Progressives Use Gun Control to Force Citizen Dependency on Government

The primary reason Progressives are trying to disarm the population is to increase the dependency of the average American on the government.

National (concealed carry) Reciprocity won bipartisan approval in the the House last year, passing by a margin of 272 to 154. National Reciprocity is expected to be added as an Amendment to the current gun control legislation pending in the Senate.

“Congress should recognize that the right to self-defense does not end at state lines,” said the NRA, in a statement issued last month when the measure was introduced in the Senate.

Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the measure this week as “the most pernicious” proposal under consideration and said approving the plan would mean that “Somebody could come from Wyoming to the big cities of New York or New Haven or Bridgeport and carry a concealed weapon, which is so against our way of life and the needs here in New York.”

Of course it’s against Chuck’s way of life.  He doesn’t need a firearm since he has armed government security, provided at tax payer expense. 

As a law enforcement officer I carried a concealed handgun for hundreds of days in Washington D.C.,  New York City, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Hartford and Newark.  Under provisions of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), close to two million active and retired law enforcement officers are authorized to carry concealed handguns in all U.S. states and territories, including the District of Columbia. Thousands of law abiding citizens are quietly carrying concealed in these cities every day under LEOSA and state concealed carry laws, without untoward incidents happening.

Concealed carry permit holders not only commit fewer gun related crimes than law enforcement officers, many train and practice more than the average police officer.  Contrary to popular belief, firearms training is a relatively small block of police academy training.  Most law enforcement officers spend less than an hour firing 50 rounds of ammunition at annual “qualification” with their handguns.

As a federal agent we qualified quarterly and qualified with at least 200 rounds a year. But since retiring, I shoot at least twice a month and firing thousands of rounds a year.  Many concealed carry permit holders train and practice more than an average police officer. 

Concealed carry permit holders are the most law abiding and responsible citizens in America.  We are all safer because of the responsible, law abiding citizens who chose to train and practice at their own expense.  Firearms are used to prevent crime and save lives hundreds of thousands of times a year in America.

The ongoing debate over gun control is just another attempt by Progressives to make the average American dependent on the government in order to increase the Democrat Party’s power. 

By disarming law-abiding Americans, Progressives hope to instill fear into people.  Progressives want citizens totally dependent on the government.  People who can’t protect themselves will be less likely to oppose increases in taxes or the size of government when they are totally dependent on the government to keep them safe.

People who depend on the government will also tend to be less likely to criticize the government because they know that government can choose to ignore its obligations to them.

If liberals were motivated by a desire to prevent gun violence, they would be in favor of laws which make it easier to convict criminals who use guns and demand that the government enforce the hundreds of current gun control laws.

Progressives work constantly to change America from a country where the government draws all authority from the people to a country where the people are dependent on the government and hence where people are controlled by the government.

If we are to stop the assault on Second Amendment civil rights, we must work tirelessly to make the average low-information voter aware of the Progressive self-interest at the core of their calls for gun control. 

"Out in the West Texas town of El Paso ..."

Mothers, don’t let your cowboys grow up to be crooks

Three armed felons crossed the US border and attempted to rob an off-duty El Paso police officer dressed in civilian clothes while he stood in front of a bank.  The plan was for two of them to grab his backpack and toss it to an accomplice on a stolen motorcycle.  However, the well prepared police officer shot all of them, killing two immediately.  The third was shot in both arms and bled to death before the ambulance arrived.

This is how much the US Taxpayer would have had to pay to prosecute these thugs:
·     Arrest and detention for 1 night = $6,000
·     Transportation for deportation back to Mexico the next day = $1000
·     Air time for Obama to apologize in 30 minute speech = $25,007,000
 
What it actually cost:
·     Four .40 rounds = $1.00
·     Taxpayer savings = $25,006,999.00
 
These cowboys picked the wrong person to rob this time.  There Won’t Be A Next Time!
 
THE AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME FOR A 911 CALL IS 4 MINUTES.
THE AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME FOR A .40 S&W ROUND IS ABOUT 1200 FEET PER SECOND.

Concealed Carry Permit Holder Stops Knife Attack in Utah

Last week a man with a concealed weapons permit drew his gun and ended the carnage of innocent victims by a violent criminal who went on a stabbing spree outside a Salt Lake City, Utah grocery store. 

The incident happened last Thursday shortly after 5 p.m. A man walked into a Smith’s store in Salt Lake City and purchased a kitchen knife, attracting no attention. He then went just outside the store and began yelling and randomly stabbing people. Dorothy Espinoza, an employee of the store, was quoted by ABC News saying,

He pulled it out and stood outside Smith’s in the foyer. And he just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people.

