In big cities there seems to be a huge disconnect with the Rank & File and gun owners are taking the hit.
Things may be different in smaller, rural areas in the country but in major metro urban cities law enforcement treads lightly in voicing public disapproval of restrictive gun laws aimed at law abiding citizens. Don't expect them to say and do more because there is a price to be paid.
We're a large range in Southern California and we have a lot of LEOs that come to shoot.
Local and federal departments come and train. Some come to do their "quals", some to practice and some just to shoot. All of them good men and women working to keep their skill level where it needs to be. I interact with a lot of them every day so naturally I get to talk about their work, our work and *surprise*, guns. We all (the range staff) kid them about how envious we are about them not having to deal with the handgun roster and the 10 round magazine limit, two of the most offensive anti-gun laws on the books here.
A little background California's Handgun Roster and 10-round Magazines
For those living outside of California, we have what is called California’s Unsafe Handgun Act (UHA). A “handgun roster” created by the California DOJ. It is a list of “safe” handguns that the state has approved to be sold new in California. It’s one of the most hated and reviled laws this state has ever passed against gun owners.
The Roster is actually is an end-around tactic built to prevent and starve gun ownership in the state. It’s unstated intention, devised by the gun control politicians that control the state legislature, is simple: To cut down on the number of firearms in circulation.
It’s written to convince non gun owners that the government is doing It’s due diligence to prevent unsafe handguns from entering the state. “Keeping our streets and communities safe from gun violence” is the mantra that is preached. It actually is an end-around tactic built to starve gun ownership in the state. It’s unstated intention devised by the gun control politicians that control the state legislature is simple: To cut down on the number of firearms in circulation and starve the gun owning public. We in Cali have not been able to purchase any new handgun models from manufacturers since 2013. (More on this farce in an upcoming post)
To be deemed safe for sale by the state, handguns must possess certain features. For example, semiautomatic pistols must have a manual safety, a loaded chamber indicator, a magazine disconnect mechanism, and microstamping technology. The microstamping requirement has been challenged in state and federal courts. No new handguns have been added to the roster since its implementation in 2013.
Exacerbating this issue is the recently passed Assembly Bill 2847. Going into effect in July of 2022, it automatically removes three previously approved handguns from the roster for every new model the state approves. This provision has already drawn a legal challenge from gun-rights supporters. Needless to say, we won't be getting any new, improved guns anytime soon.
The very fact that a Hi-Point 9mm is an approved as a "safe" handgun and a Staccato isn’t should tell you just how bogus the California’s Unsafe Handgun Act is.
The anti-gun invented term, “high capacity” magazine ban is something that much of the country already knows about. Gun control people rebranding standard 15 round magazines as somehow deadlier than a neutered 10 round mag. Again, it is to “keep our streets and communities safe from gun violence”.
I bring all this up because gun control advocates and politicians defend these laws to the public by saying that law enforcement totally agrees with this effort to get guns off the streets. They are quick to say that law enforcement is 100% behind these laws because it helps “keep our streets and society safe from gun violence”. (There’s that phrase again)
But there's a problem:
The cops on the streets here aren't 100% behind ANY of this.
Every officer, EVERY SINGLE ONE, local, state and federal, reserve, retired, consultant, beat cop or SWAT (I’m not exaggerating on this) that I have talked to about this has said that they don't believe the handgun roster, magazine limit and the highly publicized gun buybacks do anything to prevent crime on the streets and it does not make their jobs any more safer.
The people on the front lines in the war on crime overwhelmingly disagree. So what gives?
Politicians in big cities make and pass these laws ignoring input from “boots on the ground” for political reasons. For every police chief/commissioner that stands on a podium with a lawmaker assailing the virtue of one of these laws there are thousands of rank and file officers that believe the exact opposite.
These are actual quotes from Law Enforcement Officers and Police Chiefs, active and recently retired:
“The criminals get their magazines illegally and have more ammo capacity that our own citizens. It’s a joke that they restrict this stuff. I’m a firm believer that a person should own whatever type of gun for home protection.”
“Most of the firearm laws we have just make good guys into criminals for no good reason. I have yet to find a criminal that has been dissuaded to use or posses an illegal weapon.”
“The roster doesn’t make us or anyone else out there safer.”
“No, they don’t take any input from us. Politicians lie like crazy. It has nothing to do with lowering crime or gun violence. We pull lots of guns off the street. If you want to fix the problem give these criminals with guns prison time and not a couple months in county jail.”
“Honestly I don’t believe the handgun roster deters or prevents crime. I’ve pulled 16 guns off of the streets since I’ve started in July. All of the handguns I’ve taken are either ghost guns or have been stolen. During Post Miranda statements from these detainees they state that obtaining an illegal firearm is easier than purchasing alcohol. Websites don’t ask for ID and people on the streets don’t ask for ID either. I’ve seen more illegal firearms than I have legal. I’ve seen more Glock drum mags and full auto switches than I’ve seen locked gun boxes. The handgun roster is absolutely unnecessary. Laws don’t stop criminals when their goal is to commit crimes.”
“It makes zero sense. All of us think it’s nonsense…. No one can give one reason as to why or how it makes a difference to have certain firearms "LEO only" or "off roster".
“Yes I believe that’s true and most LEOs do too.”
“Microstamping is a crock. It doesn’t work. It takes less than a minute to file down a firing pin. Less time than filing down a serial number, and if it worked all it does it tell us that a stolen gun shot someone… all after the fact. It didn’t stop a crime from being committed and won’t make our job any easier.”
“I think these “laws” stink. It’s easier for a guy to get an illegal gun than it is for anyone in my family to get one.”
“The roster is a joke and high capacity magazines pose no threat to us. It’s the last thing we think about.”
“Safer? How? Non of us believe that crap.”
“In all my years as a police officer I have never arrested ANYONE that has used a legally purchased a firearm in a violent crime.”
“I’ve detained suspects with better guns than the public is allowed to purchase to defend themselves.”
(For the record: I had a number of Chiefs and officers tell me that they didn’t have a problem “going on the record” with their quotes but I chose not to publish their names or departments. My decision, not theirs. I know the cities in which they serve. The hell they would be subjected to by either their Brass or the politicians would be enormous. I couldn't do that to them. Yes, we are living in a very vindictive political atmosphere and we need all the good cops we can get on the streets. Careers would be stalled and even ended. One has only to look to places like Seattle and Portland to see how the mob mentality can destroy a good public servant trying to do the right thing.)
All of this begs the question:
If this is how the majority of law enforcement officers feel why don’t they speak up? There are lots of reasons.
Retribution
Going public in opposition of a heinous law passed by a ruling class of liberals & progressives is a sure-fire way to end a career. Also, if the Brass is making nice with the politicians I pity the beat cop that makes him look bad.
Public opinion and lack of support
Many law enforcement officials have openly stated their opinions on such laws. Some brave souls have actually said they will not enforce these laws. They can be bold and speak the truth without fear because the citizens they serve support THEM, no matter what the politicians say.
Oregon is not going down without a fight. Do you think these sheriffs would come this hard if they didn't have the support from the people?
In rural counties across the country sheriffs are elected officials, not appointed by the mayor, city council or a commission. They head agencies that typically patrol unincorporated portions of their county but also provide backup to city police departments and sometimes patrol small cities that lack their own force. The political layers that govern large cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles don’t exist there. Law enforcement has the freedom to speak the truth because they have support from the people they serve.
Unfortunately large metro police officials are not so lucky. They're in a PR bind. They serve the public but no one likes them, and if it comes down to a spat with City Hall the public will always side with the politicians. You can thank the media for that.
Some LEOs ARE talking but the media isn’t listening… or broadcasting.
What passes for journalism today is by design, suspect. News organizations are viewed by politicians in California as an extension of their own PR machine rather than an organization to be feared for asking tough questions. One would think that candid opinions from the people on the front lines of crime would be high on the list of sources of any report on gun control but they aren't. Only top Brass is questioned and quoted - they speak for their officers - and we know who they answer to.
Even so, politicians in power in these cities keep the Brass on a short leash. California Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta love to hold emotional press conferences to announce their latest assault on gun rights, but notice who is conspicuously missing on the rostrums. You would think the very people who happen to be on the front lines of combating "gun violence" would be present, but they always seem to have something better to do.
Look who seems to be missing from all the press conferences regarding dangerous guns in the community.
I believe it's because Newsom and Bonta can't risk a reporter breaking ranks and asking a law enforcement representative a tough question and getting a non-scripted answer. But honestly, they really shouldn't worry about that - the news media isn't concerned about reporting the news, just pushing an agenda.
CAG Bonta's news conference after the SCOTUS concealed carry ruling. Sort of interesting that the law enforcement agency that approves CCW applications isn't there to field questions.
During Bonta's hastily called press conference to assure the public that California would do everything in it's legal power to “keep our streets and communities safe from gun violence” (sigh), in light of the SCOTUS Good Cause ruling, it was very telling that no uniformed officers of any rank stood with him, especially any of the Brass from the L.A County Sheriffs Department, the agency that actually oversees CCW applications. This is because former L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva was a proponent of CCWs for residents. It is well known that there is no love lost between Bonta, the L.A. Supervisors and Villanueva over this issue.
During the press conference NOT ONE REPORTER asked why Villanueva wasn't there or what LACS thought of the decision. Sort of odd since they are responsible for issuing permits. NOT ONE REPORTER in the room had the journalistic integrity to ask the most basic and important question ever:
“How many CCW holders in the state have ever been convicted of a violent gun crime in California?”
