“The rights of citizens are not contingent on the reasonable exercise of those rights by all citizens.” – Fresno County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Kevin FitzGerald in an email to TTAG.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

37 COMMENTS

  3. yes, but ca is very conservative outside of la and the bay area. unfortunately this gives the dems a lock on sac. talk about taxation without representation. this is one of many reasons i say we have to break the dems at the national level in november. trust me on this, you don;t want to live in a country run like ca,

  5. Every cop in this country is tasked with infringing on basic rights. As long as the laws are unjust then the police will be vermin. So the irony of this quote shouldn’t be lost on anyone.

  6. At last count (2011) Fresno County Sheriff had issued 3600 CCWs. This represents five percent of the adult population of the county. They have unfortunately developed a long backlog after going virtual “shall issue.”

    • Well I hate backlogs, but glad at least one county is doing it. I am north of there and we are not quite shall isue yet, but working on it.

  8. Common sense that can be applied to the entire Constitution. The Supreme Court could use this for nearly every ruling. Well done!

  9. 23 Years in police work and I have never met a cop who didn’t think like this…. mostly all of us do. Sometimes, you see certain unfavorable reactions from cops, and if you look at the facts behind the case, it is almost always an incident involving some high ranking brass who is just as much a pole as the mayor or a cop whose intentions got taken out of context on a “Man with a gun call, with numerous callers” (The kinda of radio call that makes all cops swallow their heart until they know everything is ok. )

  11. Before we all go gaga with this guy, shouldn’t he be asked how often he kidnaps innocent people who harmed or threatened no-one simply because they had a certain leaf in their pocket?

    • There you go….more misguided, undeserved (especially this guy), ridiculous, cop-hating drivel being spewed on the pages of TTAG (probably by a stoner). Congrats.

      • First you accuse me of being a “pot head” and now Bob of being a “stoner.” I guess in your mind, anyone who defends the position that you own your own body and are free to ingest whatever you want (you know, that pesky idea of liberty) must be abusing non-state sanctioned “drugs.”

        There’s more to liberty than just the things you are comfortable with.

        • No, I called Bob a stoner because only someone stoned out of their head (or perhaps with a screw loose) would make a dumb statement like that.

          Don’t jump to conclusions. I smoke occasionally myself. I don’t mind the idea of smoking on a seldom occasion and keeping it in check. I do firmly believe however that being a pot head is bad for a person, their family and for society. I see a lot of it around me. I also think “medical marijuana” is doing nothing more than help create a whole new, larger generation of loser potheads (and further degrade society).

          Lastly – I certainly don’t think it should be legalized so that we have “420Mart” next to every 711 (close to the munchies). Teens of today are already lazy enough as is, without being conditioned to think that it’s 100% OK/culturally accepted to be a daily wake-n-baker. You give American kids that kind of choice, most of them will take you up on it.

          I don’t recall why I called you a pot head. 😉

        • MotoJB

          Do you remember my post several weeks ago, when I mentioned that you often viciously attack people in your replies? You’re doing it again.

          You said you would try to not do that. I know it is tough to break old habits, so consider this as just a friendly reminder.

          • No Bob, I truly don’t remember your post “several weeks ago” and I don’t remember promising you anything. Also, I have the right to voice my strong opinions, just the way others do here. If someone posts some stupid anti-cop drivel, I’m going to say something. If I come across as attacking/insulting, IMO oh well, because that’s exactly what they are doing. What I said/say is no where near as bad as what many say here with regular and reckless abandon. Over the top racist, cop-hating, craziness going on left and right and you get on me. Lovely.

            Maybe you should be a bit more annoyed by those that take every positive story that includes a cop (especially one that supports our cause) and turns it into some biased, anti-cop rant. Personally, I’m sick of it.

            Unlike many posting here – I have respect for the jobs that cops do – especially the ones that do it with honesty/integrity/bravery and care for citizens (and our gun rights). I know several cops just like this (a couple I call close friends), and I don’t appreciate all the jerks here basically saying these good guy’s are scum just because they wear the badge.

            If you’re asking me to stop replying in kind to those types of posts, sorry, it ain’t gonna happen.

    • i am on record as saying legalize drugs. but when you break the law, whether you agree with the law or not, man up and accept that you gotta pay for that misstep. throwing hissy fits about “kidnappings” adds nothing to the discussion. i occasionally carry concealed even though i have no permit. i accept the risks of my actions and if caught will face the legal system without whining.

      • Yeah, those captured fugitive slaves needed to just quit their whining and face up to the system. Since they knew they were breaking the law by trying to escape, they just have to accept the consequences once caught.

        • are you really going to compare the atrocity of slavery to laws that we can change with simple votes. being a bit overwrought aren’t we.

        • We could have abolished slavery with votes too, but that’s beside the point. I was making a comparison to demonstrate that we are under no obligation to follow “laws” that are contrary to true liberty.

          Simply because something is “law” does not mean it is moral or just. As liberty lovers, we should encourage and celebrate the violation of anti-liberty “laws.”

        • until the issue of states rights were settled with the civil war, no we couldn’t just abolish slavery with a vote. and standing up against laws you feel are unjust, as i’ve said i sometimes carry concealed even though i have no permit. we need the help of all good men to win this battle and lumping all cops into the bad category does us no good and just creates more enemies for us.

        • I totally agree that individuals should be judged by their actions and not by a prejudice against the collective. My only arguement was that it is not “whining” to fight against or violate unjust laws, and we definitely shouldn’t accept unjust consequences for acting as free men. No, you don’t “gotta pay for that misstep.” It is not a misstep to be free. I think we’re on the same wavelength though and it’s really just a matter of semantics at this point.

    • That’s just a pathetically stupid statement. Kidnapped? Are you serious? You need to sober up dude.

  12. I could give Robert lots of ‘Quote of the Day’ statements. Unfortunately, not even he would be willing to publish them and for my own good it’s probably best that they are left unspoken and unpublished.

  15. This is what I meant in an earlier post when I touched on gun rights. I stated something to the effect that if we could get a super majority of rank-and-file law enforcement officers to understand the actual meaning of the 2nd Amendment and liberty, we won’t have to worry about all the unconstitutional gun laws that our elected representatives have already enacted and continue to enact.

    And, believe it or not, this is in the best interest of rank-and-file law enforcement officers as more citizens are armed and able to carry and use their arms for lawful defense. Here is why:
    (1) About 1 in 15 adults have concealed carry licenses in my state and amazingly the number is accelerating. That means more violent criminals will be a non-threat (captured, unconscious, or dead) when law enforcement shows up. That is much safer for them.
    (2) With so many armed citizens out in public, the next time a law enforcement officer gets into a sticky situation with a criminal/s, an armed citizen could save their butt. (I was going to say “bacon” but didn’t want anyone complaining about an inappropriate pun.) Like the older gentleman in Texas who recently assisted a police officer who was in a firefight with a fleeing murderer (that had a rifle and a large tree for cover). The murderer ended up in a cross fire situation and the citizen scored the first hit. The police officer and the citizen went home to their families that afternoon; the criminal went to the morgue that afternoon.
    (3) Law enforcement officers who arrest citizens for the “crime” of arming themselves (for no other purpose than self-defense) risk resistance from the citizen. That is dangerous for both the law enforcement officers and the citizens.

    Thus, the preferred resolution to any conflict is education and persuasion. If we can get almost all of the county sheriff deputies on board, we’ll be most of the way there.

Comments are closed.