Discussion: Washington State Police Chief Pledges Not To Enforce Voter-Approved Gun Limits

TPM Article Topics
1
Washington State Police Chief Pledges Not To Enforce Voter-Approved Gun Limits Washington State Police Chief Pledges Not To Enforce Voter-Approved Gun Limits Back to article
1 Like
2

Kim Davis moved?

32 Likes
3

“I am the federal government.”
— Tom DeLay, when told by Capitol Police it was against federal law to smoke his cigar on Capitol grounds

“I am the law.”
— Loren Culp, on enforcing Washington state law

Unfortunately Republic is such a redneck part of the state that the local citizenry will likely not fire him.

24 Likes
4

Buh-bye, darling!

4 Likes
5

that he’d instructed Republic police officers not to enforce the new law when it goes into effect on Jan. 1.
Just think about that
Pick and choose what laws to enforce
After years of busting and sentencing people to jail for a few grams of pot
Because “Just enforcing the law”
Now he’s becoming discretionary?
How is he not fired immediately for that statement.?

43 Likes
6

8035CAD5-BCD1-4C92-943B-09D70F84177F.jpeg486×640 215 KB

13 Likes
7

Adios, MOFO

I hope they strip you of your pension on the way out the door.

20 Likes
8

It’s your right to choose not to enforce the law. It is your employer’s right to fire you for not doing your job. See how that works, Mr. soon-to-be former Police Chief?

21 Likes
9

Way outside the mainstream. Even gun owners are good with common-sense restrictions, according to the polls. Having to be be 21 to buy a military weapon capable of inflicting mass death doesn’t seem like a radical violation of one’s rights. It’s just sensible not to let every mixed-up teen have a machine like that.

46 Likes
10

Prediction: this will not end well for Boss Hogg Culp.

16 Likes
11

Lock. Him. Up.

9 Likes
12

Remove him, and change the name of the town from Republic to Democracy.

8 Likes
13

On one hand, when it comes to nullification of federal laws, we’re all for it when we’re for it. (Legal weed comes to mind.) We’re also for states’ rights when we’re for it, and against it when we’re not (Roe v Wade, gay marriage, that kind of thing.) So it’s hard to say he’s wrong simply on that count.

On the other hand, his argument is the argument of the stupids. “The second amendment says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” – this is nonsense, because we all know and accept that some weapons are regulated, sensibly and legally. The idea that he is standing up for the Constitution is nonsense, he is standing up for wherever he personally (along with his gun manufacturer overlords) thinks the line should be drawn. So, screw him. Jerk.

37 Likes
14

Chief, should 5 year old children be allowed to own semi-automatic rifles? If not, isn’t that an infringement?

15 Likes
15

Would this cop think it cool to bring an AK47 with extra magazines into a movie theater, hospital, school room or bar? How about into his police station?

9 Likes
16

And wearing traditional Middle Eastern dress.

8 Likes
17

Also, this isn’t a federal law, it’s a state law. And generally wingnuts are for states’ rights…

15 Likes
18

Until the NRA supports ownership of fully-automatic weapons, their 2nd Amendment support is B.S.

You can’t claim simultaneously that there is a Constitutional Right to have an AR-15, but not an M-16.

The fact that they don’t actively work to make All weapons legal means that they accept that the Constitution allows some limits. And once we’ve established that, then there is no ‘right’ to any given weapon.

14 Likes
19

Also Judge Dredd (1995)

11 Likes
20

Only if it allows human slavery and christian home schooling.

13 Likes