Quote of the Day: American Revolution 2.0 Edition

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke (courtesy gopusa.com)

“To me [gun confiscation] would be an act of tyranny. So the people in Milwaukee County do not have to worry about me enforcing some sort of order that goes out and collects everybody’s handgun, or rifles, or any kind of firearm and makes them turn them in. The reason is I don’t want to get shot, because I believe that if somebody tried to enforce something of that magnitude, you would see the second coming of an American revolution, the likes of which would make the first revolution pale by comparison.” – Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke [via libertycrier.com] [h/t RG]

comments

    1. avatar Charles5 says:

      Looks like he had a S&W Bodyguard 380.

    2. avatar sacorey says:

      Shoulda been a dgu?

      1. avatar Aaron says:

        isn’t holding a criminal at gun point a DGU? It’s defensive and it requires the use of a gun.

    3. avatar Alpo says:

      -“I went through the door and he was standing over her with the shovel, I didn’t see the knife, it was dark in there,” said Guffey.

      Guffey said the intruder used the shovel to knock his gun out of his hand. He said he then tackled the man and got his gun back while his mother called 911.-

      I’m glad it worked out. But as I Friday morning quaterback here, I can’t help but point out the following:

      -Shovel distance is too close. Had the scumbag had the knife in his hand “knocked the gun out w/ the shovel” could easily have been “stabbed/slashed the victim repeatedly”.
      -“standing over her with the shovel” = shoot him now.
      -Single-stack, pocket .380 for body carry, sure. But he was in his car and responded to his mother’s home. If you’re legal to carry, keep a more serious gun in the car in addition to your concealable EDC.

  1. avatar Peter says:

    Can I be the one who gets to start the slow clap for this guy?

    *clap*

    1. avatar James R says:

      *clap*….*clap*

      1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        I would give y’all a hand, but it looks like y’all both already got the clap.

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      Now there is someone who “gets it”.

    3. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      We’re honoring self-preservation masquerading as oath keeping, now? Well, I suppose it’s no worse than our celebration of the armed/polite society correlation, whereby that same self-preservation passes for good manners and respect for others. I can go along with the collective charade, but I can’t shake that sense of silliness about it all.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        From other statements that Sheriff Clarke has made, his heart seems to be in the right place. But even if it wasn’t, I’m happy with what he said in the above article. A good part of success in politics is about forcing bad people to do the right thing.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Good point.

    4. avatar rlc2 says:

      Also clapping, enthusiastically.

      to Jonathon: with respect, its too easy to cherry pick a couple words and then come up with a snide response to show one’s own superiority…
      “self-preservation…masquerading as oath keeping…silliness”.

      One runs the risk of be-clowning one’s self. And I speak from experience.
      Google Search is your friend…

      High visibility black, democrat, LEO speaking up for 2A …
      I’m giving this guy my support. Read more here, from the lib LA Times no less:

      http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/28/nation/la-na-nn-milwaukee-county-sheriff-guns-20130128

  2. avatar Alex in IL says:

    This guy gets it.

  3. avatar Charles5 says:

    Someone is a student of history.

    1. avatar DanRRZ says:

      Along with how our History has fundamentally shaped our character as Americans.

    2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      Or he at least reads TTAG and picked up on that lawman/citizen social contract idea from the other day.

      While a great many of life’s lessons are best learned lived, this is one that I profoundly desire all involved would just take as a given based on abundant, redundant human history, and not go discover anew for themselves.

  4. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    Quote is from about a year ago but still relevant.

    What was better were his radio commericals where he asked honest citizens to get their carry permits and help the local po po out by being their own 911.

    1. avatar Chris (not one of the other 2 chris's) says:

      His statement was along the lines of we might not be able to come to your rescue in time, so consider getting training and consider buying your own personal defense weapon.

  5. avatar The Best Chris says:

    This fantasy of armed revolution that is perpetuated on this site is rather cute.

    1. avatar Todd S says:

      Troll much?

      1. avatar The Best Chris says:

        Disagreeing with the idea that people will literally end thiers and thier family’s way of life over a principal that in reality has little effect on thier day to day living is trolling. Right.

        Do you honestly beleive that people will kill and die over something with such little practical importance? Sure you guys like to be idealists and go on about fighting the government over what arms you can posses, but are you honestly willing to end you life or the lives of your children over it? I don’t beleive that for a second.

        1. avatar Peally says:

          Yes? Are you insane? What’s the point if no one gives a damn?

        2. avatar CV_Detroit says:

          Absolutely. The tree of liberty requires the blood of the patriot. Even if my blood only rewards your cowardice.