When the media can be used so effectively to propagate California politician's gun control agenda to a brainwashed public, politicians in Sacramento have the kind of power that make dictators green with envy.
Even the Chief of LAPD who usually bends over backwards to appease the gun control City Council in Los Angeles has ordered (via policy memo) his officers not to aggressively cite legal gun owners for carrying or possessing standard capacity magazines. Not a peep from the city's news media.
And sadly, some of the Brass in more liberal cities have actually bought into the madness, or rather become de facto political appointees:
It has to be said. Some Brass have actually drank the Kool-Aid. Maybe because they feel beholden to the city leaders that gave them the position or maybe they truly believe that these dubious and vindictive gun control laws actually work. I don't think the rank & file in the Oakland PD is buying this either.
Some are just tired of the games and they just don’t want to play anymore
There’s a dirty little secret in large, urban police departments of liberal cities: They’re not meeting their recruitment quotas. Huge numbers of officers are leaving the force. Most through early retirement and some are even calling it quits before retirement age. You could build a pretty nice department in Arizona just from the California police officers that have retired and moved. And not just California. A friend of mind was a LEO in Texas and he left 4 years shy of retirement age. “Not worth the pain”.
Others have become jaded and just given up fighting the system. They equate it to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. I won’t say that their just going through the motions but it seems like they are. Sad to say, these types of officers just need to find another line of work.
Still others have adopted an "I got mine, sucks to be you" attitude.
I remember vacationing in Hawaii 4 years ago. I brought my M&P Shield with me to keep in our resort room for added protection (I also thought it would be cool to say that I shot at a range in Hawaii). The Hawaiian law dictates that I had 72 hours to physically present and declare my firearm to local law enforcement and receive a visitor’s permit to possess on the island, good for five years.
The officer that helped me was a transplant from the Midwest. He joined the Navy, got stationed in "Paradise" and decided to stay (imagine that). We got to comparing California and Hawaii gun laws and he was in total agreement that most were totally unnecessary, then he confided, “I like guns and shooting and being a cop was really the only way to own one here, so I became a cop”.
But the biggest reason is the most disturbing. It's about money.
There is a certain amount of 'Quid Pro Quo" dance that goes on between police departments and politicians at expense of legal gun owners.
When something seems a little too strange to comprehend my wife has a saying:
"If something is funny, follow the money". There seems to be a certain amount of "quid pro quo" between anti-gun politicians and large law enforcement unions and gun owners have become the sacrificial lambs.
The Brass may be in charge but they don’t control the purse strings. Getting on the bad side of a progressive city council is a sure-fire way to get your budget cut. If anything, the summer of 2020 taught us how fast city leaders can make knee-jerk decisions to appease a disgruntled community. Police budgets were slashed at a whim to placate a very vocal and angry public without any thought of the consequences. Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis and Los Angeles have recently begun to quietly “re”fund their police departments but too little, too late. LEO moral and confidence in those cities are at an all-time low and all are falling to meet their recruitment quotas. Police Chiefs nationwide are walking on eggshells trying not to antagonize City Hall.
But in states like California, police unions aren't wringing their hands over staffing, better equipment or morale. Their fight is about money. Current pay, protection of overtime / vacation pay, and retirement pensions.
In exchange for their silence in the gun control debate they are rewarded with raises and benefits.
Law enforcement have a powerful unions that work tirelessly on behalf of their members and that creates some strange bedfellows. The beliefs of the officers on the street seem to rank second to the benefits that the unions try to secure. In their zeal, gun rights have become the sacrificial lamb at the alter of political power.
To say that Governor Gavin Newsom is no friend of gun rights is a gross understatement. His anti-gun vendetta against law-abiding gun owners in the state of California is legendary. California’s repression should be a warning to all gun owners nationwide as he sets his aspirations toward the White House. He would abolish the 2nd Amendment in a heartbeat if he could, and his ultra liberal, progressive politics tend to view criminal behavior as an unfortunate byproduct of social inequities, systemic racism and police overreach.
The CCPOA wrote a check for $1.75 million to Newsom’s recall defense fund plus another $1 million for his reelection campaign. It was the single biggest donation from a California state employee union.
Yet, in the most recent elections, the Recall vote and the general election in November, Newsom was not only endorsed by California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the California Association of Highway Patrolmen PAC and the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association PAC. The CCPOA wrote a check for $1.75 million to Newsom’s recall defense fund plus another $1 million for his reelection campaign. It was the single biggest donation from a California state employee union.
Now, why the heck would a law enforcement organization that is so at odds with this Governor donate so much to his reelection?
Maybe because one month after the CCPOA got a $5,000 COVID-19 bonus for each of their represented workers they also got a nice 12% raise in their new contract earlier that year.
