FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

Tactical Pants - Galls
A popular choice for public safety professionals, the Galls Tactical Pants are...


Police Readers Support Concealed Carry, Romney for President e-newsletter subscribers participated in a survey covering gun control, politics, and police operations.

September 12, 2012  |  by - Also by this author

Photos: Gage Skidmore and Dan Sears
Photos: Gage Skidmore and Dan Sears

The vast majority of working law enforcement officers in the United States support the Second Amendment right to bear arms and plan to vote for presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney this fall. That's the findings of a survey conducted by POLICE Magazine this summer.

A total of 19,000 subscribers to the e-newsletter On-Target were given the opportunity to participate in a survey covering gun control, politics, and police operations. Of that base number, 2,387 responded, a total response of 12.6%. Of the respondents, 74% were active sworn law enforcement, 15% were retired sworn law enforcement, and 11% were not law enforcement officers.

Gun Control

Respondents showed little or no support for increased government restrictions on gun ownership. Only 10% of respondents said they believe stricter laws on handgun ownership would increase or enhance public safety.

"Assault weapons" were another story. While the vast majority of respondents, 79%, opposed restrictions on "assault weapon" ownership, 21% believed tighter control of these firearms would increase or enhance public safety. That means that more than twice the number of respondents supported control of "assault weapons" than support control of handguns. The survey did not provide a definition for "assault weapons."

Concealed carry for civilians drew almost unanimous support from the respondents. A whopping 94% said they support civilian concealed carry laws. In a follow-up question, 82.4% said they support expanding concealed carry to more places.

Asked where concealed carry should be restricted and given a list of possible locations from which to choose, 51% of respondents said private property owners should have the right to prohibit carry on their property. Another 32% said that carry should not be prohibited in any location, including churches or schools. In the wake of the Aurora, Colo., "Dark Knight" massacre only 10% of respondents said that carry should be prohibited in movie theaters.

Bulk ammunition sales on the Internet were one gun control issue that appeared to concern many officers following the Aurora shootings. Some 35% of respondents disapproved of bulk sales of ammo via the Web. Respondents were split almost 50-50 on whether large purchases of ammo should be tracked by law enforcement.

Active Shooters

The good news on the active shooter front is that this concern is front and center on the radar screens of police brass. A full 87% of respondents said their agencies have held active shooter response exercises. Maybe that’s why 73% of respondents said their agencies are prepared to respond to an active shooter incident.

Individual officers are also concerned about active shooter attacks, even to the point of personally paying for gear that can be used for responding to such attacks. A full 63% of respondents said they have paid for ammunition, weapons, armor, or other gear intended for active shooter response out of their own pockets.

A follow-up question asked respondents what measures would likely prevent mass shootings in public places. The number one answer was more concealed carry at 62.8%. Other popular answers included armed guards, 30.9%, and metal detectors, 26.6%. Note: Respondents were allowed to choose more than one answer.

The Election

As in our previous presidential election poll in 2008, the vast majority of respondents tended to be conservative. Only 10% of respondents support Democrat Barack Obama's bid for re-election.

That would seem like good news for Republican contender Mitt Romney, but it's not really. While 76% of respondents said they would support Romney in November, 14% said they would choose other candidates, including Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.

Romney's big problem with the law enforcement audience appears to be likeability. Asked why they were supporting Barack Obama, 51% of the small segment of officers who plan to vote for the president chose "I don't like Mitt Romney" as the reason.

Conservatives also indicated their vote for Romney was more about their disapproval for Obama than any actual fondness for Romney. Only four respondents, or 0.2% of the Romney supporters, selected "I like him personally" as the reason that they plan to choose the former Massachusetts governor in November. The number one answer Romney supporters chose for voting Republican in the upcoming election was "I oppose Obama's policies" at 67%.

Note: The POLICE Magazine survey was conducted prior to Romney's selection of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as his vice presidential running mate.

To get a better feel for the issues that most concern law enforcement officers in this election, the editors of POLICE Magazine asked respondents to rank a given set of issues in order of importance. Seven issues were provided in the survey. Number one at 76.25% was the economy. Despite their overwhelming support for the Second Amendment right to bear arms, respondents indicated that they were least concerned about the potential restriction of firearms and ammunition sales. This is likely due to the fact that neither party has made increased gun control a platform issue.

