Concealed carry law used by Madison police chief as 'scare tactic'

[rl6214]

In response to the new concealed carry legislation passed by the Wisconsin legislature, Radically liberal Madison Police Chief Noble Wray resorted to scare to express his distrust of a constitutionally armed public. In an attempt to frighten the residents of Madison, Wray described the unlikely scenario of drunken gun owners engaging in wild shoot-outs. Using typically patronizing language, ultra-liberal Chief Wray stated the he was fearful "for the citizen carrying that weapon, the public and law enforcement officers."

Even though a 2008 scientific study conducted at the College of William and Mary had concluded that concealed carry laws actually decrease crime, as well as the societal costs of crime, liberal politicians in Wisconsin are beside themselves with fear of law-abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons. Much like Mayor Paul Soglin, "The Tyrant of Madison," his lackey police chief Noble Wray is parroting the liberal line and making outrageous and unsubstantiated accusations against the new concealed carry law.

http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979480531

Blood flowing in the streets and all.

[gejohnston]

1. In all fairness

"liberal" and "police" sounds like an oxymoron. Actually, he sounds like any other large city police chief regardless of ideology.

[ergot]

2. Most cops are pricks (I found this out when I -was- a cop) and chiefs are generally the biggest

pricks.

[GillesDeleuze]

23. Do you have any fucking clue who Noble Wray is or how much this city respects him?

didn't think so.

[X_Digger]

24. And what, that makes him always correct?

Say stupid shit, get called on stupid shit.

[ergot]

31. A lot of people respect assholes.

8 billion flies think dogshit is tasty.

[GillesDeleuze]

3. and then theres this! carry a gun? you are probably a reckless drunk: study.

http://host.madison.com/ct/blogs/article_bacfa386-9c31-11e0-b8c9-001cc4c002e0.html

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gejohnston]

13. we discussed that shill study.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x428987

This must be the canard of the week, since everyone with a brain laughed at the buying machine guns without background checks.

If your side is so right, why must it depend on disinformation and scare tactics?

[GillesDeleuze]

18. you keep using that word like im supposed to be impressed

mds and phds who spend their entire life studying this shit disagree with your super intellectual take on the issue.

that does not make them "shills"

[gejohnston]

21. Read the study, look at it on its own merits. Then we can discuss it

I doubt the blogger read it. Here is a quote

In 2007, 34.5 percent of suicide and homicide victims in the United States had alcohol in their systems at the time of death, and 60 percent of those were considered acutely intoxicated.

It does not define acute. A peer reviewer would ask, "what does acute mean?" How many non firearm suicide victims had alcohol in their system? and what the hell does homicide victim have to do with it?

Here is another,


And compared with gun owners who kept their firearms at home unloaded and under lock and key, those who said they sometimes carry a loaded weapon for personal protection or who keep a weapon loaded and unlocked around the house were more likely to do things like drink and drive, and to engage in what substance abuse researchers call "binge drinking."

DUI is a crime. How did he get that many gun owners to admit to a crime that is a felony in some states? How was this study conducted?
One third are thought to have? That says, I am pulling numbers out of my ass.

You are losing your temper. There is this guy that will post shill studies paid for the Joyce Foundation or the John Olin Foundation. We pick the studies apart, but instead of defending the study on their own own merits he gets pissed off and accuse us of being anti intellectual.

[oneshooter]

37. I don't drink. n/t

[GillesDeleuze]

4. selfdelete

[slackmaster]

15. It looks like you have no interest in carrying on a serious discussion here

Bye.

[GillesDeleuze]

20. **Cries tears of sorrow**

[Hoyt]

5. Why do you guys keep quoting crap from obvious right wing bloggers? Worse, why read it?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rl6214]

7. That's right, unless you count all the spam and the "studies"

and "articles" posted off of the VCP and Brady bunch websites.

[rl6214]

8. Right, except for all of the VCP and Brady bunch "studies" and

"articles" quoted here by our more fervent anti gun activists. Those are all A OK.

[ergot]

9. Well, you're smack in the middle of it.

:eyes:

[DonP]

14. You do know that calling out DU members as rightwing shills violates the rules at DU?

And can get you TS'd pretty quickly. You might want to edit that post a bit.

[lawodevolution]

12. You support the Brady campaign (GOP) crap.

[spin]

17. Not all Democrats are foolish enough to believe that American citizens should be disarmed ...

like citizens in Mexico.

Some of us actually believe that the founding fathers were very liberal and progressive individuals. I believe that if the founders were transported via time machine to our world today, they would be gun owning Democrats.

