Quote of the Day: Kershaw County SC Sheriff Jim Matthews Calls for Criminal Control Edition

Kershaw County SC Sheriff Leon Crosby (courtesy theblaze.com)

“We have gun laws already on the books that address felons in possession of firearms. Those laws don’t seem to be much of a deterrent if violent felons who carry guns are not locked up when they are caught and kept in jail. We don’t need more gun control laws. We need to drop the hammer on those who violate the gun laws we already have in place.” – Kershaw County South Carolina Sheriff Jim Matthews quoted in Sheriff Says It’s Time for Law Enforcement to ‘Drop the Hammer’ With Gun Control — by Enforcing Laws on the Books [via theblaze.com]


  1. avatar James says:

    Blasphemy!!!!!!! Hope he’s ready for a DOJ anal cavity probe and nonstop attacks from the progressives, gun confiscation groups and the assault media (I apologize for the repetition since all three are the same thing)

    1. avatar fiun dagner says:

      The sad part is that for all those groups talk about “Common sense” gun laws when Something like thus comes up, something that actually is common sense, they will all be against it because it might do something with the laws already in effect rather than through passage of new laws that will only criminalize lawfull gun owners

      1. avatar DaveN says:

        Common Sense, the buzz words for those that have none and are easily controlled minions of those that control them, i.e., sheeple.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      Let’s get back to that “common sense” part –

      “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 can find nothing in that statement (two statements) that says, “unless they are a convicted felon.”

      Whether or not that thought makes you uncomfortable, keep in mind that the very same government the Second Amendment was intended to allow you to protect yourself against is the government that decides who is or is not a felon, and administers the legal system that convicts on those laws. I notice that New York is now attempting to make it a felony to purchase more ammo than double the capacity of your firearm in a 90 day period. Caught=felon=never able to buy, own or carry a firearm again. Think about that. You own a nice 6-shot revolver and buy a box of 20 rounds of hollow point ammunition and now you are a felon and “lose” your Second Amendment protected right to keep and bear arms.

      Do you think for a minute that the Founding Fathers did not expect that at least some portion of any militia would include a few people who were convicted felons?

      If you concede that the government has the authority to create, maintain and enforce a list of persons who, in the opinion of that same government, may not exercise their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, how will you keep YOUR name off of that list?

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        Understood. However, did you read the part in the Fifth Amendment regarding due process and deprivation of liberty?

        “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury….nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

        If we’re discussing felons, then we’re talking about people who’ve confessed to or been convicted of serious crimes. They ought to expect some loss of liberty, which could include their firearms rights. I get it, “If they can’t be trusted with a firearm, then they can’t be trusted on the streets.” Perhaps, but that’s a political decision to make, not a constitutional violation.

        1. avatar Moore Ham says:

          No one should be a “felon” for smoking grass, buying ammunition or 10+ round mags, or questioning the holyhoax.

        2. avatar Baldwin says:

          “If we’re discussing felons, then we’re talking about people who’ve confessed to or been convicted of serious crimes.” Like convicted of the “serious felony” of possessing hollow points in NJ?

  2. I’m Chris Christie and I approve this message.
    I was taking a survey that asked, “existing gun laws need to be enforced rather than making new laws”.
    I couldn’t honestly answer because New Jersey kept coming to mind.
    Hell no! We don’t need to enforce gun laws! We need to repeal them.
    1) More guns = less crime
    2) Less gun laws = more guns…see #1

  3. avatar Al says:

    In today’s modern era of Political Correctness and New Speak the belief that punishing or restraining individuals that do actual crimes seem so dated. Why isn’t he on board with blaming the guns and the law abiding? /SARC

  4. avatar James in AZ says:

    Am I the only one feeling the title is different from what the guy actually meant?

    1. I think it fits. He is addressing recidivism rates.

      1. avatar James in AZ says:

        The sheriff said to drop the hammer on violators. The Blaze made sound like the sheriff condones dropping the hammer (on people) with gun control

        1. Yes, this Sheriff is either the gun hero or zero.

        2. avatar Stinkeye says:

          “We need to drop the hammer on those who violate the gun laws we already have in place.”

          Sounds like dropping the hammer “with” gun control to me.

          It seems clear he doesn’t think more gun control will help, but I can’t help but wonder how he feels about the current laws.

        3. avatar James in AZ says:

          He shoulda just said everything in English instead of playing with vocabulary and grammar…

        4. avatar Hannibal says:

          “We don’t need more gun control laws. ” seems pretty clear to me.

  5. avatar John L. says:

    Laws provide an unpleasant consequence for bad behavior … after the fact, and if the lawbreaker is caught.

    As far as crime prevention, they only have a deterrent effect if the criminal is thoughtful enough to think about the possible consequences, and humble enough to admit to him- or herself that it might not go as planned.

    Know many thoughtful, humble criminals?

    1. avatar James in AZ says:

      Probably they were smart enough not to get caught?

    2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “Laws provide an unpleasant consequence for bad behavior … after the fact, and if the lawbreaker is caught….sometimes

      Fixed it for you.

      (see: Revolving door and ridiculous plea deals)

  6. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Really…that’s the answer, well I’m not buying it because the more you can turn a criminal through the judicial system the more money it makes. Locking them up doesn’t generate revenue.

    1. avatar Ban Libturds says:

      Putting them to work in a field or factory then kicking all the illegals out sure does though!

      1. avatar Eric says:

        Breaking big rocks into little rocks seems like a good idea. Everybody is talking about the highways and other infrastructure being broken and no way to fund it. I know where you could get some free labor.

  7. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    Brilliant! Somebody buy this man a Guinness.

    1. avatar M60E3 says:

      Chip, I would, but i just can’t seem to keep it in the glass long enough to get to him.

  8. avatar Craig says:

    “We need to drop the hammer on those who violate the gun laws we already have in place.”

    Except for the fact that most of the anti-liberty gun laws ‘in place’ are intended to punish normal citizens who have not committed any other crimes.

    There is no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. — Ayn Rand

  9. avatar Mike W. says:

    Proud to be a South Carolinian. Drop the freaking hammer on law breakers and felons with illegal guns. Quit trying to punish the law abiding nation wide. Demtards can eat a big Santa bag full of S**T.

  10. avatar Hannibal says:

    Meanwhile the guy who gave a gun to the Boston Bombers (because he just thought they were going to ROB people) is getting out.

  11. avatar Steve Day says:

    That’ll never happen, since there would be a disproportionate number of black men jailed compared to whites. Progressives are already scrambling to get the existing number down by having black inmates released who were sentenced for possessing small amounts of narcotics. Obama has a pen and a phone you know!

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