While it is not known what is meant by “you killed my people,” records from the Salt Lake City Jail describe the man as a Vietnamese national. A 45-year-old man was stabbed several times in the abdomen while a 30-year-old man received stab wounds to his head and arms. Both victims were taken to hospital in critical condition.  The knife-wielding man then chased other people into the parking lot. In the lot was an unidentified 47-year-old man who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon. He pulled out a pistol, pointed it at the attacker, and ordered him to drop the knife. The man with the knife complied and got down on the ground.  Employees and customers of the store then restrained the attacker while the citizen with the permit continued to point the gun at him until police arrived. Kiet Thanh Ly, 34, is facing attempted murder and aggravated assault charges. The unidentified man with the gun was praised by the police. Salt Lake City Police Lt. Brian Purvis was quoted by ABC News as saying,

This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He [the man with the concealed weapon] was definitely in the right place at the right time.

And W. Clark Aposhian, a Second Amendment advocate with the Utah Shooting Sports Council, told the local Fox News affiliate,

I think the permit holder showed great restraint in not firing the firearm. This is an imminent, an immediate, on-going attack and if he believed that deadly force was necessary, he is perfectly justified in doing that.

Ly has a long criminal history dating back to 2000.  Ly has previous convictions for assault, sexual battery lewdness, and drug offences. Unlike the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, this incident received virtually no media coverage outside of the Salt Lake City area.  The main stream media (MSM) decides what “news” the general public receives. The MSM is the voice of gun grabbers in America, including the unstable Sarah Brady, founder of the Brady Campaign.  There are no “low crime” areas.  Anything can happen, anytime. Follow the “pants rule” whenever you can be legally armed.  If you’re wearing pants, you should be carrying! Exercise your Constitutional Rights. Don’t be a victim.

DHS LEOSA Policy Memo

I’ve had some recent inquiries about DHS LEOSA Policy.  So I’m including a copy of the DHS policy memo in this post.  As the memo states, each component must issue retired credentials, which satisfy the requirements for retired LEOSA concealed carry.  Components are also authorized, but not required, to issue an additional photographic identification, specifically for LEOSA purposes.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued an order to its subordinate agencies in October 2008 to adopt LEOSA policies for their respective LEOs.  Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) published a policy, but most DHS agencies have not.  The U.S. Coast Guard is a DHS agency and has not published a LEOSA policy even though at least three of its boarding officers and boarding team members  have been arrested for criminal possession of a handgun and prevailed against criminal charges with  LEOSA arguments.

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SAFETY ACT-

Department of Homeland Security DHS Directives System Directive Number: 257-01 Revision Number: 00 Issue Date: 10/10/2008

I. Purpose

This Directive establishes policies with respect to retiring and retired qualified law enforcement officers and the application of the provisions of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (LEOSA).

II. Scope

This Directive applies to all the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Components that have retired officers who meet the definition of “qualified retired law enforcement officers” set out in the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). This Directive applies to DHS Components’ handling of LEOSA matters with qualified law enforcement officers who have retired from DHS Components since DHS was formed in 2003, with future such retirees, and with such retirees from predecessor agencies when these retirees make LEOSA inquiries with appropriate DHS successor Components.

III. Authorities

Public Law 108-277, “Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004,” codified at Title 18, United States Code, Section 926C, “Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified retired law enforcement officers”

IV. Responsibilities

The Director of Law Enforcement Policy in the Office of Policy Development is responsible for administration of DHS policies related to LEOSA. Components with qualified retired law enforcement officers are responsible for implementing this policy within their respective Components.

-1-

Directive # 257-01 Revision # 00

V. Policy and Requirements

A. The guidance set forth below is not intended to and does not create any rights, privileges, or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies or other entities, its officers or employees, or any other person. Nothing in this Directive impairs or otherwise affects the right of an individual to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

B. The provisions of LEOSA pertaining to qualified retired law enforcement officers will be implemented by DHS Components in as cost-effective and efficient manner as possible that meets the requirements and intent of the statute as well as the LEOSA concerns of DHS and predecessor agency law enforcement retirees.

C. LEOSA essentially exempts “a qualified retired law enforcement officer” (hereafter “retiree”) who is carrying the required “identification” from most State and local laws that prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons. LEOSA permits carrying a concealed firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate commerce, subject to certain restrictions.

