Law enforcement officer: "Buy as many guns as you can afford"; Judge: Carry a gun


By GottaLaff

You may be acquainted with 42bkdodgr, my "72-year-old friend" who contributes Special Comments to TPC from time to time.

He sent me this message yesterday, and I had to share:

Yesterday at a Mens Club luncheon I attended as a guest, there was a law enforcement officer running for top law enforcement position in Vegas.

He told the group that he favored no gun registration requirement and that people should buy as many guns and ammo as they could afford, because the way the country was going, they made need them.

I was shocked and scared from what was said. This coming from a law enforcement official.

I'm scared, too, 42bkdodgr, although I am becoming less shocked, which is a commentary on the recent state of affairs in and of itself.

But I'm not just alarmed by that one story. That was bad enough. No, it gets worse. Today, when I opened my L.A. Times, I found this:

One judge's solution for citizens feeling less secure because of budget cuts in an Ohio county: Carry a gun.

He explained that anyone with a gun should be "law abiding".

Yes, I'm sure all those angry, extremist militia types and/or Tea Baggers, and/or anyone with a grudge against the government who is being egged on by the likes of Sarah Palin to "reload" will remember to be "law abiding".

Emotion has nothing to do with it.

Rage is so easily controlled, isn't it? Especially these days. Why, sure as shootin', these people are as trustworthy and reasonable and safety conscious as they can be with their lethal weapons.

Mackey [...] was expressing concerns with budget cuts that have trimmed the sheriff's department from 112 to 49 deputies in the county, which is Ohio's largest by land area.

Asked by WKYC how people should respond to the cuts and limited patrols, he said, "Arm themselves. Be very careful and just be vigilant because we're going to have to look after each other."

Feel safer now? That awesome posse mentality is so in vogue these days. I must remember to purchase Nordstrom's finest hottt studded leather holster to match the gleam of ready-aim-fire in my eyes.

Even if the judge did not intend to encourage vigilantism, IMHO he was being irresponsible. Guns are not the answer to budget cuts. His honor might have thought about the possible consequences of his words before he opened his influential judicial mouth.

  • paprikapink

    I'd expect, from any responsible public servant, that EVERY recommendation for buying a gun would include an explicit recommendation for being trained to use it. I don't consider guns to be a solution, personally. Have never even touched one. So who are these guys talking to? Gun owners? No, no need. They're talking to me, people who haven't already adopted the Gun Solution. "Buying a gun" is going to make me safer?? I'm skeptical. All I get from that advice is that now I've brought danger and violence into my own house. What the hell is going to happen if I buy a gun and then set it in a drawer? Months later I hear something in the night, grab the gun...and what? I fire one shot and ... there are so many ways that story could end. The likelihood of it being a happy ending are slim and none. If you're going to be such a fearmongerer and anarchist as to tell people to own guns ALWAYS TELL THEM TO LEARN TO USE IT TOO.

  • phillybella

    These people don't want more individual freedom and less government. They want anarchy, period. I thank God I live in a big eastern city where people are civil to one another and our goal is LESS guns, not more. These lunatics want the Wild West to come back. Totally irresponsible of law enforcement to speak in such a manner.