Everyone from President Obama and Vice President Biden on down who is currently pushing for new gun control legislation as a way to “reduce gun violence” and lower crime overall is lying if they tell you that most police officers agree with them that these new measures will work.
According to PoliceOne, a law enforcement-centric website that just completed a survey of more than 15,000 verified police officers, a stunning 85 percent said a new federal ban on military look-alike semi-automatic rifles would have no effect on crime, and might even put their lives in danger.
In addition, when asked if a federal ban on ammo magazines holding more than 10 rounds would be effective at reducing violent crime, even more said no: 96 percent.
In fact, according to the survey, nearly three times as many former and active cops think that a federal ban would even exacerbate violent crime instead of reducing it. And twice as many think they will be less safe because of new gun control provisions.
These results tend to deflate the “impact” Obama was trying to achieve when he stood before Colorado cops in early April to show support for left-wing legislators there who are considering new gun control legislation, don’t they?
Police officers know who does – and does not – commit the bulk of gun crimes
There’s more from the survey:
— Police generally support simple, straightforward solutions to problems. When asked about the best course of action to prevent tragedies like the recent Sandy Hook Elementary School and Aurora movie theater shootings, nearly one-third said they backed “more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians.” Also, 86 percent said they believe a legally armed citizen could have reduced casualties at both incidents (remember, the anti-gunners want “gun-free zones”).
— An astounding 91 percent said they support concealed carry by law-abiding citizens who have been properly vetted and trained (just as cops are before they are hired on nearly all departments, by the way), while eight in 10 said they supported arming school teachers and school officials with guns (taking away a statist gun-free bastion and making it harder for the next drug-induced Adam Lanza to kill so many).
— Six in 10 said if they were a police chief or county sheriff, they would refuse to enforce restrictive new laws.
— 71 percent – nearly three in four – support law enforcement leaders who have publicly refused to support more restrictive gun laws within their jurisdiction (after all, the president himself picks and chooses which laws he will and will not support).
— Respondents were more split on background checks, with 31 percent agreeing that mental health background checks in all gun sales would help reduce mass shootings, while 45 percent disagreed.
“Contrary to what the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe, police overwhelmingly favor an armed citizenry, would like to see more guns in the hands of responsible people, and are skeptical of any greater restrictions placed on gun purchase, ownership, or accessibility.” said Doug Wylie, editor of PoliceOne.
That is historically true. Our editor and founder, Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, reported exclusively for NaturalNews, relayed as much in a widely received December story [http://www.naturalnews.com]. He asked three questions to these sources: one ex-FBI agent, one retired Sheriff’s deputy, two active duty city police detectives, one retired former police captain of a major U.S. city, two U.S. Army veterans and one USMC veteran, discharged several years ago after two tours in Afghanistan during which he sustained a severe personal injury.
Cops know what the solutions are – but partisan hacks in D.C. aren’t listening
The most relevant of the three to this story was the third question: What is the solution to stopping future mass shootings?
Here are some of the answers:
The retired Sheriff’s deputy told me that the solution was to, “Arm the teachers. Tear down the ‘gun-free zone’ signs and put weapons in the hands of school personnel.”
This opinion was seconded by one of the active-duty police detectives, who said he had actually worked several shootings, but never a mass shooting. “A mass shooting takes time, often several minutes,” he explained. “That’s too fast for the police to arrive on scene, but it’s plenty of time for someone already on location to pursue and engage the active shooter.”
The former police captain explained that the real problem with shootings in his city was, “dirt-cheap handguns” also called “Saturday Night Specials.” As he explained, “People that spend $500 on a nice handgun are almost never the problem when it comes to violent crime. It’s the ones who pick up a junk gun for $50 on the street.”
When I asked him about a practical solution to reduce shootings, he said that in his opinion, “Levying new taxes on all handguns like the tax stamps on class three weapons” would likely prevent new guns from being purchased by most violent criminals, but it wouldn’t take guns out of the hands of criminals who already have them.
Sources for this article include: