Police Chiefs are on the Wrong Side of Gun Control Debate

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) is the organization representing most of the Chiefs of Police in the United States. While researching information on a specific gun grabbing chief (more on that later), I came across the IACP's position paper on gun control and it is frightening.

Side Note: This is the International Association of Chiefs of Police, emphasis on the International. Members are from 165 different countries, 164 of which do not have a Second Amendment.

For non cops, you have to understand that a Chief of Police is appointed by politicians and is not elected by the people. Also, most people don't grow up dreaming of being the Chief. To the contrary, most chief's spent minimal time as a cop responding to calls or investigating crimes. Most did the minimum in specialized units and then climbed the ranks rather quickly. To this point, most chiefs do not represent the beliefs of line personnel. If you take one thing away from this article, know that the IACP does not represent the majority of officers in the United States. 

Pro tip: if you see a sergeant or lieutenant with one service stripe, be wary. That means they have around 5 years on and have minimal time being a real cop.

IACP's Gun Control Position Paper

The IACP has a document outlining their gun control policy positions. It covers every topic from body armor to "assault weapons." Let's break down what they think on gun control and then we will give you the street cop's view on gun control.

Body Armor

The IACP says,

The IACP supports legislation to prohibit the mail order sale of bulletproof vests and body armor to all individuals except sworn or certified law enforcement officers.

Street Cop View

First, what does body armor have to do with gun control? But I digress.

Although we agree that we don't want criminals getting body armor, what about regular citizens? Why can't they have body armor? What about people that work in high risk industries that could use it? Security guards and people that make deposits of large sums of money could use body armor. So can the clerk at the 7-11 in the high crime neighborhood. Street cops see more people victimized that can use body armor than criminals running around with body armor. Besides, you don't think criminals can get body armor if only cops can get them? Federal agents are notorious for having their weapons and body armor stolen from their trunks.

Police Chiefs have it wrong on gun control and they definitely don’t represent the thoughts of the line personnel.

Conceal Carry Reciprocity

The IACP opposes any federal legislative proposals that would either pre-empt and/or mandate the liberalization of individual states’ concealed-carry weapons (CCW) laws pertaining to the carrying of concealed weapons in other states without meeting that state’s requirements.

Street Cop View

OK. I'm starting to see a pattern with the IACP's positions on gun control and we are only two points in. Only a chief can come up with a run on sentence like that. If I was the author's sergeant, I'd kick it back for grammar alone. But, I digress. Cops are allowed, per HR218, to carry in all 50 states. Why can't citizen's? How is a citizen supposed to know each states concealed carry laws? What about states like California (where Matt and I both worked) where it is next to impossible in most counties to get a conceal carry permit? If you have a permit, you should be able to carry regardless of where you are. I think a resident of Idaho visiting California should have the right to protect themselves from the criminals running rampant on the streets.

Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) on College and University Campuses

In response to the facts and statistics surrounding gun violence and related risks at U.S college and universities, the IACP supports the prohibition of concealed carry weapons upon U.S. college and university campuses.

Street Cop View

I live in a state where college students can carry on the college campus as long as they have a concealed carry permit. I think this is a great idea. Our state has yet to have an active shooter at any of our college campuses. To make matters worse, the college security team at the largest university in our state is unarmed! It is up to the students to protect themselves from predators.

In California, we see plenty of young adults victimized on college campuses. Rape is a big concern for women at universities. They should be allowed to carry on campuses so they can protect themselves. The Chiefs definitely have it wrong on this one.

Semi Automatic Weapons

Semi-Automatic assault weapons are routinely the weapons of choice for gang members and drug dealers. They are regularly encountered in drug busts and are all too often used against police officers.

The IACP has been a strong supporter of the assault weapons ban since 1992, and our membership has approved several reauthorizations of support in the years since.

Street Cop View

Let's address the drug dealer/gang member issue the IACP brings up first. I was a long time narcotics detective. I am recipient of California's Narcotics Officer of the Year. This is a prestigious award that is very hard to attain. I also traveled the world teachingofficers how to conduct drug investigations. I know a thing or two about dope investigations. I also headed a gang unit in the San Francisco Bay Area. With that said, I saw more stolen guns that were very crappy (think Hi Point) than I saw quality "assault rifles." Chiefs aren't investigating crimes or stoping gang members or drug dealers. They have no authority to talk on this subject. How not to get a paper cut would be more their speed to be honest.

As for assault weapons; just stop. Most cops in America don't want this ban and have sworn to not enforce it. How do we know? Because we polled them and asked them their thoughts on gun control. Just click the video below to learn more where I outline the poll.

Besides, the second amendment is pretty clear on gun ownership and "assault weapons" are a part of that ownership. Enough said. Let's move on.

Firearms Enforcement

The IACP urges Congress to increase resources to better allow state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies and the Department of Justice to enable greater prosecution of individuals for Brady Act violations.

Street Cop View

First, you need to understand what the Brady Act is. Here's the definition from the ATF:

On November 30, 1993, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act was enacted, amending the Gun Control Act of 1968. The Brady Law imposed as an interim measure a waiting period of 5 days before a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer may sell, deliver, or transfer a handgun to an unlicensed individual. The waiting period applies only in states without an acceptable alternate system of conducting background checks on handgun purchasers. The interim provisions of the Brady Law became effective on February 28, 1994, and ceased to apply on November 30, 1998. While the interim provisions of the Brady Law apply only to handguns, the permanent provisions of the Brady Law apply to all firearms.

Basically, an FFL does a background check on you. If the check doesn't come back in time, the FFL has to hang on to the weapon until the background check is clear. In some states, you can get the gun after the "Brady Period." If you live in a communist state, you can be waiting for a while.

Look, I can run a person's name and get a CII rap sheet in seconds. It's been that way since I was hired in 1988. I can do it on my cell phone now. If the federal government can't give a return while you're buying a gun, that is their problem, not yours.

I'm disappointed with this one. I thought the IACP was going to say that we need to go after criminals with guns, but instead they took this in a different direction. I was hoping to agree with them on one point at least, but alas, they veered off into no mans land again.

Firearms Offender Registry

The reduction of firearms-related violent crime has been and continues to be a major goal of the IACP. Studies have shown that firearm offenders have a higher recidivist rate for committing other firearms-related violent crime with firearms than the rate for sexual offenders. Therefore, the IACP supports creating a federal registry, similar to the sexual offender registry, for offenders who have been previously convicted of a felony firearm violation or a misdemeanor that involved violent or threatening acts with firearms.

Street Cop View

I'm focusing on one thing here: Federal registry. Why do we need a federal registry like a sex offender registry? I can find out anyone's violent crime history solely by running a CII check on them. Why do I need a gun registry? It does nothing to help me investigate crime on the street.

Again, I was hoping to agree with them on something, but they went off on a tangent. Easily they could just say let's go after criminals with guns, but they don't. This is what happens when you promote with no street experience.

Firearm Purchase Waiting Period

The IACP supports a waiting period for the purchase of a handgun.

Street Cop View

I wrote about waiting periods in a prior piece here. Here's the excerpt from that article:

I remember going to a gun store in the city where I worked. I was in uniform, carrying a Glock 35 on my hip, a Glock 43 in my pocket, an HK416 was in my trunk along with an Accuracy International .308. I still had to wait a 10 day “cooling-off period.” Rest assured, the cooling-off period did nothing to protect the good citizens of California. I was talking to a man next to me and we talked about what guns we owned. Suffice it to say, the man next to me didn’t need a cooling-off period either. He had ready access to all sorts of firearms, including his legally carried concealed weapon. Again, California was safer with these great men and women possessing their firearms. Suppressing their rights and making them wait 10 days did nothing to protect the public.

I worked a case once where a young lady was suicidal. She went to a local gun shop, bought a .357 revolver and some ammunition and then left. Ten days later, she returned to the shop, picked up her handgun and then went home and killed herself. The 10 day waiting period did not help protect her. She had a plan and carried it out.

Gun Show Loophole

The IACP opposes any legislation that would limit or reduce the ability of our nation’s law enforcement agencies to combat the sale of illegal guns

Street Cop View

So, we need to limit our country's rights so that law enforcement can combat a crime? No, it doesn't work like that. We should not be punishing America's citizens to make law enforcement have an easy time investigating crime. You investigate illegal sales by doing undercover investigations and follow up. Kind of like how we are doing it now. But, again, Chiefs are administrative people with little investigative experience and they wouldn't know that.

Juvenile Crime Firearms Disability

The IACP believes that juveniles must be held accountable for their acts of violence. Therefore, the IACP supports the passage of legislation, sometimes referred to as Juvenile Brady, which would permanently prohibit gun ownership by an individual, if that individual, while a juvenile, commits a crime that would have triggered a gun disability if their crime had been committed as an adult.

Street Cop View

There are some truly violent juveniles out there. A good example is California: in California, they have "reformed" the juvenile justice system so much that criminal gangs use kids to commit the most violent acts. So if they commit a crime that would prevent them from gun ownership (like shooting someone), then that sounds OK to us.

I guess we can agree on one point so far.

Possession of and Transfer of Certain Firearm Accessories

The IACP supports legislation that prohibits the possession, import, manufacture, transfer and sale of trigger cranks, bump-fire devices, and similar attachments/accessories designed to increase or modify semi-automatic firearms to automatic weapons.

Street Cop View

I have investigated zero cases where a bump stock (or similar device) was used in a crime. Yes, I know a bump fire stock was used during the Las Vegas shooting. Can you imagine how many more people would have been killed had he not used that bump stock? Accurate fire would have killed much more. Also, a bump stock didn't kill those people. A man did.

Many people ask how I can support the second amendment when so many of my friends have been murdered. Matt and I address this in one of our podcast episodes here.

Silencers (Suppressors)

The IACP opposes any efforts to remove silencers (suppressors) from the purview of the National Firearms Act, in which these devices have been registered under since 1934.

If silencers (suppressors) are no longer regulated, it would undermine the safety of the public and law enforcement by preventing law enforcement from quickly and effectively responding to active shooters, as silencers (suppressors) make it harder to recognize the sound of gunfire and mask muzzle flash, making it more difficult to locate and engage armed offenders.

Street Cop View

I have a lot of silencers. I don't shoot a gun, for the most part, without a silencer. All you have to do is fire a gun with a silencer to realize there is nothing silent about it. This is another example that a chief is a office dweller. A chief that had spent time on SWAT or on the range staff would realize this statement is utterly ridiculous. I can hear the gun community laughing at us with that moronic statement. Hearing safe is not silent.

Besides, a silencer is a part. Like a muffler for a car. A car isn't silent. You still hear it. The same goes for a "silencer." It should not be in the NFA, it should be available in a hardware store.

Wrapping it up

The chiefs association and the street cops agree on only one thing. I have done a lot of work for the IACP. I have taught at one of their conferences on more than one occasion. But, I have learned that they are political and do not really help the average cop on the street. I think it is time that chiefs stop taking political stances and stick to policing. They have gotten it wrong on almost every single point in their position statement.