Police Lobby Says National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Will Sow “Chaos”

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

cops in school

A chaotic scene of epidemic proportions! Humans exercising their natural rights without paying (as much) for government permission! It’s the scene straight out of a horror movie, or you would think it was based on how the police lobby is painting it…

Considering many cops’ interactions with the public anymore, their judgment shouldn’t really be trusted. After all, we have cops shooting dogs for wagging their tails and killing men in cars reaching for their wallets. Now, they are begging the government to stop the passage of nationwide concealed carry reciprocity bill. A bill which will allow civilians a little bit of added protection from the trigger happy agents of the state who kill more Americans than terrorists.

The only thing the passage of this bill would mean is that those who have jumped through the hoops demanded by the state in which they reside (or those who live in a state not selling the right to keep and bear arms back to them in the form of a license) to legally carry a concealed weapon, will be “allowed” by the government to carry anywhere in the United States. Sounds like a little bit of freedom, and we can’t have that. Not in the police state USA.

The anti-gun cops are at it again, bargaining with the government to destroy the small chance of an additional freedom. Honestly, it’s not clear what’s more disturbing about this: the fact that cops are proving time and time again that they are not on our side as most right-leaning pundits would have us believe, or the fact that people think cops have the right to stop this bill because the government gives us rights.

The National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, composed of an alliance of various police chief lobbying groups, penned a letter to Congress on Friday.  In the letter, the cops urge lawmakers to decline support for a pair of national concealed carry reciprocity bills. The measures, the H.R. 38 and S.446, respectively, would expand carry rights nationwide, in effect forcing states and local jurisdictions to respect all valid concealed carry permits, a move the group feels would trigger Armageddon.

“These misguided bills would preempt local and state perspectives on what’s best for communities by forcing states to accept weaker concealed carry standards of other states and eliminates every state’s ability to determine who may exercise the enormous responsibility of carrying a firearm, concealed or otherwise,” says the three-page letter. But it gets better.

copmeme

Law enforcement officers are extensively trained to understand responsible firearm use, including making split-second decisions about when deadly force is appropriate; they also attend periodic in-service training and regularly requalify with their service weapons, most at least semi-annually.

This obvious step in the wrong direction would sow chaos and uncertainty, making a cop’s job harder and citizens less safe.

This is not the first time police officers have demanded the government (who steals from civilians to pay their salaries) take freedom away. In a May 25 op-ed published by the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck wrote, “The mere presence of more concealed weapons on California streets would make police work here much more hazardous.” he added, “If LAPD officers stopped someone with a loaded, concealed handgun, that person could claim to live in a state where permits weren’t necessary, and the officers would be unable to confirm whether it was true.”

The fear mongering and scare tactics obviously learned from media talking heads and politicians are all too obvious to virtually anyone who can read. But those skeptical of the police can take Beck’s statements to mean “you either don’t exercise your rights or because we cops are too ignorant to allow people to exercise their rights, you shouldn’t be exercising your rights.” Either way, civilians don’t deserve rights because the police say so. At least the majority of cops support more rights, according to surveys.

[A] Pew Research Center survey showing that rank-and-file police officers support protecting citizens’ gun rights over passing more gun control by a margin of 3-to-1. And on July 15, 2016, Breitbart News reported that the Annual National Survey of Police Chiefs showed that 76 percent of chiefs believed armed citizens reduce crime. –Breitbart

Those numbers are still not comforting considering cops are supposed to “protecting and serving” not “demanding the government to keep people from being free.” If police officers want to cause a bigger rift in relations with the public, this is certainly a way to make sure that happens.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Dawn Luger of The Daily Sheeple.

Dawn Luger is a staff writer and reporter for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up – follow Dawn’s work at our Facebook or Twitter.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • anonQ

    Doesn’t sound like they are upholding the oath they took to protect the constitution and bill of rights which states we the people have a right to bare arms; it’s our birthright. Are these guys even american?

    • jimmy joe

      Absolutely NOT, they are not american, they are fascists nothing more than petty fascists!! Anybody afraid of our constitution, like they are, has no right to even be here!!

      • NonYo Business

        They are “trained” to be fascists. They go in wanting to help people or just keep the military lifestyle they were accustomed too.

    • RMS1911

      There is nothing in the Constitution about police or police departments.
      If they really honored their oaths they would disband and go work for the Sheriff.

      • g.johnon

        you are correct regarding fbi, cia, u.s. marshals, atf, etc, but nothing in the constitution prevents states and civic communities from forming law enforcement departments.

        • RMS1911

          And all of them work through the sheriff’s authority.
          The county sheriff is the Constitutional law.

