Grand Junction, CO –-(Ammoland.com)- This contains some concepts that many folks haven’t considered.
We are not siding with or against the police or advancing excuses for them and we hope it does not appear we are picking on them either; we aren’t.
For this work, we interviewed 17 chiefs and sheriffs from around the country. From those conversations (emails and phone) we have some quotes in this work. We were asked not to source the particular quotes and that is fair since this was not an on the record news interview, we just wanted their thoughts and opinions. So, as Joe Friday said, “just the facts ma’am.”
When it comes to various politicians and others speaking against gun ownership (the 2nd Amendment and Constitution by definition) politicians will many times cite city and state police chiefs who allegedly may support the anti-gun movement. These politicians may have police chiefs and their officers appear with them as props or spokesmen in news conferences.
So the logical question to ask is why are these top cops so seemingly against firearm ownership?
Chiefs are at the beck and call of their political bosses, mayors and city councils. “We chiefs get our opinion on firearm ownership when it is issued to us.”–A recent quote by a chief.
A sheriff told us “There is an active debate between sheriffs and chiefs that is affected by the big city chief culture because chiefs tend to emulate each other.”
For our purpose here let’s just deal with city police, not state/national officials. If city politicians are against gun ownership (Chicago, Washington D.C, San Francisco, and New York for example) and the chief doesn’t agree he can (and probably will) be fired or demoted by the mayor or possibly by a simple majority of the City Council. In most towns over 50,000 population chiefs generally get paid between $70,000 and $140,000 a year plus benefits and retirement. Large city chiefs get well over $200,000 plus benefits, retirement and every once in a while you run into a chief earning well over $300,000.00 plus benefits. They want to hang onto that “chief” position, title and income.
This is why you see chiefs and their officers in the background when privileged officials posture against citizen firearm ownership and the Constitution by definition. Sure some chiefs may believe in citizen gun control and may be willing as a backdrop for self-serving politicians–especially if they were appointed by those in power at the time. So whenever a mayor, senator, representative or president wants a show of “top cops” showing support, a message is delivered to the particular city where the top officials are anti-2nd Amendment requesting top cops as props. The chiefs and officers are obediently delivered for props or advised to get their resume updated.
Sheriffs are by and large a different breed. They are elected by the people with a larger proportional number of citizens than city officials. The sheriff does not have to please a few city council members, a goofy mayor (or a governor). Sheriffs represent the beliefs and values of the majority of the area of his or her citizens who directly voted them into office. Yes, there will be sheriffs who do not want guns in the hands of citizens, but nothing like the number of police chiefs who have a near immediate career ending gun held to their heads by anti-Constitution politicians or the chief culture.
And most sheriffs take their Oath supporting the Constitution very seriously. And while they currently follow and enforce Constitutional applicable federal, state and county laws they reserve the power invested in their oath and position as elected officers of their county to resist or not to enforce Constitutional infringing law if or when that might come. If that were to occur, the state police and/or federal government may be ordered to step into that particular sheriff’s county to enforce those particular unconstitutional laws. The ramifications of those legal incursions might be very interesting to watch, especially, we were told, if that particular sheriff is actively supported by the citizens of that county.
The bottom line is: city, state and even federal chiefs will almost always bend to the will of their political masters–He who has the gold makes the rules.” Then this might be something to bring up in various press conferences with officers in the background.
Shults Media Relations, LLC
A PR firm that seriously supports the outdoor and firearms industry and our Constitution.
For more information please contact:
Jim Shults
Shults Media Relations, LLC
www.smrpr.com
Those chiefs were hand selected from traditionally anti gun areas. As a Chief of Police myself I can say that my department will NEVER violate anyone’s constitutional rights including the 2 nd amendment. If I’m fired I’m fired,but my integrity and oath to the people and the constitution will never be compromised
Comparision of police chiefs and sheriffs is an apple and orange arguement. Yes,we have some professional sheriffs. Most this resulted from federal dollars includding enforces state minimum training standards. We have over 18,000 State and Local Law enforcement Agencies in the US The great majoraty have 1O less sworn officers. Takes 7 officers to staff one 24/7 position. States now reliy on rural policing through state police and highway patrol. Some counties have moved from SO to County police. The problem of moving the SO into the 21 century is somewhat complex. There positions are protected by state constitution, This… Read more »
I can definitely say that I really enjoy seeing the comments from retired police officers and MP, and how you all still remember the oath you swore to. Major respects.
Did you know that Jack Webb’s TV character, Sgt. Joe Friday, never actually said, “just the facts, ma’am?”
Apparently the actual phrase uttered a few times in the show was “All we want are the facts, ma’am.” Similar, but not identical.
Ron on February 9, 2013 at 6:37 PM said:
The term is “beckon call.”
Ron – the “phrase” is, “Beck and Call”
THROW THE BUMS OUT, BEFORE ITS TOO LATE. AND WE KNOW WHO, DON’T WE ?
Where are all these “patriot” sheriffs when it comes to enforcing unconstitutional federal drug laws? And what are they going to do when the Feds cut off the money they use to buy all those APCs and swat gear.
Active Law enforcement from 1962 to 2004, the majority of POs City, county and federal I’ve worked with heartily believe in the Constitution and the cornerstone is the 2nd amendment. Only a fool would call any black semi auto an assault weapon. All weapons may be used for an assault and that is the problem the user! In order to have a well regulated militia make safety courses mandatory for all new gun sales, no passed test no gun. No need to register anything other than test results. Make a violation of the 2nd amendment a federal felony offense with… Read more »
wow there are some nutters comming out of the wood work here in the comments. how about you sit back from youre glen beck and conspericy forums take a breth and think for a moment. goverment agencys, military, public officials all live in these citys with there famlys frends and what not. do you reoly think they will go thrue a town mowing evreyone down or drop a bomb on it? all these milions of rounds… pull youre heads out of youre ass the goverment buys millions of rounds each year the only thing new this year is it was… Read more »
Due to injuries I have recently had to hand in my shield, but between the military Police and Law enforcement I served 16 years wearing a badge. The oaths I took have never ended it is unfortunate that our Government leaders take their oaths of office as something to use at parties to make them feel important. As far as Obama and his private homeland security army he’s training 18-24 yr olds with no prior ethics to do his biding. I feel sorry for these young people they know not what they will meet in the field. Hasn’t Obama and… Read more »