The Economy

As noted above, respondents chose the economy as their primary concern in the upcoming election. And with good reason; a whopping 41% of respondents said governments (city, county, state) served by their agencies are in "financial trouble."

Financial difficulties facing their agencies have affected officers in two ways: worries about employment and benefits and diminished resources for carrying out their mission. A staggering 70% of respondents said that the economy has them "worried about the stability" of their retirement benefits. Even more concerning is the fact that 50% of respondents said that "budget cuts have adversely affected" their ability to do their jobs.


Survey: Gun Control, Active Shooters, and the Election

Can You Prevent Mass Shootings?

Comments (46)

Displaying 1 - 46 of 46

TeeJaw @ 9/22/2012 9:57 AM

I wonder if a self-selected 2,387 out of 19,000 is representative of the whole. I don’t know how well a survey stacks up against a scientific poll. On the other hand, a lot of supposedly scientific polls these days are slanted by the sampling process and the wording of the questions.

I believe these results are representative of officers in general because they are highly plausible.

Dave Bryant @ 9/22/2012 10:07 AM

As an old school former street cop, this restores my faith in the new centurians out there now. Don't forget to get registered and VOTE in November. This may be the last chance to save our country. Stay safe brothers!

janickols @ 9/22/2012 11:05 AM

What a strange survey. I wonder what dream land the respondents to this survey live in. After 25 years in law enforcement and public service I find your results hard to fathom. L.E. has different faces in different places. Rural brothers and sisters have vastly different needs and requirements.
Us urban warriors from the mean gangland streets may see things from a different perspective. CCWs for the untrained? Good luck with that. CCWs in a rural land probably works. People are closer to the earth and have a better view of weapons overall. And, just maybe, a better respect for what firearms can do.
Our city folks keep an auto loader in the night stand and will probably use it to terrify one of the kids sneaking through a window from a late date. Grandpa since departed did that to my sister in law. Or, better yet, stuff it down the front of their jeans gangsta' style and blow off their bojangles.
Happened to one of my nutty neighbors. Missed his bojangles but drilled his leg fair and square.
The NRA needs to swing in and create a true comprehensive CCW program that all states would follow. CCW's for politically correct or connected are flat dangerous. Hello NRA, you need to lead.
As far as the presidential race good luck with that. Just vote. Obama has done nothing with gun control and still most are terrified he will do something. Ask the NRA, they are still a flutter over his lack of gun control legislation. But just wait it's coming. Yeah and so is Santa Claus. Gun control is a dead issue in America unless you live in the inner city.
After 40 years as a registered Republican I have given up the fight. Now an independant voter. My Republican Party of Goldwater, Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan are long gone. Reagan and Nixon couldn't get on the first ballot today as they would be run out of town as moderates. Heck, the ERA remember that? The Equal Rights Amendment was a Republican cause and part of their platform. Those days are down the road. All we get now

CONCERNED MOM @ 9/22/2012 11:09 AM

Here's the bottom line. ARE YOU SAFER NOW THAN YOU WERE 4 YRS AGO!!! Our LEO's are being assasinated on patrol. It happened in Lakewood NJ. My sons & husband are LE. The Middle East is on fire with hatred for America. Our President doesn't even see the dots, much less connect them. He can't even say the word terror. I don't care who you like, vote with your brain not your "feelings".

CFB @ 9/22/2012 11:15 AM

I will not vote for Romney. Romney proved in his speech to the rich, that he does not care about the (common) people or law enforcement. Although his mother admitted his father need help (welfare) from the government, to start his business. He only cares about the rich, the top two percent. Face it; if you are working in law enforcement, you are not making over $250,000.00. Most law enforcement officers are barley making what is considered to be middle class wages. Romney tax breaks do not help us, only the rich. And for the record, I believe all LAW ABIDING CITIZENS should have the right to carry a gun, after they pass a back ground check and take a gun class. If you want to carry a gun, it should be law that you qualify yearly. And the Republican Party just shot down a bill that would hire more officers.

mwp72 @ 9/22/2012 12:18 PM

My income tax i had to pay in has doubled in the past two years. In part because I had the audacity to try and work some off duty(instead of asking anyone to bail me out) to pay off some debt. I was rewarded by being bumped into a higher tax bracket and given a "contractor's fee" on my tax return. I don't see the current administration helping the working man at all.