        3. avatar Sergio says:

          There are millions of men and women in uniform who swore an oath to do exactly that.

          I’m sorry you think that the Constitution is of little practical importance and not worth killing or dying for.

        4. avatar Albaniaaaaa says:

          Whether you are right or not, this would be the reason America goes down (or continues to go down) the shitter. Complacency and comfort over freedom.

        5. avatar Stinkeye says:

          People kill and die over far more trivial things every day.

        6. avatar Dev says:

          Read up on the American Revolution. Then read up on the French Revolution, the Spanish one, heck just read about every revolution in history. Then come back to us educated.

        7. avatar The Best Chris says:

          So you guys will leave your children fatherless/dead because you can’t buy an AR15 anymore?

          You guys will go out of your way to comply with the law like you did in ’94 and you do now. Despite your romanticizing about armed resistance, the vast majority are not going to give up thier lives for what amounts to a toy they shoot paper with on occasion.

          To compare this situation to any of those listed above is flat out stupid.

        8. avatar peirsonb says:

          And THOSE revolutions were generally started over comparatively trivial grievances compared to what we’re faced with now. Gun control is but a portion of the new American tyranny.

        9. 3% That’s all I have to say about that.

        10. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          The Best Chris,

          You are totally missing the point. We the People are NOT bristling about firearms. We are bristling about the fact that many politicians and bureaucrats view us, the good responsible people of the United States, as objects to be exploited, controlled, manipulated, used, abused, and consumed at their (politician’s and bureaucrat’s) whim. Politicians’ and bureaucrats’ attempts to “control” guns are simply the proverbial “canary in the coal mine”. Today it is guns, tomorrow it will be due process, presumption of innocence, free speech, etc.

          It really is rather simple. Either government does or does not respect the lives, liberties and personal property of the people. When government sets out to take away firearms, they do NOT.

        11. avatar Jandrews says:

          If you’re not going to learn proper use of pronouns, please at least learn to spell “their” correctly.

          You are of the small minded opinion that all people care about is survival and comfort. You may be surprised to find that not every mind is as small as yours.

        12. avatar Timbo says:

          “So you guys will leave your children fatherless/dead because you can’t buy an AR15 anymore?”

          No, but I will leave them free.

        13. avatar Dev says:

          “To compare this situation to any of those listed above is flat out stupid.”

          My guess is you don’t know any history, do you? .

        14. avatar DownrangeFuture says:

          I swore an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. So help me God. Just because I’m medically discharged doesn’t relieve me of that oath. If only 3% of people join in the revolution, I’ll be part of that 3%.

          You’re welcome. 🙂

        15. avatar Gregolas says:

          Best Chris. Our founders endured all sorts of incursions on their liberty until a tipping point came that could not be borne. It was the attempt to confiscate arms and ammo from the colonists that caused the battles of Lexington and Concord and the American Revolution.
          As Jefferson said, and the Continental Congress approved:
          “…all experience hath shown, that Mankind is more disposed to suffer, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed-BUT, When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

        16. avatar Merits says:

          Yes. Easy answer in principle. Now,when you start with these straw men of starting a revolution over magazine capacity accusations, I know you are just looking to stir the pot. I know myself that I live my life as if it is all bonus time. My course is already set. I plan to live to a ripe old age peacefully, but if that does not occur so be it. I have already decided I will not be disarmed, the only question is where will I/we draw the line.
          I think this mindset is something you would not understand.

        17. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Firearms are never just about firearms. They’re key to every other right because they secure the individual sovereignty of Man. Can you name even one country where tyranny prevails among a both armed and compliant population? Of course you can’t. Armed people won’t live like that. Disarmed people may have to, however, and that makes all the difference.

        18. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

          Don’t kid yourself. You might not be able to comprehend it, but many people do. There are those that don’t care about themselves, but do about the greater good.
          If you just can’t wrap your brain around the concept, too bad, but don’t think for a second there are those that wouldn’t fight to the end to defend it.

          To be quite honest, your comment is rather offensive.

        19. avatar ropingdown says:

          This fantasy of armed revolution that is perpetuated on this site is rather cute.

          Do you honestly beleive that people will kill and die over something with such little practical importance?

          The condescending language was provided by The Best Chris. He also created the false dichotomy, that refusal to comply with gun confiscation is armed revolution. No. It is just local refusal to comply with the gutting of the 2nd amendment by state officials. Re-read Heller if you doubt the historical purposes of the amendment.

