The Police and Clintons

G

Glenn E. Meyer

New member
I've been musing over the police and the Clintons. I heard the President say that
the Diallo shooting wouldn't have occurred if he was white. Hilliary said the cops were murderers and backed off. Today she said the dept. was troubled or crappy.

Our police members here have stronly denied that there was a fundamental problem. It was basically a tragedy based on Diallo's actions.

So - if the Clintons really don't like you guys - why do your major organizations and chiefs suck up to Bill and Hill? I know the
LEAAA (NRA friend) doesn't but they seem not in the mainstream.

If cops are for CCW, etc - how come you don't vote the bastards out - or something like that?
 
Glenn, wish that we could.

The line officers don't get a vote on who becomes Police Chief or how long he/she stays. That's up to the Mayor.

When Clinton cites the (Inter)National Association of Chiefs of Police--he's basically listening to the City Mayors through a cut-out.

As far as the Fraternal Order of Police--I don't know. I've never been a member, so I can't tell you how they pick their officers.

Hope that helps.

LawDog
 
Money! That is the reason police chiefs are sucking up to the Clintons. You don't think all of those officer (unarmed by the way) that stand behind the first felon when he talks about gun control are free or even are there of their own volition do you? You're wrong if you do. The Virgina and Maryland police departments that order their on duty officers to appear at these photo ops receive big bucks in grant money. Some of the officers involved have filed suit against their departments for being forced to participate in political activity in uniform for a cause they don't agree with and in a manner they could be disciplined for if it wasn't sanctioned.

The other police organizations have also been bought by Justice Department grant money. The FOP is a labor union, plain and simple, just like the Teamsters or Steel Workers. They tow the Democratic party line on just about everything. The law enforcement exemptions in the '94 Assualt Weapons ban were written into the law to get the support of the FOP. They could just have easily made possesion of post ban hi-cap mags and evil semi automatic assault rifles on duty only and not given departments the option of giving retired officers the right to retain these items. The police chiefs probably wouldn't have minded.

Believe me, none of the grant money that the administration has pured into LE with their 100,000 Cops program (yeah right, show me the 100,000!) and the other programs come with strings attached.

Look into the LEAA, they have the facts and case numbers of the lawsuits by the officers.

As for the Clintons speaking out on Diallo, I'm sure they would say it was a justified, good shooting if they were speaking to an FOP Convention. Why anyone believes anything they say is beyond me. They are masters at taking both sides of an issue and getting away with it.

Jeff

Jeff
 
There's a big story on Hillary in the NYTimes
today. I posted about this elsewhere.

She wants to use scanner technology to allow cops to scan passersby for guns. That might
be a short term fix for Diallo but it is
not constitutional in my eyes.

Also, in real time, would a scanner have helped Diallo. It was very quick, he was ducking into his building - how would it help in real time?

I'm going to write the times if their damn site wouldn't crash so much.
 
Scanner technology? How would that work?

Besides the Constitutional issue:
I'd imagine that if you "scan" from a distance there would be a high output of radiation...unsafe to the cop and public. Ex radar guns. If you scan a person close up, you'd need at least 2 cops cuz the one with the scanner is vulnerable if the person is indeed a BG. Further, if ya got 2 cops, you can save the money and just physically search the person like they do now.

Another BS feel-good-we-are-doing-something

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top