Lead Farmer @ 9/22/2012 12:30 PM


Dude (or dudette), you live a sheltered existence my friend. Politicians say what will get them elected. All of them. Romney just happened to get caught. Do you think that Obama has never said anything to supporters that he wouldn't want to get out? Keep dreaming. The difference is that the media is falling all over themselves trying to get Obama elected. The funny thing is, it really wouldn't matter much who was president. Bush signed the Patriot Act, Obama signed the NDAA of 2012, both unconstitutional but they are both still the law of the land. Personally, I am going to go with Romney, not because I think that he will make a great president, but because I think he will do less damage than Obama. The lesser of two evils.

EVIL4HIRE.COM @ 9/22/2012 12:38 PM


Doc @ 9/22/2012 12:44 PM

I still cannot bring myself to even consider voting for an adult who wears "magic underwear" in order to get into heaven. If a person is that misled, I shudder to think about just how much further he could mislead this already unbalanced country. Not to mention voting for someone who has little interest in women, or generally "47%" of our citizens. Hope people start looking at the real facts and not depend on sound bytes.

tucsonjohn @ 9/22/2012 1:24 PM

I'm an independent who will vote for Romney (a life member of NRA) because the gun-hating duo Obama and Holder will fight to eviscerate the Second Amendment. And if a US Supreme Court vacancy appears, Obama will appoint a Brady-loving liberal whose goal is a USA "Gun free" from coast to coast.

Joe Smith @ 9/22/2012 1:46 PM

I don't know that Obama is a bad guy. Neither is Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer or Harry Reid; however they all are of the opinion that they know best and will make the important decisions to protect us from ourselves. In actuality they are out of touch with reality; they don’t live where we live or do what we do. They apparently don’t understand that we have in essence, miles and miles of open borders and calm warm sea’s surrounding us making it very easy to smuggle drugs or weapons by the ton into our country. If left up to them our country would be similar to Mexico, at the mercy of drug lords or anyone else who illegally organized. Our small Police Dept’s would be even more of a mop up crew, simply taking reports and chasing bad guys after the damage is done and are long gone. It’s absolutely true, due to the nature of the election process Obama purposely did nothing about gun control and hardly mentioned the word in the first four years. This was done specifically not to alienate the millions of gun advocates for his reelection. If reelected he along with a handful of others will without a doubt not only mention but address gun control in the most extreme way in the next four. Romney is not the best candidate that has come along. I and many others disagree with some of his opinions. However, our three branch system of government will most assuredly prevent him from doing anything too extreme. Most importantly his leadership and overall stance on America is superior to Obama’s by far and will be better for our safety and economic recovery. This is what is desperately lacking in Obama. If we don’t have a safe and thriving economy, we can’t afford food or shoes for our feet, let alone “Obama Care.” Safety and our economy are our #1 and #2 priorities. If we don’t have these we can have nothing else! We can not afford another four years of mismanagement of our country.

Bob@Az. @ 9/22/2012 3:21 PM

Interesting survey. As for the CCW issue, may I remind some of the large amount of combat vets we have in our midst? Some much better trained then a lot of our new LEO's. In my state originally you had a sixteen hour course which included range time. Then our gov at the time, napolitano, dropped it to four hours and then no training, just send in the money. I'd rather have an armed citizen at my six then nobody. Blues, stay safe.

Foxforce @ 9/22/2012 3:24 PM

Dear EVIL4HIRE your post is typical of double standard liberal. You chose to demonize those who oppose your viewpoints. I doubt very much that you’re an officer and if you are then I’m glad you don’t represent my organization. We all have our reasons for voting for who we believe best represents us. For me Obama in NO way represents me or America for many reasons. This has been the most despicable presidency and campaigner run by the most hypocritical double standard democrats I have ever seen.

Foxforce @ 9/22/2012 3:31 PM

CFB too bad you were so easily influenced by a snippet of a concealed recorded event. As an LEO, usually we gather the facts before drawing a conclusion. CFB clearly you we're there so you don't know. Frankly, I'm tired of seeing my tax dollars going to EBT's (welfare) cards so they can drink and gamble with my "redistributed" dollars. Get a clue.