Liberal Today, Liberal 220 years ago, Thomas Paine

***snip***

The Founders used a market with corporate control, regulation and protectionism. A corporation in our Founders time could not cross state lines and could not last longer than the normal life of a man, only 10 to 40 years. Adam Smith states this in his “Wealth of Nations” twelve times. The Founders feared Corporate power as much as a tyrannical government. They would be appalled at what rights and power the corporations have today.

Today’s Liberals are forward thinking, open minded, cares about the welfare of the people, their health, housing, education, employment, civil rights, and their civil liberties. The Founders were very progressive thinkers. The documents that they authored (Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and Bill of Rights) are based primarily on four “liberal” principles. 1. Equality of rights and opportunity. 2. E Pluribus Unum (unity within diversity), 3. Religious freedom, 4. The government’s responsibility to protect individual liberty while simultaneously ensuring our collective well-being. Meaning they were forward thinking, open minded, cares about the welfare of the people, their health, housing, education, employment, civil rights, and their civil liberties. Sounds pretty close to me.

***snip***

Thomas Paine was for progressive taxation, an estate tax and for social welfare. He proposed Social Security in 1793, supporter of animal welfare, early supporter of feminism and women’s rights, believed in free education and government employment that is paid for by the estate taxes. Sounds like a Modern Day Liberal to me.

For most if not all this information, try reading his “Rights of Man” vol 1 and 2, “Agrarian Justice” and “The Necessity of Taxation”. You can find some of it online for free of you can buy the book, Thomas Paine, Collected Writings, provided by the Library of America. You can also download Adam Smiths, “Wealth of Nations” for free in PDF.
http://www.rejecttheherd.net/blog/iratus-aves-hominis/liberal-today-liberal-220-years-ago-thomas-paine

And what did Thomas Paine say abut firearm ownership?

"The supposed quietude of a good mans allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them..." (Thomas Paine, I Writings of Thomas Paine at 56 <1894>)

Of course, other founding fathers were very pro-gun.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States

"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

edited for typo

[gejohnston]

30. There are a number of reasons

know your enemy
fun to read for comedy
reading only left wing blogs is as dumb as righties reading only right wing blogs
left wing blogs are as full of shit as the right wing ones, just on different subjects
why not?

[Logical]

11. I will admit I was one of them in the 80s who thought CC would cause issues....

and I was wrong. A very honest, trouble free group overall!

[damntexdem]

16. Good for 'Wray.' And note the language "radically liberal Madison police chief."

That tells us the regressive politics of the article being spewed onto DU.

[gejohnston]

19. I don't know about the radically liberal part but

scare tactic is accurate.
regressive and progressive is relative. Progressive means move forward, regressive means to move backward. To where does not really matter. Given the definition below, I don't see any real liberals on your side of the gun issue because I read and hear a lot of dogma and bigotry with an occasional authoritarian.

lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. I don't know what his politics are, but Wray is an idiot (if this quote is correct)

Assuming this bit from the non-OTT version of this is correct, he's *demonstrably* inept at policing

http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=33860

Wray notes that officers, when making routine traffic stops, won't even have access to a permit-holder database to determine whether a driver has a gun in the car.

Not instructing your officers to treat every traffic stop as if the driver might be armed is an excellent way of getting

one of them shot eventually.


And if he thinks that permit holders are especially dangerous, he's either a liar or fails to understand statistics.

[Kennah]

25. Very great point

Any officer who sees a license to carry and let's down their guard is a fool.

Gun or not, license or not, a part time attitude gets cops killed.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gejohnston]

28. you don't get it

The known, as in a CCW holder, is statistically a non threat to the cop. What Wray was suggesting was that officers should be more concerned of the most law abiding people, than an unknown that could be a fugitive afraid of being recognized. That shows either sloppy thinking or dishonest fear mongering on his part.
The street cop is less concerned about a gun being in the car than who has it.

[X_Digger]

33. And having a concealed carry license insures that a person always carries?

A cop would be a moron to assume, based on the lack of a concealed carry license, that there are no guns in the car s/he pulls over.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gejohnston]

29. over generalize much?

Based on your postings, I could say antis are incapable of rational and logical discussion.

[rl6214]

32. Yeah cuz it's ok to just go and yank something out of someones

hands just cuz you don't like it.

[GillesDeleuze]

34. you must have reading troubles, so ill make it simple for you.

teapartyin pro CCWers came into the capitol during the daily peace singalong. dude took his wheelchair and ran over peoples feet and belongs. then hit people in the face with his flag pole.

another guy tried to stop him, so the guy in the wheel chair punched him in the face.

good thing he didn't have a gun.

[jeepnstein]

35. Much ado over nothing.

A year from now the concealed carry law will be a fact of life and there won't be any more blood flowing in the streets than there already is.

If the Chief really wanted to deal with street crime he'd be talking about the War on Druggies.

[jpak]

36. Wow just Wow -what a steaming heap of GOP/NRA liberal hatin'

yup