I wondered what a recent visit to my War on Guns blog by Handgun Control, Inc. (renamed for public consumption to Brady Campaign to appear kinder and gentler) was about. Sure, I've tracked them (and others) lurking about before, but I assumed it was just routine keeping tabs.
Apparently not so. Friend and colleague Kurt Hofmann sent me an email letting me know our pals at HCI have given me some link love on their "Brady Blogs":
While this student’s comments don’t appear to be a malicious attack against the police, many in the gun blogosphere make it a point to denigrate law enforcement.
Yet this student also honestly describes the logical extension of the gun lobby’s attacks on police, and the argument for more guns in more places...
I'll say this much for student Stanley Luong: I understand your frustration, but you really need to learn what the term "vigilante" means, prudent measures to deal with established reality are hardly "paranoia," and acting in an organized defensive capacity does not automatically equate to "taking the law into your own hands."
But I'm not here to talk about Mr. Luong's learning curve for gun rights advocacy, or even the Bradys predictable exploitation of it to gin up hysteria and paint all gun owners with a broad brush.
I'm here to address an accusation leveled at me.
See, their comment about "denigrat[ing] law enforcement" links to my "Only Ones" files. I didn't realize I qualified as "many in the gun blogosphere," and being portrayed as part of the "gun lobby" actually strikes me as funny. Yo, Bradys: I've gotten feedback about real lobbyists who complain ornery radicals like me endanger their access. That's not my game--I don't ask usurpers politely for my rights.
I guess I could go into the standard disclaimer placed prominently in my WarOnGuns sidebar after I decided I was repeating it too often in blog posts:The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
I could even produce countless posts where I've complained that I don't want the "Only Ones" meme to take over the blog--how readers send me most of the tips and I don't go looking for the stories...but I'm not going to justify what I present because of the Bradys.
I don't apologize for exposing abuses against citizens made under color of authority. Think of it--the official Brady position is to oppose citizen oversight of criminal actions by those in government. Anyone who characterizes that as a "denigrat[ion]" is quite simply and demonstrably a police state-enabling liar.
Besides, let's not forget some recent support I've given for proper LEO conduct, like "Sheriff hosting rifle training shows proper mindset toward gun owners."
Oh, wait, that's "pro-gun," so it can't possibly be considered positive...
OK, how about all the nice things I've said about Oath Keepers, you know, current and retired law enforcement and military who say they'll live up to their oath to support and defend the Constitution?
Ah, that doesn't support the denigration theory either...but...but...but those people are just hate-filled militia extremists anyway, right...?
Say, I've got an idea. The antonym for "denigrate" is "glorify."
OK. Brady's, if what I'm doing is wrong and the opposite of your position, feel free to dive into my "Only Ones" files. Which one of these guys do you think should be...uh... glorified?
The cop who shot a man in the face who was trying to give medicine to his quadriplegic aunt?
The one who shot a mother of three and buried her in a shallow grave before taking his own life?
Go ahead, take your pick from the archives. There are plenty of stories to choose from. Tell us how the examples therein are more trustworthy to be armed than America's peaceable armed citizens. You know, the ones you continually denigrate as being too criminal, incompetent and paranoid to responsibly exercise the rights of free adult citizens.
You statist tools are pathetic.
Comments
as for the majority of officers who are not "only ones," i wonder how they feel about the brady eloi -- who have scant followers, but piles of special interest money from the joyce foundation -- taking them for granted, held in contempt, as though defense is beneath the glory of glories such as they?
youtube.com/watch?v=FGEoJX7yCiU
roger rosenblatt: "call a cop." that's you, gentlemen in blue. just a tool to keep their peace.
Add the word "Dangerous" to your word pathetic.
Anti-gun activists are more dangerous to the United States than all the criminals combined.
The Brady bunch is the biggest joke around. I wonder how they felt when their Pres. signed the law to allow carry in national parks. I bet that really put Sara's panties in a wad. She that bought a gun for her son. Was that a straw purchase? Did she break the law?
Hey, it could have been worse. They could have called you "Dave".
:-)
The law, real law, must always reside in the hands of ordinary people. That is the only legitimate place for it since we, as individuals, are the only ones who can rightfully enforce that law... the law of non-aggression.
Dear David,
Let me take some of the heat off of you.
IMO, organizations like the Brady Campaign and SPLC exist solely to further totalitarianism, nothing else. Ever hear of all the purges of innocent people by Stalin? It doesn't matter if you have done anything or not, if your demise furthers the party cause, then say goodbye :-)
The war against the "Red Menace" did not stop when the Berlin wall came down, America simply got complacent. "They" are not behind a wall anymore. What better way to mask what they really stand for than for such organizations to claim they exist to promote racial equality and a safer society (what a laugh).
