Sunday, April 28, 2013
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
‘Boston Strong’: Marching in Lockstep with the Police State
“Of all the tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” -C.S. Lewis
Caught up in the televised drama of a military-style manhunt for the suspects in the Boston Marathon explosion, most Americans fail to realize that the world around them has been suddenly and jarringly shifted off its axis, that axis being the U.S. Constitution.
For those like myself who have studied emerging police states, the sight of a city placed under martial law—its citizens under house arrest (officials used the Orwellian phrase “shelter in place” to describe the mandatory lockdown), military-style helicopters equipped with thermal imaging devices buzzing the skies, tanks and armored vehicles on the streets, and snipers perched on rooftops, while thousands of black-garbed police swarmed the streets and SWAT teams carried out house-to-house searches in search of two young and seemingly unlikely bombing suspects—leaves us in a growing state of unease.
Mind you, these are no longer warning signs of a steadily encroaching police state. The police state has arrived.
Equally unnerving is the ease with which Americans welcomed the city-wide lockdown, the routine invasion of their privacy, and the dismantling of every constitutional right intended to serve as a bulwark against government abuses. Watching it unfold, I couldn’t help but think of Nazi Field Marshal Hermann Goering’s remarks during the Nuremberg trials. As Goering noted:
It is always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.
As the events in Boston have made clear, it does indeed work the same in every country. The same propaganda and police state tactics that worked for Adolf Hitler 80 years ago continue to be employed with great success in a post-9/11 America.
Whatever the threat to so-called security—whether it’s rumored weapons of mass destruction, school shootings, or alleged acts of terrorism—it doesn’t take much for the American people to march in lockstep with the government’s dictates, even if it means submitting to martial law, having their homes searched, and being stripped of one’s constitutional rights at a moment’s notice.
As journalist Andrew O’Hehir observes in Salon:
In America after 9/11, we made a deal with the devil, or with Dick Cheney, which is much the same thing. We agreed to give up most of our enumerated rights and civil liberties (except for the sacrosanct Second Amendment, of course) in exchange for a lot of hyper-patriotic tough talk, the promise of “security” and the freedom to go on sitting on our asses and consuming whatever the hell we wanted to. Don’t look the other way and tell me that you signed a petition or voted for John Kerry or whatever. The fact is that whatever dignified private opinions you and I may hold, we did not do enough to stop it, and our constitutional rights are now deemed to be partial or provisional rather than absolute, do not necessarily apply to everyone, and can be revoked by the government at any time.
Particularly disheartening is the fact that Americans, consumed with the need for vengeance, seem even less concerned about protecting the rights of others, especially if those “others” happen to be of a different skin color or nationality. The public response to the manhunt, capture and subsequent treatment of brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is merely the latest example of America’s xenophobic mindset, which was also a driving force behind the roundup and detention of hundreds of Arab, South Asian and Muslim men following 9/11, internment camps that housed more than 18,000 people of Japanese ancestry during World War II, and the arrest and deportation of thousands of “radical” noncitizens during America’s first Red Scare.
Moreover, there has been little outcry over the Obama administration’s decision to deny 19-year-old U.S. citizen Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his due process rights and treat him as an enemy combatant, first off by interrogating him without reading him his Miranda rights (“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law…”).
Presently, under the public safety exception to the Miranda rule, if law enforcement agents believe a suspect has information that might reduce a substantial threat, they can wait to give the Miranda warning. For years now, however, the Obama administration has been lobbying to see this exception extended to all cases involving so-called terror suspects, including American citizens. Tsarnaev’s case may prove to be the game-changer. Yet as journalist Emily Bazelon points out for Slate: “Why should I care that no one’s reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights? When the law gets bent out of shape for him, it’s easier to bend out of shape for the rest of us.”
The U.S. Supreme Court rightly recognized in its 1966 ruling in Miranda v. Arizona that police officers must advise a suspect of his/her civil rights once the suspect has been taken into custody, because the police can and often do take advantage of the fact that most Americans don’t know their rights. There have been few exceptions to the Miranda rule over the last 40 years or so, and with good reason. However, if the Obama administration is allowed to scale back the Miranda rule, especially as it applies to U.S. citizens, it would be yet another dangerous expansion of government power at the expense of citizens’ civil rights.