          His subsequent comment announced (because we had no idea…) that the the 2nd amendment was of no practical importance. He doesn’t need to say more. His 1st amendment rights are probably of no practical importance either.

        20. avatar Ralph says:

          @The Best Chris, perhaps you should learn to spell before lecturing your superiors, okay?

        21. avatar The Best Chris says:

          Salty Bear gets what I am saying.

          Sorry for you folks that like going on about my poor spelling. Posting here in between meetings at work from my phone results in errors, and I know stuff like that is really easy to go after…

          My point is I don’t think most of you going on about resisting or whatever you want to call it are willing to literally end your lives over this romantic idea of defending the constitution. It easy to post like a bad-ass and say you are going to fight in the streets for you gun rights, but when it come down to it most of you will hand over your stuff like good boys and comply with the law, just like with ever other “unconstitutional act of tyranny” that has occurred int he past. I here this bullshit from the same people who bother with 922r compliance and install bullet buttons on their guns. It is nonsense.

      2. avatar jerry says:

        One of the downsides to any sites growing popularity will be an increase in troll activity. Our friend little Chris probably scuttled straight to the democratic underground or some such other loony site and let them know he sure told us a thing or two!!

        1. avatar The Best Chris says:

          I have been on this site since it started, actually.

        2. avatar Hawk says:

          Your missing the point Chris. If thugs broke in and caught me off guard and wanted my guns, yeah take them. I’m not dying over metal and plastic. Insurance will buy me new ones. However, when the government comes, they’re not just gonna take our guns, they’re taking our rights and freedoms. That is worth dying over.

        3. avatar ropingdown says:

          Chris, if you’ve been on this site since the beginning then you will know that many who contribute here believe the 2nd amendment was intended to insure that no government attained the power to crush liberty and call the result “a more civilized nation.” Cannibals with a highly ornate and ritualized system of preparing dinner can be called civilized.

          You will know that many who post on the site have actually seen men sacrifice their lives so that their children and grandchildren could live under a more just political system, whether in Vietnam, Sudan, Colombia, Somalia, Iraq, or Afghanistan. (Put aside the consequences for the U.S….because the native participants weren’t fighting for the U.S.’s sake.)

          Built into the human reality is the fact that when two sides form up, they may have opposite views of what a better world means, but that does not take from them the will to sacrifice for their beliefs. During my living mother’s lifetime every continent except Antartica and Australia has seen bloody war and rebellion against perceived tyranny. Governments are inclined to seek as much power as will make them invulnerable to challenge. Citizens are inclined to force government to earn its legitimacy by acting to secure the benefits of liberty, not the spoils of oppression.

          It is a simple matter to examine the direction of government. For example we know that the majority of murders take place in a very small bit of geography, the urban ghettos. Yet we see our government preferring to pursue the restriction of firearms ownership in the well-behaved mass of the nation, rather than suspending briefly the fourth amendment within what can be called “the gun murder zones,” a minuscule area indeed both geographically and by population. This observation makes clear that the government’s preference is to gut the very purpose of the 2nd amendment, disabling any chance of holding tyranny at bay should it arise, rather than actually reducing the rate of murder in the U.S.

          It really is that simple. The sad part is that the choice illustrated above is made for just two reasons, to make the nation safe for tyranny and to avoid alienating ghetto voters. Both motives, given the stakes, are despicable.

          As for whether people perceive the right and motive of the 2nd amendment worth defending, reflect on this, that millions of young men and women have volunteered to put their lives at risk in foreign lands simply on the belief that the government’s decision to make war there is well-motivated. Is desire to protect their own liberty a weaker impulse?

        4. avatar Salty Bear says:

          Seriously, everyone, Chris brings up a valid point, even if he’s not super polite about it. We always sigh about TTAG being an echo chamber, and we always pride ourselves on having facts on our side and having rational discussions instead of emotional knee-jerk reactions. But then when someone’s opinion is a little bit different from ours we grab them by the throat and scream, “TROLL!!!!”

          I love that the default position is “MOLON LABE.” That’s definitely the right place to start from. Now let’s be rational and examine our position. Most of us in slave states have done everything to comply with requirements for registration, mag capacity limits, prohibited items, etc. We don’t actually start from a very believable position, because we’ve already made concessions. I know we think there’ll be a “last straw” or something, but we won’t know until it comes.

          Maybe some of you (especially you single guys) have got full mags in your web gear right now and are all ready to storm your local city hall. But that would not be the end of the story. Once you made it there, the police are not going to suddenly recognize you as a legitimate government and say, “OK, boss, what are your orders?” Even if it takes the FBI sending HRT to your town, you are leaving dead or in custody.

