Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik Condemns Arizona Carry Laws Today

[jmiked]

Dupnik is a well known Lefty tool. Larry Dever the Sheriff down in Cochise county has publicly stated that the only thing that could get him in the same room with Dupnik is some Official duty.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Old School]

Hopyard,

The congresswoman was Pro 2-A and was for enforcing the border. She did vote for Obama Care. She was a former Republican and is now a Blue Dog Moderate Democrat. The shooter was an unbalanced dillusional individual rejected by the US Army and known to the local law enforcement communities. You say that people in the media are responsible for the actions of the shooter because of their retoric and should be held accountable for what they have espoused in their commentaries. You sir are of course entitled to your thoughts on the matter. My personal feelings sir are that you are really making a stretch here.

[cwblanco]

[SIZE="6"][SIZE="5"]

Why I carry a firearm, it is for my own safety and that of my family. If I were in the crowd, I would only draw and fire if the attacker was a direct threat to me or headed closer to me to do harm. Once the attacker was beyond me, I would be looking for the nearest exit. If others in the crowd aren't prepared to provide for their own safety, then that's their problem.

That is a sheeple response. Thank God that the concealed citizen who helped subdue this character was not similarly disposed.

[Roy McC]

They should issue a gag order on the sheriff if he keeps leading the press.

[gigamortis]

[SIZE="6"][SIZE="5"]

That is a sheeple response. Thank God that the concealed citizen who helped subdue this character was not similarly disposed.

You are definitely entitled to your opinion of my previous comment as being sheeple minded. Unfortunately, the way carry laws are written in most states in regard to the use of deadly force, a concealed carrier that uses their firearm in the defense of others would likely be charged with a crime themselves. I prefer not to fall into that situation. While it is no doubt noble to act in the defense of others in harm's way, the law will most likely NOT be on your side if you draw and use your firearm outside the envelope of "I was in fear for MY life". Once a concealed carrier stops acting in a defensive manner and starts to act in an offensive manner with their firearm, they can mistakenly be understood by nearby/arriving law enforcement as being the aggressor in the situation and get shot themselves.

[Hopyard]

You are definitely entitled to your opinion of my previous comment as being sheeple minded. Unfortunately, the way carry laws are written in most states in regard to the use of deadly force, a concealed carrier that uses their firearm in the defense of others would likely be charged with a crime themselves. I prefer not to fall into that situation. While it is a noble act to act in the defense of others in harm's way, the law will most likely NOT be on your side if you act outside of the envelope of "I was in fear for MY life".

I'm uncertain I understand the time sequence, but I think the BG was already tackled and also partially disarmed before the gun owner got there. Had he used it at that late moment, there would be a charge of murder.

[wvbagger]

A friend of mine said the congresswoman had a carry permit

[AZ Desertrat]

It never ceases to amaze me how the liberal....the uneducated....the band-wagoners, immediately jump on our "bad" laws...and condemn guns...
NOT PEOPLE....IE...Criminals...open mouth....insert foot, you idiots!!! And what about us Arizonans that HAVE A concealed weapons permit?? We know
about the law that passed allowing anyone to conceal carry....THEY have not been tested, taken classes etc...and are NOT necessarily schooled in deadly
force laws and theory. I for one, am tired of getting the finger pointed at the LEGAL, law abiding citizens that choose to carry a weapon and DO have training on the subject. Wake up politicians......look to the source of the problem....NOT the periphery and the innocent! Write your senators and reps, and tell them NOT
to use events like this as a stepping stone to yank more privileges and rights away from the law abiders!

[Guns and more]

It could be that the drug parapanalia was a misdemeanor which did not disqualify him and that the 2 drug related arrests were never tried in court.

So, who then bears the responsibility for the access the shooter had to a firearm? The government.
No talk show host made it possible for him to purchase a firearm.
Maybe the sheriff should look at his own county, before spouting.