Phil Werkmeister @ 9/22/2012 3:58 PM

I spent 34 yrs. on the street, 14 of them 3rd shift....I've been a Chief in 4 Depts., and all I can assuredly say, is, "We pay for what we get and we pay for what we don't get....There is no choice whether or not to pay - Only How." I personally would rather pay exhorbatant taxes to keep the bad guys locked up and provide for the Nation's Defense - all to protect my grandchildren........

CFB @ 9/22/2012 4:01 PM

Lean Farmer

Explain what has Obama done, that is so bad? Face it: you know why you are not voting for President Obama. That's another subject all together. But this is what so great about this country you havt that right. Stay turn , November is coming.

Badboy @ 9/22/2012 6:18 PM

@CFB,u just proved what is the biggest joke of it all,u backhandedly want 2 play the race card,well that is what got Obama elected in the 1st place it nothing 2 do with his policies or his smooth talking ways,it had 2 do with the fact he was a black male,most blacks,latinos n govt.system abusers voted 4 him only because he was black,point blank. Now I know u will probably come back n call me a racist,because that is what most people do who support Obama n some1 criticizes or mentions his faults,but I would vote 4 Condaleeza Rice or Gen. Powell before I would ever be suckered in by all of Obama's underhanded BS,he was a 1st term senator with no experience that is a great orator,but that was all he had,nothing else 2 do the job,he was prepped 4 everything leading up 2 the job,he has accumulated more debt in his 3 1/2 years than all the other previous administrations combined the facts are there,but the left-wing n blind supporters dont want 2 know or believe the facts,they only want 2 believe n support him because if you dont your a racist,that is essentially reverse-racism at its finest. The Man as I stated is a great orator,but he is also a sham n a disgrace 2 this country,no other president has ever had 2 or even thought 2 apologize 2 another country 4 what they have done 2 us,that makes us look weak 2 the rest of the world n that is why some of the things have happened against us in the last 3+ yrs because of that percieved weakness,he claimed full credit 4 getting Bin Laden,which was a slap in the face of all the american troops n intelligence agaencies that had been working this issue 4 over a decade before he was even in the Senate,when Saddam was captured Bush claimed we got him,when Bin Laden was killed Obama claimed I got him n gave no credit 2 the military n intelligence that actually did it covertly n didnt inform him until just a few weeks before they were ready to go in-to be cont.

Badboy @ 9/22/2012 6:27 PM

@CFB (cont.) they wanted his blessing 2 move forward but had already been given the approval 2 go 4 it even without his approval if the circumstance presented itself,so he had no choice 2 approve action 2 prevent looking more of the fool than he already had. The facts are there 4 it all, go check them out. U stated what had he done,I gave u the answer n more,u wanted 2 play the race card n open that can of worms,I have stated what many have avoided because of the usual rhetoric that follow any criticism of Obama,but the truth is the reverse racists put him in office 4 all the wrong reasons n want 2 blindly keep him there no matter how much he is driving this country into the toilet,it is a sad n harsh truth but no matter what it is,it is the truth,he is a disgrace n needs 2 be voted out,I am not saying Romney is the golden boy,but if I have 2 choose between 2 evils,Romney is the lesser of the 2.

ret.sgted @ 9/22/2012 6:50 PM

The problem lies with the lazy do nothing Congress that just adjourned. It doesn't matter who is President, it's the Congress that passes the laws. We should as a group vote to not return any sitting Congressman or woman. If you hired a contractor and he didn't do the work would you pay him? So why should we pay a congress that does nothing, exempts themselves from most of the laws they pass and then sits back and points fingers at the other guy as being at fault. Obama couldn't get anything passed in this Congress so it's no wonder that nothing got done. Romney won't be any different and I just have a hard time with anybody that hides money "off-shore". At least we know what we've got with Obama and can prepare accordingly. I don't know what to expect out of Romney, but I know what to expect out of Congress- more BS, gridlock and special interests deals. I say our solution is to change the Congress.

pyle129 @ 9/22/2012 10:33 PM

@ CFB If you're a police officer explain what Obama has done positively affecting law enforcement and crime in your neck of the woods? We're cops so let's see how well his administration has helped law enforcement. As far as I can tell he hasn't done jack squat to help us. Chicago & half it's suburbs are on Fire. My town is out of money and has laid off and forcefully retired police officers. Etc. Etc.
Obviously he & his administration & their policies have failed. Whether Romney and his admin & it's policies will succeed we don't know but I'd much rather give them a chance than continue to see the steep decline under the failure of Obama's "Hope & Change". We know that the fire is going to continue burning under Obama because the "Mulligan" he wants is about more of the "same old same old".