This continual undermining of the rules that protect civil liberties, not to mention the incessant rush to judgment by politicians, members of the media and the public, will inevitably have far-reaching consequences on a populace that not only remains ignorant about their rights but is inclined to sacrifice their liberties for phantom promises of safety.
Moments after taking Tsarnaev into custody, the Boston Police Dept. tweeted “CAPTURED!!! The hunt is over. The search is done. The terror is over. And justice has won.” Yet with Tsarnaev and his brother having been charged, tried and convicted by the government, the media and the police—all without ever having stepped foot inside a courtroom—it remains to be seen whether justice has indeed won.
The lesson for the rest of us is this: once a free people allows the government to make inroads into their freedoms or uses those same freedoms as bargaining chips for security, it quickly becomes a slippery slope to outright tyranny. And it doesn’t really matter whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican at the helm, because the bureaucratic mindset on both sides of the aisle now seems to embody the same philosophy of authoritarian government. Increasingly, those on the left who once hailed Barack Obama as the antidote for restoring the numerous civil liberties that were lost or undermined as a result of Bush-era policies are finding themselves forced to acknowledge that threats to civil liberties are worse under Obama.
Clearly, the outlook for civil liberties under Obama grows bleaker by the day, from his embrace of indefinite detention for U.S. citizens and drone kill lists to warrantless surveillance of phone, email and internet communications, and prosecutions of government whistleblowers. Most recently, capitalizing on the nation’s heightened emotions, confusion and fear, government officials used the Boston Marathon tragedy as a means of extending the reach of the police state, starting with the House of Representatives’ overwhelming passage of the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), which opens the door to greater internet surveillance by the government.
These troubling developments are the outward manifestations of an inner, philosophical shift underway in how the government views not only the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but “we the people,” as well. What this reflects is a move away from a government bound by the rule of law to one that seeks total control through the imposition of its own self-serving laws on the populace.
All the while, the American people remain largely oblivious to the looming threats to their freedoms, eager to be persuaded that the government can solve the problems that plague us—whether it be terrorism, an economic depression, an environmental disaster or even a flu epidemic. Yet having bought into the false notion that the government can ensure not only our safety but our happiness and will take care of us from cradle to grave—that is, from daycare centers to nursing homes, we have in actuality allowed ourselves to be bridled and turned into slaves at the bidding of a government that cares little for our freedoms or our happiness.
This article was originally published at The Rutherford Institute.
Read more by John W. Whitehead
- Roaches, Mosquitoes, and Birds: The Coming Micro-Drone Revolution – April 17th, 2013
- Eric Holder: If the President Does It, It’s Legal – March 22nd, 2013
- The War Against Bradley Manning – March 12th, 2013
- The Magician’s Con: Renewing FISA & NDAA Under Cover of Fiscal Cliff Debates – January 7th, 2013
- Obama’s First-Term Track Record on Civil Liberties – November 12th, 2012
‘Boston Strong’: Marching in Lockstep with the Police State
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Monday, April 22, 2013
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Reporters covering Tsarnaev manhunt get guns drawn on them, treated like suspects by police
As the total lockdown in Boston is lifted and the manhunt for the remaining Tsarnaev brother continues, reporters attempting to cover the situation are being treated by police like suspects. In some cases officers are even drawing their weapons on the reporters.
James Ford, a reporter with local New York television station WPIX, got himself into hot water when filming police.
“I’ve been removed from crime scenes but never by officers with their guns drawn on me,” Ford said.
One officer told him to get back and asked, “Is it worth your life?”
“I’m tethered to this cable,” Ford said, according to the Huffington Post. “What’s more important, saving the cable or saving your life?” the officer asked.
After a few tense minutes, viewers witnessed the officers walking away with their guns at their sides.