You're to nice David, these people need to be called out and exposed for what they really are Communist instigators, am happy to do so.
I think our Republic is getting shafted and driven into the ground by these leftist/Marxist organizations and we are allowed to say "Ouch."
The Brady Bunch is nothing more than a couple thousand compulsive petition signers, some lawyers and a few wealthy contributors. They are very model of an elitist organization. Sarah Brady deserves the same respect in the US as Vidkun Quisling got in Norway.
David, Here is a little cat-nip for you:
www.liveleak.com/view?i=a25_1256858330
Quick Summary: Gun crime has increased five-fold in some parts of the UK. Gun crime has almost doubled since Labour came to power as a culture of extreme gang violence has taken hold.
The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent.
Last week, police in London revealed they had begun carrying out armed patrols on some streets. The move means officers armed with sub-machine guns are engaged in routine policing for the first time.
Yea, UK/Europe has the answers, machine pistols & guns in the streets! Those intellectual Dears, they must be so proud...
Circa 1829, Sir Robert Peel the person credited with founding what we know today as the London Metropolitan police force (Scotland Yard) developed 9 principles of community policing. Principle seven states;
“Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
Two phrases within principle number seven stand out.
“… the police are the public and the public are the police …”, and
“… duties which are incumbent on every citizen… “
In the last 180 years these two very important phrases have been forgotten by the police community as well as by the public and the media.
The effectiveness of a police agency should be determined by the level of public peace and tranquility rather than by the number of arrests made or citations issued. Police agencies should exist to protect the people not to control the people. There doesn’t need to be an “us versus them” mentality.
The public needs to understand that there are no experts in the criminal justice professions and that no one should be expected to make perfect decisions every time. At the same time, every police officer, prosecutor, legislator, and judge needs to understand that there are no perfect citizens and that laws should be written and enforced to protect citizens not to punish them.
The most efficient police agency is not that of the Miami Vice operation, or the L.A. PD of Dragnet fame, but Sheriff Andy Taylor’s Mayberry.
I have spent most of my adult life in the criminal justice profession either as a peace officer or as a jailer. I have come in contact with those who deserve to be “buried under the jail” as well as those who have been jailed whose “Illegal” actions were committed totally without criminal culpability. I have become more familiar than I have cared to be with folks who are malicious and/or completely non-caring as far as compassion for their fellow humans is concerned, some in uniform and some not.
I apologize for the diatribe. I wrote all this to make the point that there are good citizens and there are bad. Some wear badges and some don’t. All should be treated as equals under the law. No one’s rights should negate someone else’s. The uniform doesn’t make the man, the man makes the uniform.
David, your criticisms of those whose actions bring shame upon an honorable profession do not offend me in the least.
Hey! I'm not a cop basher. I'm a dog lover. If those two things happen to be identical these days, it's not my fault, and it's not the dogs' fault.
The fact is, other than a few newspapers, nobody cares any more what the Bradys have to say. Not the general public, not the state legislatures, not the Supreme Court, not even their pet president. By the success of liberalized gun laws in the states, in the courts, and in public perception, HCI has been neutered into political irrelevance. That must frost Sarah's pancakes EVERY MORNING.
law enforcement officers of any kind should be held to a higher standard than the general public. They are supposed to be the example of good conduct we are to follow. Yet today too many violate the law and fellow officers will not report them. This creates distrust among the public. I won't repeat what W.W. Woodward said above but he is right. The man makes the uniform not the other way around. Trust is built not put on with a badge and the same for respect. People join police forces today not to serve but to gain the excellent pensions, salaries, and perks. We need to stop that and civilian oversight is a good way if done right. Hiring the proper top cops also helps. As for the Brady bunch they have already done too much damage to this country and the rights of every citizen in it. Do we want to become the next Nazi Germany or Russia because of their lobbying?
Yes David, You Are The Gun Lobby!
Please don't fall for the suggestion that only guys in suits in DC are the Gun Lobby. The guys in suits in DC are the hired guns of the Gun Lobby, but the Gun Lobby is every concerned citizen who has ever expressed concern about infringements upon our right to arms. Dad always opened every speech he gave by welcoming the Gun Lobby - the people in the audience - even when he was listed as one of the 100 most powerful men in Washington as the top hired gun of the Gun Lobby.
I understand the point you were making, but annoying the suits doesn't mean you're not the Gun Lobby, it just means they don't understand who they work for.
Jeff
To W.W. Woodward:
Scotland Yard was not founded in 1829, but came much later, after the Jack the Ripper killings of 1888. Those killings so underscored the ineptitude of the police work regarding the case, that a better way of investigating crimes was needed. Ergo, the creation of Scotland Yard.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!