Retired chief @ 9/23/2012 6:09 AM

Obama and his cronies ain't going to mess with our guns! Too many gun owners who would crucify politicians for any to mess with our guns. Rumors that President Clinton was going to mess with our guns proved false too. As a lifetime NRA member of 40+ years, they do a lot of good, but they are also in the business of making money. Every week NRA sends stuff to get more money from us. No need to get so radical about believing Mitt and the Republicans who are spreading these rumors. It just ain't going to happen!

Paul @ 9/23/2012 6:29 AM

Retired Chief said "Rumors that President Clinton was going to mess with our guns proved false too."----with all due respect, are you kidding ? Remember the Assualt Weapon Ban & the ban on standard capacity magazines ?

Foxforce @ 9/23/2012 10:46 AM

"Badboy," well said!! A person like CFB is never going to get it, he's too wrapped up the tired old over used racial bias victim.

CFB @ 9/23/2012 10:50 AM

This ban did not affect police officers. Like I said, I think all LAW ABIDING citizen should be allowed to carry a gun, once they complete the proper course and qualify. On the person that stated I used the race card. I am telling the truth. You know it. And for using money to feed people with EBT card. How about starting two wars for oil? I know they used the attack on 9-11 but face it; it was for oil. Went to Iraq? Why? Oil! Trust me the safest thing there was the oil pipes and rigs. Yeah, OIF-2 Vet. The terrorist were in Afghanistan. Allowed Bin Linden escaped, until Obama gave the order. By the way, the first thing they made sure the president of Afghanistan do was make sure the OIL PIPE LINE was complete. Again; Oil. Have spent billions of tax dollars, to rebuild the countries we destroyed. I know there are people that take advantage of the system, and get over. But we have officers that do the same: lazy and do just enough to get to retirement. So why is it so bad, to have a system that takes care of the real poor and elderly people in America? Keep living, you will get old unless you die young. Why can’t the best country in the world make it available for everyone (everyone) to have a chance to a great education and go the college, regardless of their circumstance? Billions spent for OIL! And how they repay us, the price of oil tripled. And they still want tax breaks. If they don’t spend some of the tax money on the poor, who will they spend it on? Trust me we will continue to pay taxes.

walkin' trails @ 9/23/2012 12:09 PM

I can't see anything positive for Obama getting a second term. With Obamacare looming, all of us middle class law enforcers are fixing to get hit even harder in the pocketbook. I am still miffed about the notification I, and probably millions of others enrolled in a flexible spending account got last week notifying that our maximum contribution is getting cut in half for 2013. And that ain't even the full effect of the disaster that's coming. As far as "wars for oil," we sure ain't getting anything significant from Iraq or Afghanistan. But the region was going to become incredibly instable regardless of which tin-pot dictator sat on whichever throne over there. I tend to believe that Obama and his clowns would have had no chance of re-election if he had pursued the course of action on gun control that he wishes he could. And only the looming threat of a 2016 presidential election for the next dem candidate will have any bearing on how far he might push the limits if he does get a second term. Green energy in its present level is a farce. I'm not opposed to better forms of power for my home and my car, but none of the current offerings come even close to what fossil fuels still do, except for nuclear, and the green folks don't like that either. The beautiful thing about the United States of America is that unless you have criminal charges pending, you are free to immigrate to any part of the world where a government is in place that encompasses all of your beliefs. Want to have government funded health care, go to Canada, the UK, Europe. Hate big oil, move to Saudi Arabia and help them stick it to BP and all the other oil companies. Like living where corrupt government is the norm, well, there are a lot of places....

CHUCK 155 ..RET. @ 9/23/2012 3:07 PM

I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER OFFICERS .. Although it appears were in the IN THE MINORITY ...ILL GO ONE STEP FURTHER ..AND CALL ROMNEY A IDIOT ...HE CANT KEEP ANY consistency..cant respond true-fully to a question ...if he answers it at all ..personally i think hes actually leans to the middle ..BUT HES SWAYED BY THE T-PARTY ... THIS GUY WILL SAY And do anything to get elected ...trouble is half the time he . says something ..he puts his.foot in his month vote is for Obama ..if he bans 100 round magazines be it ....,. stay safe brothers ..chuck... [retired deputy sheriff] ...