          Remember this? http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/03/robert-farago/video-every-connecticut-gun-owner-watch/ Can you imagine what your life would be like? The romanticism would wear off pretty fast. Have a look at war. Go look up pictures of what’s happening in Ukraine. People don’t come back from it.

          I’m not saying it’s fair. They have already started the war, even if they’re not willing to fire the first shot. But if you are thinking of escalating this war on our liberty into a shooting war, I think Chris has a really good point (even though he comes across as trolly). We can’t fathom what we’d be getting ourselves into, and as noble and fearless and outraged as we feel right now behind our keyboards, we do actually have to take into account the immediate effect it will have on our families.

          Because more than likely it will mean the end.

          Still up for it? Go for it. But save your condescension.

        5. avatar Ralph says:

          If The Best Chris was on this site since the beginning, then he was ten when he started reading it.

    2. avatar neiowa says:

      Obuma’s revolution isn’t working out for ANYONE. So plan B is what for you libtards?

    3. avatar IllinoisShooter says:

      So says the unarmed troll…

      1. avatar The Best Chris says:

        I am very much armed, thank you.

        1. avatar peirsonb says:

          Hang on, they’re working to fix that.

        2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          Careful, Chris, sounds to me like you’re talking yourself out of your own guns.

        3. avatar GunGuyInNC says:

          Apparently you are only “very much armed” until someone in a government issued uniform comes to your house, at which point you will willingly become a very much disarmed servant. I’m I to believe you care more for your family than your guns… admirable (IMHO terribly misguided, but to each his own).

          Fear not, some of us will fight and you can fondly remember our sacrifice (or not) when they return your weapons (provided they weren’t destroyed).

          Riddle me this, should your family ever be attacked will you be willing to die in an effort to protect them (or will you be willing to give them up, like your guns)? Do you plan to ask the criminal(s) to go easy on your loved ones, beg the rapist to be genial, blow your rape whistle and hope someone that still has a gun shows up?

          Giving up my best tool to defend my loved ones, isn’t how I show them my “love”. The government has no right to tell me which tools I can use to defend myself or my loved ones (based on your comments you appear to be a handguns = ok, AR = bad, what happens when they come for your handgun, will you be willing to die then).

          It’s not about a right to own an AR with a standard 30 round mag, it’s about my right to chose the best tool for my defense. The government has no way to assure that I will only ever be attacked by one person, nor can they assure that my first shot will always end the threat. My two Great Pyr’s are the first line of defense, me and my handgun follow close behind… should we fall, I fully expect my wife to dump the entire mag of our AR at any remaining threats.

        4. avatar Cliff H says:

          Chris, To what end? To simplify it for you: Why are you armed? What is the purpose of your being armed? Whatever your purpose, do you really believe that if the government comes for our guns they won’t be after yours as well?

          This current conflict only resembles the American Revolution from a very narrow viewpoint. The fact of the matter is that we revolted against the tyranny of England and established the first constitutional republic in history. It has taken the tyrannical fascists in our nation over 220 years to figure out how to defeat the protections of liberty installed in that Constitution, but they have despotic tyranny as their end goal, without any doubt, the self same tyranny we revolted against in 1775.

          However – we are not considering a fight against a tyrannical colonial master, but a fight to take back our country from Progressive usurpers who have perverted our republican (small “r”) system and no longer even pretend to rule us under the limitations of The Constitution of the United States of America. It is THEY who have rebelled, not us. We are exercising our Constitutional right to free speech to communicate our extreme displeasure at their shitting on our social contract and our intent that given sufficient cause a significant number of us will exercise our Second Amendment right to bear arms in defense of ourselves and to try to re-instate our Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

          We have been invaded and all but conquered by “The enemy within” and to believe that true Americans who believe in the tenets of The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not at some point take up arms to recover our liberties is puerile in the extreme.

          You claim to have been reading this site “from the beginning.” Why? You obviously have learned nothing from the exercise, so you have wasted a whole lot of your time. I only became aware of TTAG in December 2012 and have been a daily participant since that time. I comment where I feel I can contribute and have had several essays published by RF. I read most, although not all of the comments to the articles I find interesting and this is the FIRST TIME I recall seeing your handle, and it comes at the head of a particularly egregious snipe.

          Matt in FL has the ability to review each commenter and maybe can refute this, but I think the claim of Troll is well deserved in your case. I only hope that if the current regime insists on pushing their tyranny to a confrontation that none of us truly want, even though we are prepared for it, that you are not one of those who survives to enjoy the benefits of what we are willing to fight and die for.