In another incident, Kerry Sanders of NBC told “Today” that one officer pointed his gun at him when he was just talking to a woman near the scene of the shootout in Watertown.
Similarly, Megan Chuchmach, an ABC producer, said that she was swarmed and forced to the ground by officers with their guns drawn.
“I was walking with my camera trying to get a better sense of where the SWAT teams were all congregating when all of a sudden, three officers swarmed with their guns drawn, forced me to the ground, and told me that they were suspicious of my backpack and thought I might be the suspect,” Chuchmach said.
Others like Adam Gabbatt of the Guardian reported that police were yelling at journalists to stay back. Some of the officers had weapons drawn, Gabbatt said.
Time reporter Zeke Miller said that a CNN correspondent was told to move by a cop saying, “You’re in the line of fire, you’re in the line of fire.”
The Boston Police also tweeted earlier, “WARNING: Do Not Compromise Officer Safety by Broadcasting Tactical Positions of Homes Being Searched.”
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Madison Ruppert of End the Lie.
Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on UCY.TV from 7 pm — 10 pm Pacific, which you can find HERE. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/endtheliedotcom
Facebook: http://facebook.com/endthelie
Youtube: http://youtube.com/endthelie
Reporters covering Tsarnaev manhunt get guns drawn on them, treated like suspects by police
Friday, April 19, 2013
Manhunt: Military Conducting Door-To-Door Searches For Boston Bomber; Live Police Scanner Stream
Kimberly Paxton of The Daily Sheeple has contributed to this report.
Follow Live on Police scanner:
UPDATED 1:48 PM ET
Twitter update from 911Buff
RIGHT NOW – CONNECTICUT STATE POLICE PUT OUT AN APB ON A ’99 GREEN HONDA CIVIC MASS TAG 11GC7 SUSPECT MIGHT BE DRIVING IT. NBC. #911BUFF
— 911 Operator (@911BUFF) April 19, 2013
UPDATED 1:15 PM ET Anzor Tsarnaev spoke with ABC News of his suspicion that his sons were set up:
“The father said he spoke to his sons by phone earlier this week. “We talked about the bombing. I was worried about then,” Anzor Tsarnaev said. He said his sons reassured him, saying, “Everything is good, Daddy. Everything is very good.” “If they kill my second child, I will know that it is an inside job, a hit job. The police are to blame,” the father told ABC News. “Someone, some organization is out to get them.”
UPDATED 12:55PM ET A defacto state of martial law has now been enacted across Boston:
Police, federal agents and military personnel are going door-to-door searching for the teenage bombing suspect who has eluded capture since being located late Thursday. Massachusetts state officials said residents should keep doors locked and not open their door unless it’s a uniformed police officer knocking. New leads have been developed and the search and sweep of the area could continue through the weekend. (link)
UPDATED 11:57 AM ET AP interviews anguished father of Tamarmlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev:
Anzor Tsarnaev spoke with The Associated Press by telephone from the southern Russian republic of Dagestan after police said one of his sons, 26-year-old Tamerlan, had been killed in a shootout and the other, Dzhokhar, was being intensely pursued. “My son is a true angel,” the elder Tsarnaev said. He said his son was “an intelligent boy” who was studying medicine. “We expected him to come on holidays here,” he said. “They were set up, they were set up!” he exclaimed. “I saw it on television; they killed my older son Tamerlan.” Tsarnaev, badly agitated, gave little more information and ended the call angrily, saying, “Leave me alone, my son’s been killed.”
UPDATED 11:46 AM ET Authorities surround the Watertown house where Dzokhar Tsarnaev is believed to be. 
JUST IN – ANZUR TSARNAEV, FATHER OF SUSPECTS IN BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING SAYS, HE BELIEVES SECRET SERVICES FRAMED HIS SONS. BBC. #911BUFF — 911 Operator (@911BUFF) April 19, 2013
UPDATED 11:25 AM ET Police have deployed 2 robots to inspect a possible explosive device attached to the suspect in custody, a man in his mid-60s. The media has been advised to immediately run and take cover. (via scanner) UPDATED 10:64AM ET Police are converging on the house where they believe Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is hiding. He has sent the following Tweet.