Halderon @ 9/23/2012 6:50 PM

I'm not here to research O's accomplishments while in office-instead you guys google Obamas Accomplishments in office. In the first year his record on Congressional Approval was in the high ninety's-then came Republican obstructionism with the stated goal of making him fail. To wish a President to fail when we were fighting two wars was to me-treason-but they tried He couldn't even have an idea without the Republicans voting "NO!"and they were proud of the fact that they were known as the Party of No! Well, a President can't make laws-that is the duty of the do nothing congress. There approval rate in recent polls was 10%. After all, they signed pledges, and those meant more than their oath of office. They are elected to represent the people-not pledges. I sent an email to my representative and told him he was fired-hell, he wasn't doing anything. And I got two pages of meetings he had been to, but that's not why he is there. O did stop the war in Iraq. He proposed closing the Bush Prison in Cuba, but it was rejected by the Republicans and some Democrats. He authorized SEAL team six to rescue hostages held by Somaili Pirates. He authorized the same team to kill Bin Laden. If you do what I suggested, you will see the positives in the Veterans Administration, the care of first responders to 9/11, the Don't ask/Don't tell nonsense, and not a single soldier has deserted,He signed the equal pay for women-but wait, I am doing what I said i wouldn't. You guys are on your own, but if you vote for Romney, please do some research on his Religion-he made that open when he decided to run, so look at it in detail and remember that he signed a blood oath to put that Religion first, and ask yourselves does it supersede his Oath of Office. See, I have been in many debates about his religion vs Christianity and I am not that sure that he can call himself Christian. You will all have to search your soul to answer that, and when you do, ask yourself why he wants this job. Peace bros.

RICHARD @ 9/23/2012 6:53 PM


John @ 9/23/2012 7:52 PM

We have learned nothing from the fact that there are over a couple of hundred thousand country wide and they have different opinions from different sections of the country.

Survey are meant to shed some light on the real world about us. True, some are manufactured, some manipulated, and some just try to get a general response, to get a feel for what is out there.
This election is crucial to us all, when hasn't an election for President of the United States been crucial? We want the best man to win and we want to see prosperity once again. We want to see jobs that were sent to China and other places, back in the USA. We want the middle class to thrive and help create a positive future for our kids and their kids. So that means discussing ideas, critiquing surveys and doing it in a manner that does all our law enforcement professionals proud, and that is with respect for all opinions.
Make sure you register to vote, then make sure you vote! God bless America and May God always be in our culture.

Retired Chief of Police

Blue Steel @ 9/23/2012 8:06 PM

"Save our county", What are we saving our country from, it is amazing how soon people forget that there was a scare that "Obama is going to take our guns" and the gun industry racked up billions from this foolishness. Now the public is screaming gun control. And for the middle class police officer, I HOPE you never get hurt on the job, because if you do you will beg for Obama care. There are brother officers who has found out the hard way, that once it is determined that you can not return to work due to injury, You lose your insurance. You can get another job that you area qualified for, because most of your employment life you were a cop. NO ONE WANTS AN OUT OF WORK, BROKEN UP COP. And if you believe that the RICH republicans care about police officers your crazy. To them you are no more that a butler or maid,, they let you work security details at their parties, and watch their expensive cars, and you take their little hand out (30-40 bucks an hour) with a smile. Less than 200 bucks to put your life on the line to protect them. And if you get hurt in the process, you are ass out. Romney and his millionaire supporters don't care about police, because you can not help them make money. It is time to open your eyes brothers, the rich looks down their noises at you, you are beneath them.

Book Worm @ 9/23/2012 9:17 PM

The interest rate on a College loan is the highest it's ever been. And Comrade Obama didn't pay anything for his education.

Doc @ 9/24/2012 7:10 AM

Book Worm: neither did GW and his family had enough money to create their own college. I too paid nothing for college and graduate school. The enhanced GI bill set into motion by LBJ let my country provide a citizen with education, which in the long run is the most predictable way to create strength and national stability. I'd rather deal with a person who was president of the Harvard Law Review (on me) then the person complaining about it without any apparent education or much to say. Sounds like Romney went to your college.

jlgrrsn @ 9/24/2012 7:43 AM

It is Congress who makes the Laws, and big money has Congress in a choke-hold. As LEO, how many has sent letters to their representatives regarding FED REV unlimited spending, 9 trillion dollars to unknowns, the failure of OMB/IG to locate 500 billion dollars and last but not least have you asked, why the lack of info on the tng and loc of the 16 who cause the 9/11 incidents, we have the best of the best in LE and Security but we were blind sided on that awful day, why?