  • elbustaroyjetspeekerson

    “Police Lobby Says National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Will Sow ‘Chaos’”……………. EXXXXX-cellent……………….

    • RMS1911

      Anything that scares them and makes them hesitate is good.
      Maybe now they will quit telling lies and stealing but I doubt it.

  • f16hoser

    An Armed Society is a Polite Society.
    Also, I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by six…

  • elbustaroyjetspeekerson

    Nothin’ better to wake up to than a story about nervous chickenshit crybaby piglets, is there? Listen up, peeps:
    No matter WHAT gets “decided”, CC ANYWAY. Your life and the lives of those you love are in the balance EVERYTIME you interact with these TRAITORS. Treat them accordingly. And watch your six. The piglets think they will be exempt from The Great Purge that IS INEVITABLE. THAT means there is NO loyalty to The People, EVER.

  • Frank

    Here’s one suggestion to the “problem” of: “If LAPD officers stopped someone with a loaded, concealed handgun, that person could claim to live in a state where permits weren’t necessary, and the officers would be unable to confirm whether it was true.” (BTW: LA or California is probably the worst example to use.)
    Solution: Even if your own state does not require a CC permit, but you travel to a state that does, you better have one. Simple, and solves the issue of being within the Reciprocity framework. The cops would still be able to find out if the person was a Felon or not – the immediate disqualifier for being in possession of a firearm.
    Also, to my knowledge, as long as you’re not engaged in criminal activity and aren’t doing something to get the attention of law enforcement, like being a dick, most cops don’t bother the law-abiding gun carriers no matter where they’re from or where their CC permit (if they have one) was issued. (I don’t go to CA, either.)

    It isn’t difficult for any law-abiding Citizen to obtain a CC permit, except in the anti-gun, Liberal Progressive states that have delusions of creating a Socialistic Nirvana.
    Short of a national (all fifty states) recognition of every non-Felon Citizen’s Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and with the conditions that presently exist (social, political, and racial divisiveness), the Reciprocity initiative is probably as close as we’re gonna get. If you like the policies of your state and either don’t travel out-of-state or don’t have an issue with traveling without a firearm, no problem.

    The problems lie within the gap of “What should be” and “What is.”

  • dav1bg

    If police enforcement has that much power, then it is easy to change the requirements of employment to include narcissistic personalities or other non empathetic people to the force, who will ruthlessly enforce any unjust law that they are told to uphold. This is how Histler’s SS gained so much control in prewar Germany and what we are beginning to see now. Concealed carry requires FBI investigation before acceptance, anyone with any criminal background will never get the permit. So I fail to see how this is a bad thing. Citizens on patrol. I wonder if the average Police officer has to have as thorough a background check?
    Any police officer who shoots a person with a concealed carry permit is an idiot. To get a permit you have to be an upstanding person in the community, on a level just below a police officer.

    • g.johnon

      it’s getting harder and harder to imagine a level below a police officer.

      • RMS1911

        They encompass a lot in one package. Thief, liar, pervert, control freak, pedophile, rapist, murderer, drug dealers, sadist, facist, psychotic, coward, marginal intelligence.
        did I mention immoral?

        • ReverendDraco✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ ᵃᶜᶜᵒᵘᶰᵗ

          I would hazard it’s more Amoral than Immoral.

          • g.johnon

            more like a big pile of both.

          • RMS1911

            Both are applicable.
            As are unethical/unethical.

        • g.johnon

          yeah, it kinda did come out.

    • SP_88

      It’s actually quite a bit above a police officer. Police officers are arrested for committing crimes at a rate of six times more than any licensed civilian gun owner.
      Six times more. I’d say that is quite a bit more upstanding than a police officer.

  • Fearthenut

    We already have chaos.

    • TrevorD

      Yes indeed and it`s all part of the plan and working very well for `them.`

  • endofwatchersbegan1/28/2011

    Another example of WHY the Constitution is so important. THUGS like the Police Lobby would have us all victims to justify their criminal existence – against the Constitution. With guns in everyone’s back pockets there would be less and less crime because the bad guys would very rapidly be eliminated. Even the ones in the Police Depts. No need for Police then – for what?. That is what they are afraid of. The CHAOS would be their elimination and becoming obsolete. Their loss of CONTROL and oppressive BLOOD SUCKING over the People.

  • jhpace1

    The police want it both ways.

    I have heard a story, on the Internet, how in the last 2 or 3 years an elderly couple was stopped in New York State by a young police officer “insisting” upon seeing their concealed weapon (which would have been illegal in NY, but not in their home state), because he had read the couple’s car’s license plate and learned that they had a CCW from their home state, and assumed that the couple had it in their car. He was looking for an easy illegal-carry bust, and harassed the couple to try and get that bust on his record.

