Ban may save officers' lives

Ban may save officers' lives

There are 35 comments on the San Bernardino County Sun story from Apr 5, 2009, titled Ban may save officers' lives. In it, San Bernardino County Sun reports that:

Richard Poplawski, the man accused of slaying three Pittsburgh police officers on Saturday, owned several handguns and an AK-47 assault rifle.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Bernardino County Sun.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Andy

New Braunfels, TX

#1 Apr 5, 2009
LIBs,,, gota love-em....Ban everything and then flush the first admendment down their water saving toilets... LOL
Oh Please

Running Springs, CA

#2 Apr 5, 2009
As your own editorial stated, it wouldn't have made a difference. This is a silly debate, which is why the bogus federal ban was allowed to expire, uncerimoniously.

Please
CathyInBlue

Punxsutawney, PA

#3 Apr 6, 2009
Dick Pop owned nothing that could be referred to by the very precise phrase assault rifle. Nothing he owned fired on full automatic. Nearly all AK-47s in private hands in America are semi-automatic-only rifles, which exempts them from the label of assault rifle.

This distinction, lost on The Sun's editorial board, can most succinctly be exemplified by this short YouTube video.
Please note that the tragedy in Stockton, CA to which Ofc. Leeroy Pyle alludes took place in January, 1989, over two decades ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton_Massacr...

It's time for the mainstream media to learn something about the things about which they write. Ignorance of at least 20 year old information is unforgiveable.

As is inelegance with the English language. "he shot two officers who knocked on his door with a rifle." So, you're saying the police used rifles to knock on Dick Pop's door? You do that at my house, you raise your chances of getting shot too. How about "he used a rifle to shoot two officers who knocked on his door." I know precision and accuracy is foreign to your editorial staff, but word smithing is supposed to be your thing, even if honesty isn't.

And why should Congress bring back a ban on inanimate objects which the rank and file themselves will tell you are not the weapons used by criminals to commit crimes? Don't believe me. Ask the FBI crime statistics. Check the 10 years prior to 1994 for the number and type of firearm taken off criminals and found at crime scenes with the 10 years after 1994. There is no change. The hallmark of legislation, good or bad, is that you can see a change in the world because of its passage.

Frank Zappa said of journalists for the Rolling Stone, "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." The same can be said of banning guns to lower crime. It makes no objective sense.

I've got an idea. I know what we can ban that will monumentally improve the safety of Americans, make our lives better, and it'll even improve the economy, although, of course, I have no actual numbers to back up any of these claims. And, I know that it's interfering with a Constitutionally protected right, but, come on, "if it just saves one life," let's ban bad journalism.

Relying on research done on the efficacy of gun control by the Violence Policy Center... who do you think you're kidding? Perpetuating the exploded myth that American guns are feeding the narco-wars in Mexico? That's journalistic malpractice. How about citing the 65 Democrats who signed a letter to A.G. Holder dictating that they would not support an attempt to renew an AWB. Oh, right, because you disagree with them. There's no bias in that.

Let's definitely, absolutely, and with malice aforethought violate the human, civil, and Constitutional rights of millions of Americans, because the law with which we do it "may" have a benefit. How about the editorial staff of The Sun join the anti-gun Leftists in Washington in learning a few facts about guns in America before opening your traps again or putting pens to paper?
SHADDAP

Crestline, CA

#4 Apr 6, 2009
Let's outlaw drugs - that will stop addicts.
Let's outlaw felons having guns.
Let's outlaw murder, that will stop all killing.
Let's out law drunk driving, that will stop the deaths of thousands.

What do you mean, we already outlawed these things?

