Public Appointees

I’m sure we are all sick of the anti-gun rhetoric after a horrific crime. When it comes from a public appointee who is a police chief and it borders on gun confiscation it elevates the game.

Big Government

In this case, it happens to be the Houston Police Chief. A quick search of his history on gun confiscation rhetoric would take you all the way back to his time as the Austin Police Chief. I remember vividly when it happened and thinking to myself why would someone in his position make those comments. Why would someone whose job is to uphold the law feel it is his position to even comment about infringing on his constituents civil liberties. I witnessed the difference in those comments from then to current and all I can say is their true colors are showing. In this case, their true colors are how the citizenry is not responsible. Rhetoric such as this says to the majority we need the government and in this case the Chief of Police to step in and manage our lives.

Be professional

What bothers me the most is not so much their agenda, but the positions they occupy. As a civil servant who is in charge of public safety is it appropriate to voice his personal views. I think there is a fine line between being professional and then pushing your own narrative. I’m fine if someone wants to push their own narrative, have the decency to be transparent about your motives and actions. When you do so at the helm of a large police department it implies you have the support and permission of the department to speak on their behalf. It is one thing to be subversive about it, the idea no one else knows is long gone these days. It does however show conviction; which I can appreciate.

Calling a Spade a Spade

His current message has taken a harsher tone. In my opinion, his view is in the wrong. Pure and simple. Are there some people who are negligent. Of course, but do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many. As a general rule, no, but especially no when it comes to their constitutional rights. NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch asked him onto her show to have a conversation on the subject. To be honest, I would have been interested in hearing what he has to say and I would encourage others the same. It is important they be given an opportunity to be honest in public, to go on record. Should the public have a different view now they can make up their own minds.

It’s Not About the Guns

The bottom line is as Chief of Police he has no business using the departments good name to further his own personal agenda. When he wears a uniform, stands in front of cameras with department colors and directs his opinions at the camera it is implied he is speaking on behalf of the department he represents. If he wants to push a gun confiscation agenda or change the law then do so on your own. I do see how he is supporting an initiative to “vote out” those who differ from his opinion. Let’s be clear, laws already exist and it is unlikely they would have prevented this horrific act.  is there anything short of revoking an entire nation’s civil liberties that would have prevented this tragedy? More importantly and this is directed right at you Art…it is not about the guns.

Until we are ready to have a serious conversation about these horrific acts I see this for what it is, gun confiscation. We need real leaders who are willing to talk about the real issues such as social decay, mental health and the failures of our public schools.