    But now we’re told “police cannot search a person’s record and find out if they have a legal license from another state”. A blatant lie. The databases are already crossing state lines for police in different jurisdictions to use.

    The same argument holds for driver’s licenses across the USA today. So are states going to insist this is a “states’ rights issue”, or an interstate Federal issue?

    • SP_88

      You never hear about states complaining that having to recognize the driver’s license of other states will “preempt” their “perspective” on who should and shouldn’t be able to drive a car in their state.
      And certainly cars kill a lot more people than guns do. Drunk drivers, people texting and talking on their cell phones, people speeding and racing, people who are just bad drivers, and all sorts of other reasons make cars much more deadly than guns. Law abiding gun owners aren’t going around shooting their guns out the window of their cars, waving their loaded guns around at people, texting and talking on their cell phones while shooting, shooting while intoxicated, etc. It’s not the problem these anti-gun people are trying to make it out to be.
      They pretend to care about this issue as if it were such a huge problem, yet they ignore the real problems that are actually causing injuries and fatalities. And it’s because they have an agenda. It’s got nothing to do with public safety. It’s purely about control.
      These people can take their fake cares and make-believe concerns and stick it. It’s all a bunch of BS.

  • RMS1911

    There is nothing in the Constitution about police or police departments,
    It notes Constables, Sheriff’s and the militia shall execute the laws. No mention of police. They are not CLEOS just private security employed by a city or municipality acting under the color of law. Ever wonder how an entire police department can be shut down then a sheriff or other police department takes over?

  • RMS1911

    Of course they want you disarmed it makes it easier to molest and assault you and guarantees their job security. Any part of the government that fears you being armed is up to something.
    What are they hiding?
    What are they up too?
    Even in the places with the largest police departments they are outnumbered 15 or 20 to 1.
    In the rural places it’s 1000’s to 1.
    In medium cities it’s 100’s to 1.
    They’re not even 1% of the population.
    They live because we allow it.
    They’re looking and acting more and more like a foreign occupational force.

  • SP_88

    “If the LAPD pulls somebody over with a loaded concealed handgun, they could just claim to be from a state that doesn’t require a license, and the police would be unable to confirm whether it was true”. If the LAPD pulls somebody over, they will quite likely have something called a DRIVER’S LICENSE. And on that DRIVER’S LICENSE will be something called AN ADDRESS. That address will contain a couple of capital letters followed by a period. Those letters will correspond to the STATE in which they live. And with a little bit of police work, they will be able to figure out if that particular state requires a license to carry a firearm. Are these people really this stupid? Or do they just think that we are.
    Furthermore, none of this even matters because neither the state or the federal government has the authority to prevent we the people from exercising our rights. There should be no license requirement to exercise any right. The second amendment is no different than any other right. Any American should be free to exercise their rights without fear of harassment from the government.
    The only reason this is such a problem is because the second amendment is the one right that ensures that all of our other rights remain intact.
    If this tyranny continues, it will soon become necessary to do a lot more than just exercise our second amendment rights. We may have to actually use our second amendment rights for it’s intended purpose, to shut down a tyrannical and oppressive government.
    It is not the job of the police to determine which rights we get to exercise, and which rights we can’t. Their job is to protect and serve. I suggest they get to it, because the community isn’t going to protect and serve itself. Oh, wait, yea it is, as long as they are not prevented from exercising their second amendment rights.
    So what do we need the police for? We don’t. Their only purpose is to harass people and collect revenue for the state by giving out traffic tickets. They serve no real purpose otherwise. At least not for us.

    • elbustaroyjetspeekerson

      Bravo, Rev. Well said.

  • James Allen Wyatt

    THE FILING OF SUITS SIMILAR TO CLASS ACTIONS OF THE PAST WHICH MADE FORTUNES FOR THOSE INVOLVED FROM THE DEFENDANTS; THAT NOW NEEDED OT BE CONSIDERED AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL OFFICER, THOSE WHO HIRED THEM WITHOUT THOROUGH VETTING AND ALSO THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT EMPLOY THEM:

    AS LONG AS BUREAUCRATS ARE ALLOWED TO HIRE WITH LITTLE OR NO SUPERVISION THOSE WHO SEEK TO BE EMPLOYED AS COPS, MANY OF WHOM HAVE A HISTORY OF BEING BULLIES GOING BACK THROUGH THEIR CHILDHOOD AND WHO SEEK THIS MEANS OF FURTHERING THEY’RE BULLYING LUST NOW ARMED WITH IMPRESSIVE UNIFORM, SHINY NEW BADGE AND DEADLY WEAPONS AND WITH THE PRESUMPTIONS THAT THEY NOW HAVE A LICENSE TO BEAT, CRIPPLE AND SHOOT WHENEVER AND WHOMEVER THEY PLEASE,
    ATROCITIES ARE EXPECTED TO BE THE NORM AND WILL BE EXPECTED TO GROW AT AN EXPONENTIAL RATE.