@boston_police Do not approach. — Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev (@Dzhokhar_A) April 19, 2013
UPDATED 10:54AM ET
Police have another suspect surrounded in the Arsenal Street area in Watertown, a man approximately 60-70 years old. He is wearing a vest and has a device in his hand that is suspected to be explosive. (via scanner)
UPDATED 10:43AM ET
Anzor Tsarnaev, the father of suspected the Boston Marathon bombers appealed to his son, Dzhokhar, to “surrender peacefully.”, but warned the U.S. that “If they killed him, then all hell would break loose.” He insists that his sons are innocent of the bombing. (source)
photo of Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev
UPDATED 10:33AM ET
Police scanners in Boston are saying that there may be a third suspect. Police are looking for gray Honda CRV with Massachusetts plates 316ES9. APBs have been issues in Massachusetts and Connecticut for this vehicle.
UPDATED 10:29AM ET
The second suspect Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev has opened a twitter account and is Tweeting Live.
UPDATED 8:11 AM ET
The dead suspect has been named as Tamerlan Tsarnaev and he is the older brother of Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev. Tamerlan was 26 years old and a competitive boxer. He had been in the US since 2000, when he was admitted under refugee status. Read more about Tamerland Tsarnaev HERE.
pictured: Tamerlan Tsarnaev
UPDATED 6:29 AM ET
AP: Boston bomb suspects from Russia region near Chechnya, lived in US at least 1 year. Surviving Boston bomb suspect identified as Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, Mass.
UPDATED 6:01 AM ET
According to ABC News, the suspects are believed to be foreign nationals, living legally in the United States. “Based on the way they engaged police, authorities believe they have some paramilitary training. ”
All public schools in Boston have been closed for the day as police engage in a massive manhunt for the second suspect, who is still at large.
UPDATED 4:05AM ET
One of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing has reportedly been killed by Police.
Middlesex District Attorney – Official Statement:
Police are investigating a fatal shooting of MIT campus police officer by two men who then committed an armed carjacking in Cambridge, Middlesex Acting District Attorney Michael Pelgro, Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas, and MIT Police Chief John DiFava announced this evening.
At approximately 10:20 p.m. April 18, police received reports of shots fired on the MIT campus. At 10:30 p.m., an MIT campus police officer was found shot in his vehicle in the area of Vassar and Main streets. According to authorities, the officer was found evidencing multiple gunshot wounds. He was transported to Massachusetts General Hospital and pronounced deceased.
Authorities launched an immediate investigation into the circumstances of the shooting. The investigation determined that two males were involved in this shooting.
A short time later, police received reports of an armed carjacking by two males in the area of Third Street in Cambridge. The victim was carjacked at gunpoint by two males and was kept in the car with the suspects for approximately a half hour. The victim was released at a gas station on Memorial Drive in Cambridge. He was not injured.
Police immediately began a search for the vehicle and were in pursuit of the vehicle into Watertown. At that time, explosive devices were reportedly thrown from car by the suspects. The suspects and police also exchanged gunfire in the area of Dexter and Laurel streets. During this pursuit, an MBTA Police officer was seriously injured and transported to the hospital.
During the pursuit, one suspect was critically injured and transported to the hospital where he was pronounced deceased.
An extensive manhunt is ongoing in the Watertown area for the second suspect, who is believed to be armed and dangerous.
The case is being investigated by local, state and federal authorities working in cooperation. The Massachusetts State Police Bomb Squad is assessing and removing any potentially explosive devices that may have been thrown on the street in Watertown by the suspects.
The investigation remains active and ongoing.
No further information is available at this time.
Gunfire, explosions – raw video:
Updated April 18 3:50AM ET
Fox News reports that the suspect in police custody was taken to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead.
An FBI photo released at 2:00AM this morning shows the two suspects standing side-by-side. The man in the black cap is believed to be the one killed by police this morning.
The suspect wearing the white cap remains at large.