          In spite of our Pussy in Chief, America has been and is the major stabilizing influence in world politics. Any significant political conflict in the U.S., especially an armed conflict intended to take back our Constitutional Republic from the current Progressives and RINOs perverting it, would result in massive world-wide de-stabilization and bloodshed. Perhaps he defense of personal liberties enshrined in our founding documents is worth it – I hope we never have to find out – but until then our willingness to stand up and convince the usurpers that we WILL fight is our best hope that will not have to fight.

    4. avatar NotoriousAPP says:

      I bet some troll said that in Ukraine…and Egypt…and ……

    5. avatar Dave357 says:

      Revolution may be a fantasy, but the continuing erosion of freedom in the US is not.

      1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

        Here here! The tyranny we face today is far far worse than what the founders faced. They were being taxed something like 3% overall. My last paycheck had 27% taken out of it for income Medicare and social security(I am 24 and I will never see that money back). I do pretty well, but I am not rich by any means. I guess I am being unrealistic though, because the government obviously earned that chunk of my paycheck, not me.

      2. avatar ShaunL. says:

        Revolution is no fantasy of mine though it may be an inevitability. The thing most people don’t seem to see is that a large scale conflict only needs a small catalyst.

        What happens when ONE armed civilian opens fire on what he perceives to be an intruder but in actuality is a LEO “no-knock” party???? The likely outcome is his immediate termination with EXTREME prejudice followed by the already inflamed(but sometimes all too silent) and well armed segment of society coming to grips with the reality of imminent threat WITHIN OUR OWN HOMES! All that is needed is a singular event to prove without a shadow doubt that “it will never happen here” no longer holds true.

        All it takes is one match to light a forest fire but not every match thrown into a dry forest WILL. I see the “forest” of gun owners as being very dry at the moment and can only hope someone(gun grabbing boneheaded politician?) doesn’t toss the wrong match in the wrong spot.

    6. avatar moveableDO says:

      It would only take a spark, but it would have to be a pretty big spark. Gestapo coming to get our guns would be a bonfire-size spark…

    7. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      With all due respect, revolutions are usually thrust upon people and the people have little choice. The cops aren’t just going to knock on your door and ask you to please let them hold on to your firearms for you. They’re not going to ask pretty please with sugar on top. They are going to bust your door down at 3:00am and throw flash-bangs down your hallway. Once a few gun owners and innocent bystanders are ripped to shreds by automatic gunfire things will escalate rapidly. You may have no choice but to band together and fight or die. Go study history for a while and come back with a list of revolutions where it was the people that started shooting first, not the government. It will be a short list.

      1. avatar David PA/NJ says:

        Well yeah because those are called civil wars

    8. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      At any given time, there may be a dozen or so countries in various stages of armed revolution, coup or civil war; potentially blurry lines differentiating such events, notwithstanding. And virtually every country has undergone them at some point, some of them with frightening regularity.

      The fantasy that Americans descended from the Heavens, sent to trod the fruited plains with nary a care in the world and bearing no likeness to other societies’ experiences, is not only not cute, but naive and reckless.

    9. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      Hawk said:
      “Your missing the point Chris. If thugs broke in and caught me off guard and wanted my guns, yeah take them. I’m not dying over metal and plastic. Insurance will buy me new ones. However, when the government comes, they’re not just gonna take our guns, they’re taking our rights and freedoms. That is worth dying over.”

      This!

    10. avatar Chris (not one of the other 2 chris's) says:

      How dare ye slander my good name?

  6. avatar John S. says:

    I love this guy; he needs to run for the Senate then for President; he would have my vote!

    1. avatar NotoriousAPP says:

      I was thinking the same thing. Gun friendly minority who’s “afraid” of the citizens he serves. Makes for great political marketing.

  7. avatar IllinoisShooter says:

    Sheriff Dave Clark is a friend of ours.

  8. avatar Accur81 says:

    Many cops are pro-gun. Unfortunately, many police chiefs are not. The pro-gun atmosphere of WI is one of the reasons I’m planning to move back. I wish we had more upper management police like this.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      Would you expect it’s because he’s an elected sheriff, by large 3 to 1 margins, too, as opposed a big city P.D.’s appointed Chief?

    2. IMO, police chiefs are not serving in a law enforcement position but in a political position. They serve their boss (typically the mayor) and in order to get hired, and stay hired, they need to reflect the political position of their boss.