    IT IS FOREVER HOPED THAT ONE OR MORE LAW FIRMS WILL RISE TO THE OBVIOUS NEED AND COME INTO BEING THAT WILL RELENTLESSLY UNDERTAKE THE FILING OF SUITS AND NOT
    ONLY AGAINST THE INVOLVED JURISDICTION AND THE INDIVIDUAL ROGUE COP OR COPS BUT ALSO THOSE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE HIRING OF THE COP OR COPS; THE IMPRESSION ALWAYS BEING THAT THESE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HIRING AND THUS ARE AS GUILTY AS THE INVOLVED ROGUE COP(S) & THEY HAVE TO BE FACED WITH THE HARSH REALITY BY HAVING LEVIED AGAINST EACH AND EVERY OFFENDER HUGH AWARDS/FINES; NOT JUST LEVIED ON THE JURISDICTION, I.E. THE CITY, COUNTY, STATE OR FEDS . . . BUT ALSO AGAINST EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED IN THE HIRING WITH LITTLE OR NO VETTING . . . AS WELL AS THE ROGUE COP OR COPS THEMSELVES AS THAT INDIVIDUALLY ; THE AWARDS TO BE PAID OUT OF POCKET BY THE INDIVIDUALS’; THEIR INDIVIDUAL PRORATED AWARD SHARE PAYMENT REQUIRED TO BE MADE OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS

    AND ONLY A PRORATED SHARE BY THE JURISDICTION AS WHAT THE JURISDICTION PAYS WILL INVARIABLY COME OUT OF THE POCKETS OF THAT JURISDICTION’S TAX PAYERS UNLESS THAT IS BY SOME MEANS PROHIBITED.

    STIFF PENALTIES IN THE FORM OF HUGE FINANCIAL JUDGEMENT AWARDS SHOULD GO A LONG, LONG WAY IN FOSTERING AN AWARENESS BY THESE WHO HAVE ESCAPED
    ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SO, SO LONG OF THE POTENTIALLY VERY EXPENSIVE FOLLY OF THEIR IRRESPONSIBLE ACTIONS WHICH RESULTS IN SO MUCH SUFFERING AND MANY TIME
    CRIPPLING INJURIES AND/OR DEATH.
    Reply
    +0-0
    iSORELY NEED IS A CONFEDERATION OF THE VERY BEST PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS THROUGH OUT THE NATION, THAT WILL – WILLINGLY AND IMMEDIATELY – FILE SUIT ON THE USUAL CONTINGENCY FEE BASIC FOR THE ORDINARY CIVIL SUITS, THAT IN BEHALF OF THESE VICTIMS OF GOON POLICE GONE WILD BRUTALITY; THESE PROPOSED SUITS MUCH LIKE THE CLASS-ACTIONS FILED IN THE PAST AGAINST ABUSERS; FINANCIAL PENALTIES APPARENTLY THE ONLY PUNISHMENT THAT THESE ROGUE COPS AND THEIR EMPLOYERS CAN REALLY UNDERSTAND; THOSE SUITS SHOULD BE DIRECTED INITIALLY AGAINS THE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE INVOLVED OR WHO WERE PRESENT AND DID NOT INTERVENE . . . . AND ONLY THEN BRING A SEPARATE SUIT EXCLUSIVELY AGAINST THEIR INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYERS; I.E. THE CITY, COUNTY, STATE; WHERE EVER THE HIRING AND CONTROL RESPONSIBILITY REST JamesAllenWyatt,Jr., Mississippi State Univ. Class of 1961

  • SP_88

    The NRA is actively supporting them. They are running charity events to help them. In my area, I hear their ads on the radio all the time. They want you to donate your old car so they can scrap it and give the money to the police
    And while the NRA is running charity events for the police, the police are trying to take away our gun rights. How dumb can the NRA be?
    What we should be doing is disarming the police. Why do they need guns to hand out traffic tickets? I could understand some of them having a gun, but clearly they don’t all need to carry a gun. They’ve consistently demonstrated that they are not able to handle a firearm and the stress of being in a situation where they have to use it. These people are soft. They panic easily and when one of us is at the other end of their gun, and this cop is afraid for his life, innocent people end up dead.
    If ever there was an epidemic that needs to be dealt with, disarming the police is it.