The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 2, 2013, 12:54 AM   #51
Join Date: November 5, 2012
Posts: 25
Make no mistake, Flynn's purpose was to evade the questions Graham put to him. Flynn is the same chief that made the statement that 7 of his officers were shot with "semi-automatic weapons". The weapons were handguns. Guns not include in the ban being discussed. (at least this time) And Owls comment that he was trying to answer the question is horse cookies.

Flynn is also the police chief that's been recently busted for cooking the books on crime in the community. (Arrest for crime but report a lessor charge.) No wonder he doesn't chase "paper crimes". Makes the stats look bad,

The only thing that actually holding Milwaukee together at the moment is the fact that the county sheriff, David Clarke is at the other end of the spectrum, a no nonsense LEO. He's the one that put out adds suggesting you arm yourself and get training.
Buford_Tannen is offline  
Old March 2, 2013, 09:21 PM   #52
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 228
I agree that a figure or two probably would have satisfied the senator. The fact is though that I respect Flynn more for having stood his ground.

I don't want a man in uniform who withers when being questioned by a politician.
Flynn is a bureaucrat and more of a political hack than anyone on the senate committee. his entire testimony was political. He has given blatantly false statements on gun issues in the past.

he didn't "whither", he simply evaded and refused to answer a straight question.

And why didn't he answer the questions? The point Graham was smoking is valid. Perhaps if Flynn had been more honest we could have gotten to the question of funding of grabbing and prosecuting people who bounce back as felons when the FBI check comes back?

These high ranking police bureaucrats are not your everyday cop "in uniform" they are part of and in many cases the cause of the problem if gun violence by their scapegoating of legal gunowners in diversion from the real source of gun and other violence -- prior convicted criminals on the streets.
TDL is offline  
Old March 2, 2013, 09:27 PM   #53
Senior Member
Join Date: August 20, 2002
Posts: 2,090
True background checks would require an enormous increase in manpower and probably the establishment of a new federal (sub)agency.
IMO that is the idea/intent of new laws to increase government.
wingman is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.04533 seconds with 7 queries