      They are in many ways their bosses “spokesperson” on law enforcement issues and as such do not stray away from whatever the party line is or should be.

      As mentioned before, sheriffs tend to be elected so they have a little more of a pulse on their electorate which makes them somewhat independent or at least only politically beholden to themselves (which is at least somewhat internally consistent with who they are unless they are insane).

      Hoo-rah for Sheriff Clark.

      1. avatar Gene says:

        They are political and serve at the whim of their major.

        The Sheriff is elected and has authority over the county.

        Pay attention and vote during mayoral and sheriff elections.

  9. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    This is why we need to quit vilifying the entire law enforcement profession with a broad brush. Many of them, most notably county sheriffs and their subordinates, are squarely on our side, and they already have a bully pulpit from which to speak.

    Condemn the individual police officers who abuse their power, and support those who defend our liberties by strapping on a gun and standing between us and tyranny.

    1. avatar Todd S says:

      Good point. All the cops I know are good folks and the cops I have had, shall we say, less than cordial interactions with were all very professional.

    2. avatar Dev says:

      Part of the problem is that many of the good police will just stand by and let the bad ones break the law because of some archaic “code”. We need the good police, which are the vast majority of police, to be more outspoken against the criminals in their ranks.

      1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

        Well you beat me to it. +1

    3. avatar John L. says:

      Just as the media like to focus on “bad shoots” they also tend to publicize police officers and representatives who are anti-gun, do not see themselves as servants and defenders, etc.

      You just don’t hear about the “good guys” very often. Which is one reason this piece is so refreshing.

    4. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

      I try not to vilify all cops, but I admit that I have trouble because every experience I have had has been a bad one(I am always polite, the cops I run into are just the power trip type). I think what would help the public perception is if good cops were more willing to figuratively tar and feather the bad ones when they act badly. It could be the upper admin positions that keep them from doing this, but I have no LE experience so I don’t know.

    5. avatar Ralph says:

      Find me some cops without a union and I’ll show you some good cops.

    6. avatar ShaunL. says:

      I live in an extremely rural area and can see first hand the disconnect between the people and the police. The good, honest, hard working people in my area have a great relationship with our local Leos and Sheriffs and in return are treated with respect by those officers who in most cases live amongst us. I know several personally and have seen them go out of their way to actually do good for the community.

      On the inverse you have the miscreants, druggies, and all around dregs of the area who HOWL at the top of their lungs how unfair and evil those same LEOs are.

      Then there’s the third segment…. People who hate “the pigs” because they locked up innocent little Timmy who I’m sure was doing charity work and was only holding that METH for a sick friend. Timmy happens to be an ANGEL according to mom and dad so the small town shit talking continues.

      The squeaky wheels get the grease while the good wheels keep on trucking. Make it a point to meet your local LEOs and form your own opinions, you may be surprised.

  10. avatar Jim Jones says:

    Man I love my sheriff.

  11. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Finally, someone gets it!

  12. avatar Ross says:

    Smart man, this one.

  13. avatar Dave357 says:

    … if somebody tried to enforce something of that magnitude …

    Very true. Hence he gradual approach – first the magazine size and “assault” weapons, then git rid of most of the handguns through microstamping, then register everything, then …

    1. I think some people will not comply at each level. That could add up to a whole lot of people who are still armed. One can hope anyways. I agree, though, that’s why they take the gradual approach.

  14. avatar Karim says:

    Why the hell aren’t we trying to get this man elected as president?

  15. avatar Handgun Dad says:

    I don’t think the people (well, person) scoffing at the likelihood of death/’armed revolution’ should house to house confiscations begin is even remotely aware of realities on the ground.

    These no-knock raids are inherently dangerous even when they are attempted in situations where the target is unaware he’s the subject of the raid. CATO’s got a botched raid map here (http://www.cato.org/raidmap) that depicts this. Add in the complete loss of surprise after the first ten or so (tops) of these are done, where pretty much every gun owner in the state would know he’s on a list within hours of the first raid being attempted, and you’ve ratcheted up the danger factor by an exponential amount.

    Do not think for one second that the very instant after the first gun confiscation death occurred, be it citizen or officer, that the dynamic of those raids wouldn’t change tremendously… and there is literally no chance that someone wouldn’t end up shot and killed in one of these things within the first couple weeks (again, tops).

    This ‘armed revolution’ isn’t about citizen militias taking over towns like they have in Mexico. An ‘armed revolution’ doesn’t have to be 10,000 people in brand new digital camo outfits running around with shiny ARs. An ‘armed revolution’ doesn’t even have to fire a shot. All it has to do is to be armed, stand up, and say ‘No.’

