Sunday, February 14, 2010

California Detective says that "open carry" supporters should be shot

A couple of readers sent me this after my recent post about Starbucks being safer than Fort Hood.....
Ever notice how much some government entities hate competitors?  Like, the U.S. Post Office is about to go broke, but won't allow anyone else to carry 1st class mail?  Remember when FDR wouldn't allow citizens to own gold, because they would've abandoned the dollar?  Or, in the case of guns.....

Gun rights advocates have a California police detective in their crosshairs after he apparently posted comments on Facebook advocating that "open carry" supporters should be shot.

I understand why Detective Tuason would be threatened by "open carry" advocates.  After all, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away. 


East Palo Alto Police Det. Rod Tuason apparently posted the remarks on his Facebook page in response to a friend's status update, which suggested that gun advocates who carry unloaded weapons openly — which is legal in California — should do so in places like "Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto" and not just in "hoity toity" cities.

"Haha we had one guy last week try to do it!" Tuason replied. "He got proned out [laid face-down on the ground] and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!"

That's a picture of a suspect in a not-quite-prone position. 
Let's get one thing straight here.  Which would you rather have with you if you had to live in Oakland, Richmond, or East Palo Alto?  A pistol, or Detective Tuason's cell phone number? 

Several comments later, the detective suggested shooting the gun rights advocates, some of whom have carried firearms openly in recent weeks in California's Bay Area, particularly at Starbucks locations.

"Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!" Tuason wrote. "Should've pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!" -- referring to the modified duty, commonly known as desk duty, that typically follows any instance in which an officer is investigated for firing his weapon.

Sigh.....These are our employees.  How much time off would this clown get if we started acting like employers?  I suspect it would be more than two weeks. 

Those comments caught the attention of a California attorney and blogger, as well as a Virginia man who started a Facebook group calling for Tuason's termination.

John Taylor, whose Facebook group had 54 members as of midday Friday, said the Facebook thread confirmed gun owners' worst fears.

As of Sunday afternoon, it has 1,900 members.  Hit the link.  But that's nothing to quibble over. 

"Any sworn officer who suggests shooting law-abiding citizens for exercising their most basic constitutional rights deserves the full wrath of America's gun owners," Taylor told FoxNews.com. "It's an affront."

What we have here is a free speech vs 2nd Amendment vs freedom of contract issue.  Detective Tuason should have the right to say what he wants to say about shooting citizens.  I say, let him say whatever he wants.  The 2nd Amendment states that we can keep and bear arms without having to worry about Det. Tuason shooting us.  And "freedom of contract" implies that the unfortunate citizens of whichever city Tuason works for should be able to fire his butt back into the private sector whenever they please. 
I see no reason why this can't be resolved quickly. 
 
Go here for a screen shot of the conversation.  The picture of the Glock in a not-quite open carry situation came from Free Market Fairy Tales

4 comments:

ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ said...

Allen,
I posted on this incident yesterday. This Tauson creep is right in a sense. If you abide by the law in Kalifornia your gun must be UNLOADED. The "turds" know this and as THEY ignore the law they will have you at a disadvantage and will likely "jack" you for your $400.00 Glock. It's that bad in Kalifornia.

Nick Rowe said...

I agree that he has a right to free speech. He does not, however, have a right to keep his job.

He may, without peril, express his opinion that the Open Carry people's actions are unwise, dangerous, counterproductive to their own cause, or even crazy.

But when a police officer openly threatens to overreact to lawful behavior and even kill someone for such behavior, that officer can no longer be trusted to wear a badge.

I speak my mind freely and openly on a variety of topics. I don't mention my employer in my blog and don't even talk about our line of business.

The blogger who wrote FMFT from which you got the Glock picture has decided his career isn't worth risking with his opinions. He remained anonymous and a co-worker figured out who he was. I will miss his acerbic but apropos wit and charm.

No one ever said free speech is without consequences. No one like Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers needs to be in any position to spread their propaganda supported by taxpayer dollars.

Nick Rowe said...

Μολὼν λαβέ ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ!

Anonymous said...

Any police officer who displays such obvious contempt for the people's civil rights should be dismissed immediately from the public payroll. The long and short of it is, he may be wearing a badge, but he's no law man.