D. LEOSA requires that, at least once each year, retirees carrying a concealed firearm under its provisions “be tested or otherwise be found …to meet …standards…to carry a firearm of the same type as the concealed firearm.” LEOSA provides that this annual testing or otherwise being “found…to meet…standards” can be conducted either by the agency from which the retiree retired or by some other entity authorized to issue “a certification …by the State in which the [retiree] resides” indicating that the retiree has “been tested or otherwise found by the State to meet the standards established by the State for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers…”

E. As explained below, as a matter of policy, DHS Components will not perform or assist with the required annual firearms testing for retirees.

F. The “identification” required to be carried by retirees tested under State standards includes both a photographic identification issued by the agency from which the retiree retired and an up-to-date “certification issued by the State” concerning annual testing and qualification.

LEOSA does not exempt covered retirees from other federal laws or regulations, including any restrictions on the carriage of firearms on transportation systems (such as commercial airlines) and does not confer on the retiree any law enforcement power or authority to use the firearm.

Directive # 257-01 Revision # 00

-2-

1. Photographic Identification: DHS Components currently allow law enforcement officers who are retiring in good standing to retain their credentials (containing their photograph, name, signature and position title) stamped or perforated with the word “Retired.” To minimize costs and administrative burden, Components may utilize these “Retired” credentials as the “Photographic Identification” required by the LEOSA. Components are also authorized, but not required, to issue an additional photographic identification, specifically for LEOSA purposes, containing the retiree’s photograph, name, signature, and the title of the law enforcement position from which he or she retired, proceeded by the word “Retired,” and the name of the Component or Subcomponent from which the individual retired (e.g., “Retired Special Agent, U.S. Customs Service”). Components are authorized to issue these additional LEOSA identification cards to retirees from their present Components and to retirees from those parts of their predecessor agencies that were merged into their present Components (e.g., Border Patrol into U.S. Customs & Border Protection [CBP], Customs and INS investigational elements into U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement [ICE]). All LEOSA identification cards issued must meet Department-wide identification standards in effect at the time of issuance. Because of unavailability of or excessive cost/difficulty of retrieving older records, Components may establish cut- off dates, and advise retirees who retired before those dates that their requests for LEOSA identification cards cannot be honored.

2. Certification Issued by the State: Under no circumstances will DHS Components perform or assist with annual firearms testing for their retirees. To meet LEOSA requirements, law enforcement retirees from DHS Components and their predecessor agencies must “be tested or otherwise be found …to meet …standards” by a non-DHS entity authorized to issue “a certification ….by the State in which the [retiree] resides” indicating that the retiree has “been tested or otherwise found by the State to meet the standards established by the State for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers…” The availability of such “certifications” varies by State, and it is the responsibility of the individual DHS law enforcement retiree to determine and meet the requirements of his or her state of residence for obtaining this “certification.”

G. Whenever the retiree experiences an event which would disqualify him or her from receiving a firearm under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) or (n), the retiree immediately notifies the Component and the certifying entity in the State of residence. On an annual basis, the retiree shall certify to the Component in writing, or in a manner acceptable to the Component, that the retiree is not subject to any of the disqualifiers in 18 U.S.C. 922(g) and (n) that would prohibit an individual from receiving a firearm.

Directive # 257-01 Revision # 00

-3-

VI. Questions

Address any questions regarding this Directive to the Director of Law Enforcement Policy in the Office of Policy Development.

Texas LEOSA Concealed Carry Update

I drove to east Texas yesterday to meet a good friend and former co-worker who retired shortly after I did from DHS/ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).  It was great to get together and catch up on things.  We both agreed that being retired from ICE/HSI is the best “job” that we’ve ever had!

My friend set up our annual Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA) firearms qualification with a certified Texas Concealed Handgun License (CHL) instructor in Tyler. 

I have heard from a number of retired federal and “out of state” officers, who are not aware that any certified Texas CHL Instructor, can qualify retired officers for the TCLEOSE certification card.  You DO NOT have to be qualified by a law enforcement agency.

In fact, it’s getting more and more difficult to find a law enforcement agency that will qualify retired officers for LEOSA concealed carry TCLEOSE certification.  On the other hand, it’s very easy to find CHL instructors in every county in Texas. 

Google CHL Instructors in your area and then contact them to inquiry about TCLEOSE retired law enforcement officer qualification and certification.  Fees vary, so shop around for the best deal. 

Here’s the link with the latest TCLEOSE application for retired federal officers and retired state and locals officers who retired from a state OTHER than Texas, and now live in Texas.

Law Enforcement Officers who retired in the state of Texas should contact their former agency or TCLEOSE for LEOSA certification and annual firearms qualification instructions.