Spencer Police Chief in D.C. supporting gun registration and ban on "assault weapons

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

okiebryan

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
1
Location
OKC
I spoke to the Spencer Chief last night for more than an hour. It was a very pleasant conversation. He definitely feels that he was blindsided and used. He said that the two Oklahoma chiefs were the only ones who were called out by name, and he was very confused by that. He was totally unaware of who Feinstein was or what her bill was about. He accepted the invitation to DC because he wants gun violence to decrease and wanted to be a part of that conversation. Said he get to meet with Inhofe and a few others before the Feinstein show.

He also doesn't understand why it is that Bill Citty says all kinds of unpopular stuff about guns, and nobody says peep. Then he gets a ton of criticism after his trip. I told him that people expect a big city chief to say these kinds of things, but that smaller town chiefs usually know better that gun control is a bad idea.

He is unequivocally opposed to any gun bans. He's in favor of "strengthening" background checks, but wouldn't say whether that would include UBC. He was citing incidents at some flea market where minor gang bangers are getting guns. I told him that's already illegal, but he's thinking that more laws will stop this from happening?

He wants mental health information shared with NICS. The biggest issue I see is that he doesn't exactly understand how the process works quite as well as we do.

We had a lot of discussion about stopping mass shooters. He heard a lot of what I said and I may have enlightened him a little.

He's not 100% on our side, but he's not the boogeyman that the Feinstein introduction makes him appear to be. All in all, it was a pleasant conversation.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2005
Messages
10,024
Reaction score
3,023
Location
Blanchard
If he is against gun bans, he needs to call a press conference and let everyone know he was "used". If he doesn't know why he was there or why his name was used, he should have a problem with it and address it. Feinstein has used his name to further her progress.

Bill Citty does say lots of bad things about guns, but he didn't go to DC and have his name mentioned on National TV.
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
638
Reaction score
109
Location
Edmond America
I spoke to the Spencer Chief last night for more than an hour. It was a very pleasant conversation. He definitely feels that he was blindsided and used. He said that the two Oklahoma chiefs were the only ones who were called out by name, and he was very confused by that. He was totally unaware of who Feinstein was or what her bill was about. He accepted the invitation to DC because he wants gun violence to decrease and wanted to be a part of that conversation. Said he get to meet with Inhofe and a few others before the Feinstein show.

He also doesn't understand why it is that Bill Citty says all kinds of unpopular stuff about guns, and nobody says peep. Then he gets a ton of criticism after his trip. I told him that people expect a big city chief to say these kinds of things, but that smaller town chiefs usually know better that gun control is a bad idea.

He is unequivocally opposed to any gun bans. He's in favor of "strengthening" background checks, but wouldn't say whether that would include UBC. He was citing incidents at some flea market where minor gang bangers are getting guns. I told him that's already illegal, but he's thinking that more laws will stop this from happening?

He wants mental health information shared with NICS. The biggest issue I see is that he doesn't exactly understand how the process works quite as well as we do.

We had a lot of discussion about stopping mass shooters. He heard a lot of what I said and I may have enlightened him a little.

He's not 100% on our side, but he's not the boogeyman that the Feinstein introduction makes him appear to be. All in all, it was a pleasant conversation.

Great deal, Bryan. My blood pressure dropped 30 points after reading your post! Now about Bill Citty - time to free him up for the job market? He seems very much out of step, and I wager his troops think so, too.

LL
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,954
Reaction score
10,298
Location
Tornado Alley
I spoke to the Spencer Chief last night for more than an hour. It was a very pleasant conversation. He definitely feels that he was blindsided and used. He said that the two Oklahoma chiefs were the only ones who were called out by name, and he was very confused by that. He was totally unaware of who Feinstein was or what her bill was about. He accepted the invitation to DC because he wants gun violence to decrease and wanted to be a part of that conversation. Said he get to meet with Inhofe and a few others before the Feinstein show.

He also doesn't understand why it is that Bill Citty says all kinds of unpopular stuff about guns, and nobody says peep. Then he gets a ton of criticism after his trip. I told him that people expect a big city chief to say these kinds of things, but that smaller town chiefs usually know better that gun control is a bad idea.

He is unequivocally opposed to any gun bans. He's in favor of "strengthening" background checks, but wouldn't say whether that would include UBC. He was citing incidents at some flea market where minor gang bangers are getting guns. I told him that's already illegal, but he's thinking that more laws will stop this from happening?

He wants mental health information shared with NICS. The biggest issue I see is that he doesn't exactly understand how the process works quite as well as we do.

We had a lot of discussion about stopping mass shooters. He heard a lot of what I said and I may have enlightened him a little.

He's not 100% on our side, but he's not the boogeyman that the Feinstein introduction makes him appear to be. All in all, it was a pleasant conversation.

A couple of "issues" with what he said.

1) How is he unaware of Feinstein?

2) If he met with Inhoff how did he not understand that him being "used" was a distinct possibility? This also relates to #1.

3) Did he not realize what the gig was when he only heard the Oklahoma "delegation" called by name?

I'm not so sure he was being sincere or it could be that he just isn't the sharpest tool in the shed...
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom