Posted on 06/22/2023 5:08:50 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Tulsa Police Chief Wendell Franklin is calling for a 9/11 style response to gun violence and suggesting people may have to give up some of their freedom in exchange for gun control.
NPR posted an interview with Franklin on Sunday, noting he is critical of constitutional carry, wants more regulations on firearms that Democrats describe as “ghost guns,” and is open to a waiting period for the purchase of AR-15s and similar firearms.
Franklin said, “Law enforcement – we are the experts. We’re the subject matter experts at protecting America – right? – protecting our cities. And, you know, we should be utilizing that in that manner. So I am charged with protecting this community. And if there are better ways of protecting it, I think we should be looking at those better ways to protect it.”
Public Radio Tulsa quoted Franklin saying:
Ultimately, I’m a Second Amendment guy…But I’m okay giving up some of that freedom, right? We had to give up some of that freedom after 9/11. I’m okay with waiting three days, five days, or whatever to get my firearm if I go out and purchase another firearm. So I’m okay with a pause to allow for weapons to be purchased and allow the government and the gun companies to look at the background and do a thorough check before that gun goes to someone.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
He has no business being in law enforcement. He should try clown college.
We’ll be trading ammo...
They probably had trouble finding a chief and hired some foreigner from CA.
"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."
Time to get a new police chief...
Maybe time to turn in your star chief.
Hmmm, why not trying enforcing and prosecuting violations of existing gun laws (can you say Hunter Biden?)?
Might be time for a new police chief.
And mayor. And Attorney General. And Vice President. And President. And . . .
No, it’s time to lock up the bad guys for a good long time.
“I’m okay with a pause to allow for weapons to be purchased and allow the government and the gun companies to look at the background and do a thorough check before that gun goes to someone.”
Typical Communist circular argument.
What he doesn’t say is that “as a law-abiding citizen” he would accommodate intrusion (AKA: infringement) because he “has nothing to hide”.
Such a benevolent party supporter, eh comrade?
Yet he never says he wants to do the hard, dirty, dangerous work of getting illegal guns out of lawless hands because THAT is his job.
Not sitting around writing position papers and doing the bureaucratic shuffle while he pretends to be a policeman.
The lawless? They won’t need to wait for BG-checks because they don’t legally buy guns.
Gun grabbers who claim to be “Second Amendment guys” are lyin’ scumbags. That’s like Planned Parenthood claiming that they love little babies.
How about the people give up this clown in exchange for someone who respects their constitutional rights?
Only women tend to trade freedom for safety. Usually, they end up with neither.
The police ARE NOT on our side.
Most big city police chiefs are progressive crap holes.
As soon as I hear any government official state we should trade a little freedom for “whatever”, I know it’s Marxist tyranny BS.
“Ultimately, I’m a Second Amendment guy…But I’m okay giving up some of that freedom, right?”
The end game is complete disarmament of the citizenry. Everyone knows that. There is no “some” in this discussion, except for maybe a few gullible LEOs. The best thing he could do is crack down on gangs, for whom murder is just business as usual.
Your job is to enforce the law, not write it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.