It looks as if police unions really don’t expect for politicians to be on their side so their attitude is “why fight the fight?”. Their view is that politicians are going to lie to anyone and everyone in order to get elected, so if law enforcement is going to get screwed in the end they might as well play the game and get as much as they can for themselves when they walk out the door. Their silence is bought and paid for.
It’s also difficult to speak out against a horrendous law when you can profit handsomely from it.
California law enforcement is exempt from the dreaded "Handgun Roster". The unions fought hard for this exemption. But this exemption is ripe for abuse.
The LAPD Gun Scandal shows the extent some law enforcement entities will go through to keep a “guns for me but not for thee” attitude in place at the expense of legal gun owners.
Archi Duenas, the manager of the gun store at the Los Angeles Police Revolver and Athletic Club located at the Los Angeles Police Academy was accused of stealing guns, off-roster, and selling them. He faced 25 criminal counts and over a dozen years in prison but instead received probation after pleading no contest to felony grand theft of a firearm and a single misdemeanor count of illegally transferring a firearm, a punishment approved by DA George Gascon, Los Angeles’ very liberal, very progressive, gun control district attorney. Gascon will not comment on why Duenas got what amounted to a light hand-slap over this but one can connect the dots:
The guns in question were not just sold to citizens but to other police officers.
Now, if police officers are exempt and can purchase any gun they want why on earth would they buy guns from some random dude when they can buy anything they want and most of the time with a LEO discount?
Most of which were resold as private party transfers for a tidy profit.
Off-roster guns sold by a private party (which is perfectly legal) in California can command a 100% or higher markup.
A Sig Sauer P365LX retails at $675 at gun stores nationwide.
In California the same gun can be sold privately for over $1600.
Many Private Party sellers prey on the gun buying public’s desperation for updated and new models. It's a pretty tidy revenue stream.
I'm sure if Duenas had been anyone else stealing and selling over 44 stolen off-roster firearms I’m confident he/she would be enjoying quite a few birthdays from behind bars and Newsom, Bonta and every other anti-gun lawmaker in the state would never let a gun control press conference go by without mentioning his name 20 times.
Why is this story being allowed to quietly fade away?
Because it's a perk that puts side money into LEOs pockets and someone that abuses it brings unwanted public scrutiny that the media can't ignore.
(But in possibly the most glorious moment of pure karma for Newsom and California gun control advocates, the LAPD adopted the FN 509 as their official duty weapon, a gun that is not approved to be sold in California because it was deemed “unsafe”. I’m sure Judge St. Benitez with have plenty to say about that when he issues his ruling in the lawsuit challenging the legality of the Roster brought the CRPA, FPC, GOA and NRA on the legality and political nature of the Roster. Again, “Unsafe guns for me but not for thee”.
Where is this all headed and what can we do about this?
Cities and counties that respect gun rights will have law enforcement that will do the same.
If you are in a pro 2A city or county keep voting for the Constitution not the candidate. The California disease is infecting major metro areas and gun control fanatics now know they don’t have to control an entire state, just it’s major metro population center. That’s what happened in California, Oregon, Washington and Georgia. Keep the fight at the local level. Keep it out of your local communities. Make your voice heard and your vote count at the local level. Find out where your representatives stand on the fundamentals of the 2nd Amendment and vigorously support them.
Support law enforcement that is fully pro-2A and not in a “politically-correct” pro-2A way.
It’s all or nothing now. Speak out, let law enforcement know where you stand. If politicians in your area propose a money-wasting gun buyback let your voices be heard. Local LEOs push back even harder knowing they have the public behind them.
Law enforcement has got to take a stand.
How is this going to play out in the future? I really don’t know, but I do believe we are approaching a tipping point and law enforcement is going to have to make a stand. The Pew Research Center released a survey that shows that police officers support protecting citizens’ gun rights over passing more gun control by a margin of 3 to 1, and 71% of officers polled said a ban on so-called assault weapons would have no effect on reducing violent crime.
LEOs everywhere need to end the silence and speak the truth.
You really have more power than you think. If one officer speaks the truth it’s easy to silence him/her but if the majority speak up you can’t be silenced.
If your legislature proposes another hideous anti-gun law that you know will have no effect on crime but put yet another undue burden on law abiding citizens, come out both barrels blazing against it. Go on the offensive. You will run the risk of enraging some politicians but as the crime rate soars and the public becomes increasingly aware that there is only so much the police can do, things will change.
Liberal politicians may not like you or what you have to say but they also know that no one else will step up to the plate to do what you do. If you say, “screw it, we’re done”, it’s amazing how fast things seem to change. Just ask the city of Seattle or Minneapolis.
And yes, these politicians are vindictive.
They will want you to play the game. Stand firm. There may be a price to pay for standing up for gun rights as a member of law enforcement but just keep this in the back of your minds:
Comments