    This administration won’t even enforce a health care law that makes people pay more money to get inferior health care because of the bad optics politically. Does anybody think for one second they’d allow gun owners to be killed or arrested and deal with the political optics of that? Give me a break.

    The ‘armed revolution’ is going to be people standing up and saying ‘bleep you’ to police officers, something awful eventually happening, and then a whole bunch of career politicians running for the bleeping hills because they aren’t going to want the first half a percent of the sheer tonnage of public hatred that will descend on them the first hours after something like this:

    “John Smith, father of two, was shot and killed during a no-knock raid performed at 11pm at his house in Localtown, Connecticut. Police refused comment on the incident at this time, but neighbors reported a CT swat team arrived at the Smith’s front lawn late Wednesday evening, and after quickly entering the establishment they heard gunfire shortly thereafter. Reports vary at this point with some witnesses alleging ‘more than a couple dozen’ rounds were fired. Although Mr. Smith is the only reported casualty at this time, witnesses say that two ambulances left the scene and that one of them transported Mr. Smith’s oldest daughter, Jane Smith, age 11.

    … happens. That’s a completely made up (by me) news report, and I defy you to read that and not feel real fear. You know that not only COULD that happen just as I (again, fictionally) laid out, but that it damn sure well would. Somebody would screw up.

    That’s what the ‘armed revolution’ will look like.

    1. avatar John L. says:

      “This administration won’t even enforce a health care law that makes people pay more money to get inferior health care because of the bad optics politically. Does anybody think for one second they’d allow gun owners to be killed or arrested and deal with the political optics of that?”

      Yes.

      President Obama clearly believes the health care law is a cornerstone of his legacy and will do whatever it takes to protect and extend it.

      If he, and by extension his administration, view gun control in the same fashion, then … yes. They would be willing to kill gun owners for the sake of that legacy, if that’s what it took to make it happen. Or at least that’s my perception, and I hope I’m wrong and/or that there’s not enough time left for this administration to really get it going.

    2. avatar Wiregrass says:

      I get what you are saying, and word will spread fast among gun owners, but don’t expect those first media reports to paint John Smith as suburban family man. He’ll be an armed insurrectionist or terrorist upon first reports but hopefully the people who are paying attention will see through that.

  16. avatar Leon says:

    So now we have Top Cops in Detroit and Milwaukee encouraging citizens to get their CC license or permits. Could this be a new trend? The fact that both men are black and know that the poor are the most vulnerable to bad guys isn’t lost on me. Hopefully more LEO officials will sing this song in our cities.

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Crucial distinction:
      ELECTED Milwaukee County Sheriff, APPOINTED City of Detroit Police Chief. We seen plenty of sheriffs publicly support gun rights.

      City chiefs of police, on the other hand, serve at the whim of their mayors and almost always act as the mayor’s mouthpiece, parroting the mayor’s opinions on gun control. That is why the Detroit Police Chief’s statements were such a breath of fresh air.

      1. avatar B320 says:

        True – and the Milwaukee Chief of Police is second amendment hater and a political appointee in cahoots with our silly mayor Tom Barrett. Despite the name… blech.

        Then of course we had that lovely botched ATF sting that actually led to a real M4 being put on the street. It’s not reasonable for me to easily and legally have a machine gun, but by golly, let’s make it easy for the local criminals to steal them.

        1. avatar Gyufygy says:

          I do like the Sherriff’s retort about your mayor getting the crap beat out of him by a dude with a tire iron not too long ago. Guess he didn’t have an army like Bloomie.

  17. avatar Dermott says:

    To “The Best Chris”. The issue is the same as in the Ukraine. Many on this site ARE willing to die for that right. Especially those who were in HS during the 60’s and 70’s who were actually taught history.
    Frederick the Great once pointed out to his retreating troops that they were not going to live forever, they were going to die sometime. May as well die for the right cause.
    It won’t take a large % of the population to fight. Throw in the nut bags and other disenchanted people and we have enough to go.

    1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

      If that’s the path you want to go down then you need to do it in a smart way. I hate to use movies as examples, but in “The Patriot” when the British show up on his doorstep, and eventually kill one of his sons, he is smart enough to know that fighting back right there on those terms, would have ended quickly and not in his favor. He counter attacked on his terms. Disclaimer: I am speaking in hypothetical terms since I pray it never comes to that.

  18. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    A government that fears the people…

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      . . . kills the people.