Larry @ 9/24/2012 3:20 PM

In response to janikols, the NRA does have a comprehensive Concealed Carry class. It is called Personal Protection Outside the Home. It has been out for around 3 or 4 years. Yes it took ten years to get it from concept to classroom, but they did an outstanding job. It is a companion to their Personal Protection Inside the Home. The biggest problem is that the Basic Pistol and PPITH are pre-requisites. Only the truly committed have stepped up to take the classes. I takes about 40 hours to get through the sequence. (In comparison, Colorado POST is 64 hours of handgun training). I have taught it half dozen times, compared to the hundreds of ProfireUSA 8 hour Colorado / Utah CCW classes that I have assisted with. Even these are not easy to fill when there are guys in town doing a 4 hour coffee and doughnuts class (even if our class costs less). The best citizens will seek out the best classes. A large segment will go for a middle ground. An alarming number will select the lazy way around. I don't feel real good about them standing in line behind me at the grocery store. Some states have more stringent requirements than others. That's life my friend.

John @ 9/24/2012 3:31 PM

I'm not a big Romney fan, but you would have to a socialist or be an idiot, who believes eveything the mainstream media spoonfeeds you, to vote for Obama in November.

1) Obamacare is the precurser to socialized health care. Ever part of this legislation will cost people more money. The only provision that would have lowered costs would have been tort reform. Of course, the democrats wouldn't even consider tort reform because of their trial lawyer buddies.
2) Obama and the senate leadership are very anti gun. Obama is simply waiting until a second term to target those people that "cling to their guns and religion."
3) How many jobs did Obama's trillion dollar stimilus package create?
4) I thought Obama was suppose to bring our troops home from Afghanistan?
5) Heard of Fast & Furious?
6) Check out
7)Don't you just love a president that is so eager to apologize for America?

John @ 9/24/2012 3:34 PM

add: be (between to & a).

JohnDPMP @ 9/25/2012 12:27 AM

Let's face it and be honest for once. The entire system is broken and there really is no "choice". Obama promised "change" and all he has done is further most of Bush's policies while adding his own communist/socialist initiatives to the mix. At best, it is choice between the lesser of 2 evils. Our entire political system is corrupt and false. Don't believe me? Then just compare what these jerks actually do versus the oaths they take when assuming office. Nothing less than treason, period.

Michael @ 9/25/2012 10:40 AM

Fascinating. So a majority of the respondents chose the economy as their primary concern and are selecting the candidate least likely to provide financial aid to their local governments and departments? I guess I'm not too surprised. Too many of us simply believe what we've been told to believe instead of doing our own non-partisan research, looking at both sides of every story before deciding who is telling the truth. Come on guys, get out there and look for hard numbers and facts, not comments taken out of context, rumors and suppositions without any evidence to stand on. Unfortunately most if not all of the concerns voiced about Obama on here are based on misinformation. Although I can't say I'm completely satisfied with or confident in our President, after doing some research it seems like he will at least do less damage than Romney, and definitely will do more for LEO and people at my pay grade.

Doc @ 9/25/2012 6:39 PM

You hit the nail on the head Michael. Many of my law enforcement collegues have bought the FOX twists and lies. When one examines the facts, we ARE BETTER now that when the last Republican bottomed out our economy. Second, the Obama administration has given more direct and measureable support to law enforcement than the previous administration. Romney knows how to rape the American economy...and that we do not need.

Doug @ 9/25/2012 6:55 PM

I was glad to see so many respondants uphold the 2nd Amendment. I see a lot of officers get squeemish when the topic of CCW's gets brought up. And the "lack of training" argument is bogus. There are some civilians that have tons more training and trigger time than the anti-CCW officers do. Once we start thinking the general public is below us and we're "more qualified" with guns and "assault rifles", we need to go make some more non-LE friends.

