt, against Lautenberg (with the only even remotely successful legal case, although I believe it was later overturned), against the New Jersey Assault Weapon Ban, stated opposition to gun registration on a federal level and local level, and a few other goodies.
They were bedded with HCI under the Clinton era (coincidentally, at the same time that a good 4+ million dollars worth of grants were mysteriously handed out), and they’ll never be too far on our side, but given their opposition the vast majority of the Brady-dingles, it’s a bit hard to claim that the NRA hates them.
Well, I do not honestly know whether they believe it or not, straightarrow. That said, their protestations and “arguments” against firearms border on straight-up beliefs/faith, so it all comes out even in the end :).
As for those who read it and believe it themselves… well, one is born every minute!
Yes, Linoge, you know, else they would not have tried to talk Fenty out of pursuing his appeal of Parker (Heller) v. DC. as evidenced in another item on this site and elsewhere.
They know they are wrong, that they are campaigning to dishonestly deny natural rights to citizens and they are afraid the court will know it also. You need no more proof that they know damn well they are wrong. They are just hoping political pressure from ignorami, such as JadeGold, whose votes unfortunately count for as much as do votes of the intelligent, will sway the oft times spineless adjudicator, legislators and enforcers of the law in order to retain the perks of their illegitimately exalted status.