How can these lawbreakers ignore the laws?
Don't they know this stuff is illegal? Now I'm confused, it should have fixed everything!
Debra Zavala

Mcallen, TX

#5 Apr 6, 2009
It's the person that causes deaths, not the gun. Why infringe on everyone else's 2nd amendment right to self defense because of a loon that will kill, hurt or maim regardless of a gun ban.
Steve Ogaz

Los Angeles, CA

#6 Apr 6, 2009
Again raising the ban on assault weapons will do nothing to stop these murders. When will the focus be on the evil these people have rather than the weapon. Taking away the weapons will not stop them, only making them find another way to kill. As for police officials believing that bans will work, ask the street cop who deals with criminals on a daily basis and they will tell you that bans and so called buy back programs do nothing to make the communities safer. It just makes you feel good. What a fashion statement made by the elected officials who view these senseless crime as a way to apnder to the fears in order to be reelected.
JJF

Milford, MI

#7 Apr 6, 2009
In a recent interview with ABC News, Author James Jacobs (Can Gun Control Work? ISBN 0195176588)
states the basically that the ban failed.( http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex... )
Claims that the drug lords getting their guns from the US are being toned down, and the percentage is closer to 20% instead of 90%. Why don't you publish those stories? The only people that will benifit from a Ban are members of the following community organizations:
Almighty Saints
Black Disciples
Black P Stones
Puerto Rican Stones
Crips
Bloods
Vice Lords
Spanish lords
Four Corner Hustlers
Gangster Disciples
Mickey Cobras
Two Six
Latin Eagles
Latin Kings
MS-13
Maniac Latin Disciples
Satan Disciples
Spanish Cobras
Sureños
La Raza Nation
Norteños
SHADDAP

Crestline, CA

#8 Apr 6, 2009
Creating fear in the populace is a great plan that has been used many times in history. Scare the population into allowing the passage of restrictive laws, then everything will be good and safe.
Here is a good example:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/whitehead2.h...
High Desert Man

Ontario, CA

#10 Apr 6, 2009
Since we are talking statistics here, how about drunk driving that killed over 17,000 Americans in 2006.

That doesn't count all those with permanent life altering injuries either.

That would be more than the total homicide rate for the US I believe, more than our loss of US troops in combat since 1991.

So let's ban booze, make first offense DUI a felony a mandatory 2 year prison sentence?

That won't happen because so many of our politicians like to drink.

Ban booze first, then we can talk about gun control.

You Democrats need to shut your pieholes.
mick

Lima, OH

#11 Apr 6, 2009
yea, because convicted felons buy guns legally. Guns are the biggest selling item within the black market, meaning that they are not purchased leagally. So what does that tell you if there was a ban on guns, that only cops and criminals would obtain them.
Charlie P

Detroit, MI

#12 Apr 6, 2009
Let's put restrictions on the 1st amendment. That would stop pieces of crap like this story from being put into print. What a tool. It's the first thing that runs through these clueless wonders minds, ban the guns. We certainly wouldn't want to establish a nationwide capital punishment law that would make criminals think twice before they go on a spree. Oh but that's cruel and unusual punishment. We can't hurt the poor criminals feelings by correcting them in a way that they'll never commit another crime. The American criminal justice system is being run by a bunch of wussses, with the exception of a hand full.

“I won't pay health insurance”

Since: Jun 07

Wenatchee, WA

#13 Apr 6, 2009
The ban "may" save officers lives. Criminals "may" just magically turn into outstanding citizens after the ban and never break a law again or even think about killing police officers.
CA Cop

Highland, CA

#14 Apr 6, 2009
Speaking as a cop, I oppose reinstating the ban on assault weapons. I am a firm beliver in the 2nd amendment. Let those, who put their lives on the line, make the desissions, not the anti-gun legislators.
exconservative

Mescalero, NM

#15 Apr 6, 2009
As long as people are in jail for Marijuana I will vote the straight democratic ticket even though I hate all forms of gun control.