Video of police apprehending an individual in Watertown. It is not clear whether this individual is one of the two suspects:
Original Report: April 18 – 2:45AM ET
In what the FBI’s public information officer calls an “active” and “fluid” situation, hundreds of police cruisers converged on a small neighborhood in Watertown, Massachusetts after multiple bombs were reportedly detonated.
Reports indicate that the bombings came shortly after a shooting involving a police officer at MIT’s campus in Cambridge. The officer, whose name has not yet been released, was killed in the exchange.
Witnesses have also reported “round after round” of gunshots and explosions going off in Watertown.
Both locations are within 10 miles of the deadly Boston Marathon bombings.
The FBI reports that a suspect is in custody, but has not confirmed if the individual was also involved in the Boston bombing.
The Boston Globe reports that the individual in custody may be one of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.
7 News Boston has reported on their web site that their law enforcement sources say that the Watertown suspects are also the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.
At approximately 2:00 AM ET the Federal Bureau of Investigation released a new photo of the two suspects together minutes before the two marathon bombs left three people dead and scores severely injured.
Mixed reports from Fox News, CNN and local Boston news channels indicate that the suspect in the photo above wearing the white hat remains at large, suggesting that his accomplice may be the one currently in custody.
Live Coverage from CBS Local
Live Coverage from 7 News
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Mac Slavo of www.SHTFplan.com.
When it hits the fan, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Mac Slavo is the editor of SHTFplan.com, a resource hub for alternative news, contrarian commentary and strategies that you can take to protect yourself from the coming global paradigm shift.
Manhunt: Military Conducting Door-To-Door Searches For Boston Bomber; Live Police Scanner Stream
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons
A link to a YouTube video was recently forwarded to me, the content of which was so unbelievable that if I had read a transcript, I would have assumed it was a satire or spoof. Unfortunately, it is clear that it is not the case.
The video shows a Feb. 7 press conference presided over by Emeryville (Calif.) Police Chief Ken James, who refers to current proposed anti-gun laws.
During the press conference, James makes several statements that are completely irrational in regards to “reasonable gun laws helping our officers on the street.”
But the most over the top statement is, “One issue that always boggles my mind is the idea that guns are a defensive weapon. That is a myth. A gun is not a defensive weapon. A gun is an offensive weapon, used to intimidate, and used to show power. Police officers do not carry a gun as a defensive weapon to defend themselves or their other officers, they carry a gun to be able to do their job in a safe and effective manner and face any opposition that we may come upon. If it was a defensive measure, why did we lose 55 officers last year to gun violence?”
The above comment is so nonsensical and divorced from reality, it would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying. Based on the content of James’ statement, it is clear that either he is remarkably stupid, or thinks the public is. I would hope that someone as “Darwin Award” stupid as he comes across couldn’t get elected to high office, but you never know—especially since we’re talking about California.
Most police chiefs are elected to office, which makes them politicians. Many politicians like having control over the people they purportedly “serve,” which is why so many police chiefs are very anti-gun when the majority of street cops are not. Does James actually believe the inanities that are coming out of his mouth?
Of course, James isn’t the only public official spewing nonsense through a public forum. In March, our esteemed vice president, Joe Biden, took to YouTube with this brilliant home defense advice: If you think there are troublemakers near your home, just walk outside with a double-barreled shotgun and fire two blasts in the air.
As if that statement wasn’t ignorant enough in regards to gun safety, Biden went even further with Field & Stream, saying if you want to keep bad guys away from your house, “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”
Earlier this month, Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette also made a fool of herself during a public forum hosted by the Denver Post. While discussing high-capacity magazines, DeGette said, “I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
Great, except that’s not true at all. Anyone with half a brain will tell you magazines can be reloaded with ammo, a fact apparently lost on DeGette.
When the public and media called DeGette out on her error, her office doubled down on stupid: “The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism.”
Also wrong.
Such statements would be comical if they weren’t so terrifying; after all, these are the people charged with not only defending our rights, but in James’ case, our lives.
Police Chief Ken James: Guns Are Not Defensive Weapons