Ima Leprechaun @ 9/30/2012 12:19 PM

To support any candidate for only one policy is crazy. Especially a candidate that changes his opinion with the wind. 49 states have concealed carry permits of some kind and the Federal Government has not made one single regulation against any states or individuals. The last federal gun law to pass was in 1993, The Brady Bill. Not one politician from either party has threatened anybody's gun rights since. Honestly, I think gun control is a good thing especially from a Law Enforcement perspective. Guns and ammo are way to easy to obtain by mail without any necessary background checks now. Not one government official has threatened anyone's 2nd ammendment rights to bear arms even though when the constitution was written the arms were flint locks and took 20 mins to reload. If we still used flint locks I'd say anybody that wants to carry one can.

TripWire @ 10/20/2012 5:27 PM

What troubles me is that only 94% of respondents support civilian carry. Being a sworn officer means that at one point or another we swore an oath to the Constitution. Is the wording confusing to some of you or were you crossing your fingers during the oath? I just don't get it.

TripWire @ 10/20/2012 5:54 PM

@Ima Leprechaun
Care to change your post now that the 2nd Presidential debate has shown Obama calling for an assault weapons ban?
And to give you a history lesson, the guns that were in common use when the Constitution was written were the same guns that the military used at the time. There is no mention of limitations or restrictions on the type of arms citizens can carry. There is no mention of gun control, no distinction between sporting use and military use. No language regarding handguns, shotguns, rifles or even weaponry not even imagined. What the authors did specify, is the right of the people, not just the priviledged, to keep and bear arms.
A lesson on Federal Firearm Laws (if you are a cop, then you should know this): No one can legally buy a gun over the internet without going through a licensed FFL dealer.

the Founders who drafted and ratified the Second Amendment surely knew that the right they were enshrining carried a risk of misuse, but risk is an integral aspect of freedom. Because we are free to speak our minds, we run the risk of hearing things we don’t want to hear, and of saying things others don’t want to hear. Because we have a God-given right to security in our own things, we run the risk of having people use their possessions in ways of which we don’t approve, and they likewise run the risk that we might use our possessions in a way they find repulsive. However, that’s the price of freedom, and an overreaching government that tries to squash that right in order to remove the risk is a government that has violated the people’s trust.

Ima Leprechaun @ 10/22/2012 8:54 PM

"Tripwire" I happen to agree with an assault weapons ban and apparently you never read my post. As for what is legal and illegal that has never stopped anyone from buying or selling illegal or barely legal weapons over the internet. There is no God given right to carry any firearm anywhere on this planet. If you made your own bullets using lead ball ammo firing a flint lock with black powder I'd say you have the right under the US Constitution to carry that gun. That is what the government of the people meant when that document was written. So if I use your logic then everyone has the right to built and keep nuclear, chemical and biological weapons because those are the weapons that are used by our current military. I really dont agree with your conclusions of a 200+ year old document. By the way the 2nd ammendment says: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." I see this as a state miliita or national guard issue not an individual issue. As for the debate not being a psychic I would have no way of knowing what anybody would say before they said it but I do agree with it and if you were a cop you would too. From your last line I guess you have just declared war on the USA for overreaching its power.

Elm Creek Smith @ 10/23/2012 6:27 PM

@ Ima Leprechaun

Twisting someone else's logic to come up with "...everyone has the right to built (sic) and keep nuclear, chemical and biological weapons..." is specious at best. "...[A]rms..." at the time of the Constitution were individual weapons to be used against other individuals. They did not include crew-served weapons or ordnance. If you look at the famously misinterpreted Miller decision, the Supreme Court said that the "...militia..." "...when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time." That cannot possibly be interpreted to fit your twisted argument.

Too bad the Supreme Court disagreed with your interpretation of Amendment II to the Constitution. Just a short grammar lesson: "...well regulated..." modifies the word "...militia..." not "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms..." What Amendment II has to say about "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms..." is that it "...shall not be infringed."


gwot06 @ 11/4/2012 8:02 AM

@ Ima Leprechaun In fact the Bill of Rights (Amendments 1 - 10) of the Constitution were written specifically to protect the god-given rights of the citizens from the government. Your interpretation of the 2nd amendment is specious and seems to be that of those who subscribe to the undemocratic notion of a "living" constitution. Our system of government provides for amendments to the Constitution if change is necessary; thus involving the citizenry not the federal judicial system or the whim of individual politicians.

Join the Discussion

POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.
Police Magazine