Since: Apr 09

Orangeburg SC

#16 Apr 6, 2009
Gun bans will not stop criminals from getting guns just look at DC and obamas state and New York all have strict gun control laws and massive crime rates
And if cops can obey the constitution then they do not have any business being cops
Boomer215

Anderson, IN

#17 Apr 6, 2009
exconservative wrote:
As long as people are in jail for Marijuana I will vote the straight democratic ticket even though I hate all forms of gun control.
You should really teach them a lesson and refuse to vote.
Algernon Sidney

Lakewood, OH

#18 Apr 6, 2009
exconservative wrote:
As long as people are in jail for Marijuana I will vote the straight democratic ticket even though I hate all forms of gun control.
Who do you think passed those laws in the first place?
GunShowBeingCens ored

Phoenix, AZ

#19 Apr 6, 2009
CA Cop wrote:
Speaking as a cop, I oppose reinstating the ban on assault weapons. I am a firm beliver in the 2nd amendment. Let those, who put their lives on the line, make the desissions, not the anti-gun legislators.
And their our many of your brethren which feel the same way:

Cops and Gun Control: The REAL Story

One of the driving forces behind LEAA’s founding was to dispel the false impression that America’s police favor more gun control.

We know, and research backs us up, an overwhelming majority of America’s rank-and-file cops support private ownership of firearms.

That’s because they know, better than most, that disarming honest citizens does nothing to reduce crime, but will deprive citizens of the means of defending themselves from violent predators.

Many cops are firearms and shooting sports enthusiasts.(If you doubt this, count the number of law enforcement types you see next time you go to the range or on a hunting trip!) These officers know first hand that the kind of gun control popular among liberal activists will do nothing to reduce real crime or deter real criminals. They also know that the kind of extreme gun control measures being pushed by liberals today places an inordinate burden on law abiding shooting enthusiasts and legitimate gun dealers.

And many veteran law enforcement officers can recount episodes where the intervention of an armed private citizen has saved lives ­ often the officer’s!

So Why Do so many Americans Believe Cops Want More Gun Control

In part because that is what gun control advocates want you to believe. In their campaign to pass legislation the Brady Bill and the 1994 gun ban, for example, pro-gun control forces routinely called on cops to help make their case. Mostly big city chiefs and political appointees,(what we at LEAA like to call “photo op cops”) these few police bureaucrats have helped create a public impression that America’s cops favor gun control.(In some outrageous cases, police officers who actually opposed the legislation were forced by their superiors to appear in staged photographs as if they were solidly behind gun control!)

Next time you see cops willingly participate in pro-gun control debate, notice how few of them are front-line street level officers....

...GET THE FULL HISTORY ON LEAA's EFFORTS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON WHAT COPS REALLY THINK AND WHY THEY OPPOSE GUN CONTROL

"The majority of peace officers I've talked to agree that gun laws only result in armed criminals preying on defenseless citizens. Instead of useless anti-gun owner legislation, what we need and need right now are tough anti-crime measures. Anti-gun bills only cloud the real issue. And those of us who actually battle crime pay the price."

Lt. Harry Thomas: Cincinnati Police Division
http://www.leaa.org/Cops%20Versus%20Gun%20Con...
Just Candid

Nashville, TN

#20 Apr 7, 2009
FreedomNut wrote:
Gun bans will not stop criminals from getting guns just look at DC and obamas state and New York all have strict gun control laws and massive crime rates
And if cops can obey the constitution then they do not have any business being cops
" if cops can obey the constitution then they do not have any business being cops " WHAT? Are you suggesting they ignore the constitutional rights of citizens?
Just Candid

Nashville, TN

#21 Apr 7, 2009
You did mean " can't " , didn't you?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Study finds 20M would lose health coverage unde... 2 min deplorable spud 68
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Homer 1,432,007
News Suburban NY police prep for presidential debate 4 min watching from above 3
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min valerie 243,501
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 5 min syamsu 209,585
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 5 min Chilli J 10,205
News Police in riot-hit Charlotte say shooting victi... 5 min okimar 577
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 14 min Cheech the Conser... 395,387
News As Clinton focuses on debate, Trump says he'd c... 45 min WeTheSheeple 87
News Suspect arrested in Washington mall shooting 49 min WeTheSheeple 72
More from around the web