  19. avatar former water walker says:

    To the Chris…ever hear of the Civil War? 600000 deaths. People ARE willing to die for freedom. “I don’t want to get shot”…and LEARN how to spell their.

  20. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    When our Sheriff Clark speaks someone should really be there to carve it in stone. He hates crime, loves law abiding citizens, we got lucky in Milwaukee.

  21. avatar Joseph Roman says:

    I know that there are all kinds of opinions on gun control and whether people would literally fight gun control and shoot back. Remember that during our revolution against the Brits, only 1/3 of the people supported the ‘terrorists’, another 1/3 supported England and 1/3 did not care. One does not need a majority in any insurgency, they must just survive.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Quite a small minority can change the course of history if they have the tools and the will to employ them for change.

  22. avatar Pascal says:

    Dear Mr. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke — please contact

    Lt. J. Paul Vance
    Public Information Officer

    For the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection &
    the Connecticut State Police

    and give him a lesson before hell breaks loose.

    1. avatar Mark says:

      Well played sir!

  23. avatar WI Patriot says:

    Gotta love Sheriff David Clarke …

  24. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    I’m waiting for the day when a reporter shouts the question to some political candidate “What’s your stance on gun control?!”, and that candidate’s only response is “Modified Weaver. Next question.”

    I’m voting for that candidate. Hell, watch out, someday I might *be* that candidate.

  25. avatar Paul53 says:

    Slow clap continues for a true American Patriot, one who appreciates The Bill of Rights, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. Long may you run.

  26. avatar jdb says:

    There’s some people grouching and saying “hey, yer just doing what yer sposed to be doing”. But I say that we should applaud and support this guy to a large degree. First, because he put out radio adds telling people to arm themselves.
    Second, because libs always paint gun owners as fat, white, anti government slobs. Sheriff Clarke is the exact opposite. We need more men like him.

  27. avatar The Smiling Swordsman says:

    I absolutely do NOT want a second revolution. it does appear that some people do, but I think that they are a bit misguided because we are not yet to the point of no return. Are things perfect no but they are acceptable right now and my hope is that enough people will wake up and vote for liberty rather than a nanny.

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Acceptable right now?
      Millions of Americans today are being denied the right to protect themselves, criminals know this and victimize helpless people, including women, the elderly and the poor, on a daily basis, and you think things are acceptable right now?

  28. avatar Paul53 says:

    We just need to be more careful when, NOT IF, but when we vote!

  29. avatar Mark says:

    Well said sir! I like this guy. I true American law enforcement officer! Bravo!

  30. avatar T says:

    How true this is.

  31. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    It’s all just chit chat until that confiscation order comes down, and he conscientiously objects and refuses to carry it out, now isn’t it? As we all know and frequently say, keyboard commando talk is abundant. Who’s yet backed it up?

    Look, I think it’s great he’s saying the right things. I just don’t buy into it until there’s action to back it, or at least some track record to suggest it. What’s his? Well. The good sheriff here eagerly supports citizens taking up arms and defending themselves, because he can’t be everywhere, as reported in the lib L.A. Times link you provided. He would say that now wouldn’t he?

    After all, in his jurisdiction in 2010 (most recent year data was available), you could count on one hand the number of burglaries there were and on two hands the number of robberies there were. You wouldn’t even need so little as ONE finger to count the number of murders there were! So we’re hardly talking about some violence-infested wasteland here. The good sheriff’s bold pronouncements on civilian up armament, then, come off as empty and irrelevant as taunting a mean dog from well beyond leash length. Talk about beclowning oneself…..I see your point.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Sure, it’s just talk now — but if there’s enough talk by law enforcement, then there will never be a confiscation order.

      Political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The pols know it, which is why they want ours. Pols won’t risk their power by alienating its source, namely, the guys who carry the guns for them. So if the Praetorians keep saying “no,” we’re good.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Right on, Ralph….

  32. avatar Daniel S. says:

    I would vote for this man. Bravo, Sir. Bravo.

  33. avatar William Burke says:

    I’ve liked this Sheriff for a long time. He continues to delight and surprise me.

    I’d be happy to have him as my county’s Sheriff. Forget about police chiefs; county sheriffs are the true backbone of America!

  34. avatar Sparky Griswold says:

    Clarke is one of the few diminishing good things left in Milwaukee. I left Milw. 12 years ago and haven’t regretted it since. I’ll take my house out in the country and my bit of land any day. Clarke is an honorable man; trying to fight the good fight against all the scum that’s out there in a city I sure as hell don’t miss!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email