Police Chief Group’s Proposal to Reduce Police Shootings: Fire Warning Shots?

In what has got to be one of most dangerous and stupid ideas for police officers, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) has suggested that when officers feel they are in mortal danger, they should fire a warning shot rather than stop the offender on the spot.

There’s no actual justification for something this backwards. If ANYONE, including regular Americans, feels they are in imminent danger, their first priority is to stop that threat. Is the IACP actually saying that officers should first look around to be sure they don’t kill an innocent bystander to shoot a warning shot as a dangerous criminal is attacking them?

Yes, it’s that stupid. As discussed by Bearing Arms:

One of the realities of law enforcement is that higher-level police brass are typically more interested in protecting their own power and advancing their own careers than they care at all about the realities officers face on the street. That detached and self-serving mindset is probably behind a new recommendation by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (and allegedly some other law enforcement organizations) that law enforcement officers should be allowed to fire warning shots.

You can read about the proposed policy more here.

Bob Owens at Bearing Arms gives some excellent analysis of the policy and they reasons he believes they are trying to impose it here.

What’s also interesting is that the IACP is a gun-control organization. They believe in pushing gun control onto American citizens, who are actually responsible for their own self-defense. From the IACP’s Policy Priorities:

  • Support legislation and policies that prohibit the sale or transfer of armor piercing ammunition.
  • Support legislation that expands background checks, and require background checks for all firearm purchasers.
  • Limit high-capacity ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.
  • Support legislation to create a mandatory five-day waiting period prior to the completion of a handgun purchase.

These are just a few from their document, but essentially, these ignoramuses are not only pushing for police officers to be less safe, but they want regular Americans to be less safe as well.

What in the hell is wrong with these people? Oh wait… liberalism or leftism. They aren’t using actual facts (and that’s clear in their policies) to think about proposals that may be useful; they are using emotional, backwards, left-wing logic.

Clearly they aren’t concerned with the safety of officers, or they wouldn’t push a warning shot policy when an officer is in mortal danger. That’s just idiocy.

Clearly they aren’t concerned with the safety of Americans, or they wouldn’t push ALL of the above policies they would like to see passed.

This organization should be seen for what it really is – a politicized left-wing organization that serves absolutely no purpose when it comes to protecting their own officers OR the public.


Kimberly Morin

About Kimberly Morin

Kimberly Morin has been writing about politics since early 2009. She began writing as the Boston Conservative Independent Examiner and has since moved to the 'Live Free or Die' state of New Hampshire where she is the editor of NH Political Buzz and anchor of the weekly 'Politically Buzzed' segment on Girard at Large. She's also a weekly guest on nationally syndicated 'Real Side with Joe Messina.'

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *