Sheriff's pro-gun radio ads to be paid by taxpayers. "This has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with self-promotion."


sheriff guns protect yourself

In my post Ad: Hey kids! “Who knows? Maybe you’ll find a Bushmaster AR-15 under your tree some frosty Christmas morning!” I included this story:

Before Calling 911, Sheriff Tells Residents To Get ‘In The Game’ With A Gun. Wisconsin County Sheriff David Clarke:

It’s no longer a spectator sport; I need you in the game, but are you ready? [...]

You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back; but are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We’re partners now. Can I count on you?

As you can see, Clarke is the same sheriff who made a fool of himself in the video above. Which he did over and over again whenever Piers Morgan gave him the opportunity. Which was often.

He's also the same sheriff whose scary, fear-mongery pro-gun radio ads (referred to as "safety messages" in his video) will be paid by taxpayers.


Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. has been showered with free media time, including four appearances on two national cable TV outlets, to espouse his support for citizens arming themselves for self-protection.

But the local radio ads that launched the whirlwind of attention for Clarke were paid spots that will be billed to taxpayers through the sheriff's county budget, Clarke said Friday.

Clarke calls that "crime prevention." Or as I like to call it, negligence waiting to happen.

Here's one of his "safety messages":

Yes, families should consider getting gun training "so you can defend yourself until we get there."

What could possibly go wrong?

Say it with me, kiddies, the family that aims together, maims together.

Critics have said the ads discourage people from using 911 and instead promote gun proliferation. [...]

In an email, Clarke said his paid radio spots were not gun ads, but public safety announcements.

Supervisor John Weishan Jr. said the sheriff's ads did not qualify as something that promotes general welfare and safety and were an inappropriate use of public money.

"There is a way to do public service announcements to promote public safety," Weishan said. "This has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with self-promotion."

Gee, ya think? And all at the taxpayers' expense. A twofer!

  •  Actually, it does work:

    However, if other areas traffic guns in, then it becomes less effective.

  • CCrown

    Well if we have to pay for these ads maybe we can save on the cost of law enforcement by letting all the police go. They are pretty much saying they are no use anyway and we have to arm ourselves.  

  • Technical Analyst

    I live in Chicago and some of the strictest gun control measures in the country. It also has  some of the most gun deaths in the nation. Gun control doesn't work. Let each individual decide whether or not they want to defend themselves with a firearm and stop trying to make legitimate self-defense more difficult.

  • Law enforcement families must cringe at the sight of this.  The last thing you need on a domestic call is a red-faced wife-beater with a gun.  43:1, that's the odds of a domestic gun being used on a family or close relative, as opposed to being used in self defense.  Terrible odds, with a deathly payout.

  • TurboKitty

    Obviously the tax payers know about this now (at least hopefully), isn't this illegal use of tax payer funds?

  • Taxpayers should not be forced to condone or advertise views which they do not agree with. These RW  imbeciles are only trying to sell more guns for the Gun Manufacturers, who support their candidacies. more guns is definitely not the answer, just look at the correlation between the amount of guns in a country and the amount of gun violence. The US is at the top of that dubious list. All the other "civilized" nations,who have strict gun regulations,  have much lower instances of gun violence. Under 75 compared to the US who has many thousands of gun related deaths. Also, the effect of having a firearm in the house increases the risk of someone in that house being injured or killed by that firearm by 47%.

  • mellowjohn

     i was rather hoping you'd reply "you'll shoot your eye out, kid."

  • Sally

    I have never held a gun or even seen one. My two children survived their childhoods with nothing more lethal than a .99 water pistol. Neither of them has felt the need to endanger their children by purchasing lethal weapons and 'hiding' them under their beds. Good Lord. The GOP thinks we are all in Dodge City and need to prepare for High Noon. And yet, who is being killed? Innocent GOP children and the men who are cleaning their penis extensions. Oh well. I'm sure the anti-contraception crowd will just pop put replacements shooters.

  •  My brother had a Daisy.

  • mellowjohn

    gosh, i used to want an Official Red Ryder Carbine-Action Two-Hundred-Shot Range Model Air Rifle, but i guess this ups the ante!