Police Murder Rate used to weaken RKBA

[Noel]

Please don't misjudge my motives on posting this topic and I wish to assure all the LEO's reading that I am not belittling the sacrifices you make in performing your responsibilities in a flawed system.

My concern is the statistics on officers killed in the line of duty being used as a justification for more restrictive firearms laws. The last statistics I saw in Guns and Weapons showed about 50 LEO's killed feloniously each year and approximately 100 more killed in accidents each year, mostly automobile related.

Now as a result of Scott Evans question about the number of police in the country I have looked up the total number of police in the country.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Justice Expenditure and Employment Abstracts 1980-1992 (latest year available), indicates police protection employment for all government entities (Fed, state and local) is 857,593 in 1992 (increasing at 1.2% a year)

Later in the report it is stated that total of state and local sworn police is 538,510 in 1992 (no Fed category given) increasing at 1.2% a year.

Using the historical rates of increase of 1.2% and the estimate of 60,000 for armed Fed agents I arrive at the following estimates:

Police Protection Personnel 981,222 in 1998 (857,593 *(1.02 ^6) + 60,000)

Sworn Police (Armed) 578,464 + 60,000) = 638,464


(See also "State and local law enforcement agencies and employees, by State and type of agency, June 1996"
data source: BJS, Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, 1996) which gives:

Population Number of Full-time Full-time
State in 1996 agencies employees sworn officers

All States 265,283,783 18,769 921,978 663,535
(NO Fed. Data given)


50 officers killed feloniously in the 1998 year (estimated) would give an annual "murder" rate for LEO of 5.1 per 100,000 using all police personnel as the population.

The rate would be 7.8 per 100,000 using the estimate of armed officers and Federal agents as the population.

For comparison, the murder rate in the state of California is 9.4 per 100,000 in 1996.

The murder rate in the entire U.S. in 1992 was 9 per 100,000 (from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cv94.txt)

Also for comparison, recent news reports indicate between 300 and 400 citizens are killed in unjustified shootings by police each year.

Now, what is the significance of these comparisons?

I honestly don't know.

But, I am sure that when politicians and Law enforcement figureheads (e.g. LA Police Chief or NYC Police Chief) get up in front of the TV cameras and loudly proclaim that the violence against the police in the streets is such that we must pass more laws to protect the officers, I am greatly concerned. I am also concerned that many organizations that purport to represent Law enforcement play into the hands of gun control advocates by emphasizing that police need access to special weapons that citizens do not "need".

Why does a SRT member "need" a MP5 or "need" a M-16 any more than any citizen? In what way can we justify the fact that only sworn LEOs can legally purchase any firearm magazine with a capacity of greater than 10 rounds?

All the blather about how police are "outgunned" on the streets drives a rift between the citizens and their police that does not need to be present. I felt it was a good thing that the latest gun control legislation impacted the police in the form that no one with a domestic violence conviction could posses a gun, and many police and military were taken off armed duty. I think this points out that if we (LEOs and plain citizens) don't hang together we will assuredly hang separately.

In my opinion LEOs should refuse to carry or use any device that can not be possessed by the people he/she protects.

I am sure the LEOs reading this will have strong feelings on this topic. I am willing to learn from your views, I request that you treat my questions on the topic with respect.

Noel

[4V50]

Noel,

Remember that except for small departments, all chiefs and sheriffs are interrelated by blood. Ours may be A, B or O, but theirs is pure political. (I didn't learn about the small town exception until I met two chiefs in PA this year).

Many of these "leaders" tout the anti gun line and some are now paying a price for political correctness. Because they rant against guns and private ownership, ranges get closed (better to have a safe golf course) and you know what, police ranges get closed with civilian ranges! Because they don't like the military look of Colts or Bushmasters, their officers get outgunned. The incident in New Hampshire last year or in LA are prime examples. Unfortunately, while the brass safely foams at the mouth for the benefit of their political patrons, their troops get killed or injured.

Few and far between are the real chiefs and sheriffs who have the courage to stand up and say right is right. The Sheriff from Montana who fought the Brady Bill is one.

Many line officers are pro-Second Amendment and support the private ownership of firearms and the riff you speak of is largely media created. Sgt. Pyle (sic) from San Jose, CA, PD got too much heat for standing up against then Chief Robert McNamara (ret., now with the Stanford Research Institute) and were in some form retaliated against. I know one fellow from a major agency who had to resign as a lifetime member of the NRA before he would receive his well earned captain bars. So much for the implied freedom of association too.

Other agencies have a simplier policy to preempt individuals. Simply, "YOU DONT TALK TO THE MEDIA." The chief shows up before cameras in uniform and you in a suit. Naturally, which has more credibility before a camera. If you couldn't hear the words and saw only the image, wouldn't you trust the nice senior officer as opposed to that dude in the ill fitting sports coat?

The same applies to many police officers' associations/fraternities. The rank and file are never polled and the leaders play political football without consulting them. LEAA is an exception and actively fights for the rights of all.

Enough soapbox. You are not alone and many officers stand beside you and the Constitution.

4V50

[Noel]

4V50-

Thanks for your viewpoint. I agree that the brass has a different outlook than the cops. It is the stupidity of the politically motivated statements that sets my teeth on edge.

Be safe,

Noel

[DC]

In my post about the Assembly election on "Regaining 2nd amendment rights" thread, the ex asst DA anti-gun candidate has the endorcement of a few prominant LEO organizations here in Calif...so of course, her ads say she has the support of over 40000 law enforcement personnel. Funny, none of the local cops/sheriffs I've spoken to intend to vote for her http://www.thefiringline.com/ubb/smile.gif

[4V50]

DC,

You must mean PORAC. Yep, I remember when PORAC took a stand against "assault weapons". Classic example of the leadership never even consulting with regional chapter (via monthly meetings) yet alone with individual POAs or DSAs or Heaven forbid, the troops.

Dump Barbara Boxer!

4V50