[Old School]

You are definitely entitled to your opinion of my previous comment as being sheeple minded. Unfortunately, the way carry laws are written in most states in regard to the use of deadly force, a concealed carrier that uses their firearm in the defense of others would likely be charged with a crime themselves. I prefer not to fall into that situation. While it is a noble act to act in the defense of others in harm's way, the law will most likely NOT be on your side if you act outside of the envelope of "I was in fear for MY life".

I can only speak for my state of Florida without researching other states however Florida Statute says that "deadly force can be used if you or someone else is in eminate, immediate danger of death or great bodily harm".

[Guns and more]

And of course now the guilty at Fox are starting to squeal like stuck pigs and don't even have the decency to try to row the boat back a bit from the waterfall.

Fox? Fox? Exactly what was said at Fox that you are referring to? Don't give me spin..........tell me who said what and when, I challenge you.

Way more hate speech comes from the left.

How about (see, I'll point it out) Huffington Post (now scrubbed) where the author titled his story about Gabrielle Gifford:
"My-CongressWOMAN-voted-against-Nancy-Pelosi!-And-is-now-DEAD-to-me".
Here's the link, the story is scrubbed but the link still exists.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/20...now-DEAD-to-me

Now, back up your claim about Fox.

[Hopyard]

Hopyard,

The congresswoman was Pro 2-A and was for enforcing the border. She did vote for Obama Care. She was a former Republican and is now a Blue Dog Moderate Democrat. The shooter was an unbalanced dillusional individual rejected by the US Army and known to the local law enforcement communities. You say that people in the media are responsible for the actions of the shooter because of their retoric and should be held accountable for what they have espoused in their commentaries. You sir are of course entitled to your thoughts on the matter. My personal feelings sir are that you are really making a stretch here.

There is a German word, hope I spell it right, "zeitgeist," which roughly means "spirit of the times." There is currently a zeitgeist in this country in which it is seen by many as OK that bald faced lies about politicians and policy are acceptable. When these lies paint people as sufficiently evil that they should be in "cross hairs" and that is accompanied with commentary about the desirability of armed revolution, and commentary specifically about second amendment solutions, and actions by some to encourage sedition within the military ranks (we have often here discussed secondary oaths) on the lie that the government is not legitimate, or is somehow tyrannical, the mentally confused take that stuff to be truth. And sadly we have entertainers happily making millions provoking the unstable. And we have professional politicians who are too timid to speak out against these things-- even hedging on the birther issue as one example of being willing to tolerate the worst sort of propagandistic lying.

The mentally deranged can't distinguish reality from fantasy or from propaganda, and as a result of this inability they (some, one) will view their violent urges as patriotic.

I know that for most here, including myself, WWII is ancient history and its lessons may not be learned. One lesson from it which should be understood is that a tyrannical and murderous regime did not arise from nothing. Hitler had a propaganda chief who famously pointed out that the more bold a lie is, and the more the bold lie is repeated, the more people will believe it.

The sheriff should not IMO have spoken as he did, no more than a military officer should speak of things political in public, but his point about the zeitgeist is spot on.

[Guantes]

I can only speak for my state of Florida without researching other states however Florida Statute says that "deadly force can be used if you or someone else is in eminate, immediate danger of death or great bodily harm".

Some states go beyond that allowing lethal force to prevent a felony against ones self or others, without regard to a threat of death or GBI.

[gigamortis]

I can only speak for my state of Florida without researching other states however Florida Statute says that "deadly force can be used if you or someone else is in eminate, immediate danger of death or great bodily harm".

Even if you are fortunately in a state that permits you to act in the defense of others with your firearm, the laws in general will become increasingly more grayer in scope the more you step out of the zone of your own personal self defense. Those that act in the defense of another, who had had the same opportunity within the law as you or I did to provide for their own safety but chose NOT to, would be opening themselves up to great financial, criminal, and civil liabilities. Meanwhile, the sheeple out there that choose not to provide for their own safety roam freely without any worry of legal risks.

[tbrenke]

IMO the sheriff was spot on though impolitic.

I am not surprised.