What Do Cops Think About Trump’s Gun Reform?

What Do Cops Think About Trump’s Gun Reform?

What does Trump’s gun reform mean for law enforcement? I got together with a few LEO friends to discuss the issue, this is what they have to say.

Background checks

One of the most talked about reforms that has the anti-gun crowd up in arms (see what I did there) is adjusting our current system for purchasing firearms. Trump states on his website  “What we need to do is fix the system we have and make it work as intended. What we don’t need to do is expand a broken system.” Instead of creating new policies and restrictions, he want’s to work on better criminal and mental health background checks for gun sales.

In addition to better background checks, Trump wants to “fix a broken mental health system”. With most mass murders that have occurred within the past few years, the suspects showed red flags of poor mental health long before they decided to pick up a gun and kill people. According to Trump’s website

And why does this matter to law-abiding gun owners? Once again, because they get blamed by anti-gun politicians, gun control groups and the media for the acts of deranged madmen. When one of these tragedies occurs, we can count on two things: one, that opponents of gun rights will immediately exploit it to push their political agenda; and two, that none of their so-called “solutions” would have prevented the tragedy in the first place. They’ve even admitted it.

What does this mean for law enforcement? 

This one is pretty self explanatory. We all agreed that keeping mentally ill people from purchasing firearms benefits everyone, obviously.

Remove gun and magazine bans

President-Elect Trump states that

Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons”, “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semiautomatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice.

What does this mean for law enforcement?

Mark from Law Enforcement Against Gun Control – Zero negative effect on LE at all. Firearms bans have had zero effect on crime rates. In fact strict bans on firearms tend to increase violent crime rates.

Vegas Cop – Magazine bans do nothing. All gun bans do is hinder regular folks from being able to stop criminals who don’t GAF about laws. What needs to be done is mandatory sentences for people who violate the current gun laws. City and district attorneys do too many plea bargains. Can’t count how many times I have seen it here in Vegas, and I’m certain it is similar everywhere.  I have run across multiple guys that have done time for murder and are out. Not like they did a life sentence, these guys were under 40 years old and still out after a murder conviction. So my opinion is that laws need to have mandatory minimums and have the criminals actually serve time for their crimes.

J. Kirb (Investigator, SC) – Criminals have never obeyed by these laws as is evident from many search warrants and finding high capacity mags, and rifles with superior fire power! What it did was stop everyday Joe’s from buying these items only to realize shooting cans and bottles without having to reload is not as fun and cheap as they thought, therefore selling them to some smuck which ended up on the streets in the hands of the criminal! And we know criminals care less about a misdemeanor gun charge.

K. Ren (K9 Officer, SC) – Gun and magazine bans have never hurt anyone other than the law abiding gun owner. Allowing gun enthusiasts to enjoy their passion is never wrong.

National concealed carry permits

According to Trump

That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

What does this mean for law enforcement?

Copzilla (Detective with 28 years in law enforcement) from Deputy Matt & Others Who Serve – If anything, national concealed carry will have a positive effect on crime across the nation. It will allow law abiding citizens to arm themselves in the Democrat bastions of strict gun control. And an armed law abiding citizen is my ally. It will come amid much wailing and talk of “Old West shootouts” and “blood in the streets”, and lastly the plea will be to “think about the children”, but in every area concealed carry has been implemented, none of the doom and gloom has come to fruition. The effect has always been a mild to moderate positive effect on crime.

Joe Grit from Blue Lives Matter – It will deter crime heavily but also increase the need for more training for officers on how to deal with it. We already assume everyone is armed so I don’t think that will change much. Training needs to increase…on dealing with people with firearms…a lot.

J. Chad (Patrol Officer, SC) – National concealed carry permits could be great, provided that it is done correctly. I know a lot of people are against training, and background checks and being “registered” but if we did require some form of firearms safety training and proficiency at shooting to go along with a clear background check then it wouldn’t be a big deal at all. We are around more armed people now (especially in the south) than many people may ever realize.

Officer Blue from Blue Lives Matter – This is a potential legal mess for law enforcement due to conflicting state laws. To get a concealed carry permit in many states you don’t need a fingerprint-based criminal background check, you don’t need any firearms training at all, and no mental health background check. To make matters worse, in many states it is illegal for a person under 21 to possess a concealed firearm, while other states grant permits to persons under 21. The states with minimal requirements won’t want to increase their standards, because they would view it as infringing upon their rights, and the states with strict requirements will refuse to lower their standards because they set the standards for a reason. I think that the only practical way that this could ever happen would be if the U.S. Supreme Court decided that concealed carry was a Constitutional right, and they dissolved all laws requiring concealed carry permits.

Legalization of suppressors

People who have actually used or seen a suppressor work know that it’s not really how Hollywood makes it out to be. Suppressors save your hearing by reducing sound and they reduce recoil. They do not “silence” a gun, Hollywood style. You’re still dealing with an explosive and you can’t eliminate the sound. With Trump now in office, the Hearing Protection Act may finally go through.

What does this mean for law enforcement?

-7- from Survive the Streets: A Page for Cops – They won’t effect LE at all. (Most)Gun violence isn’t committed by guys running around with suppressed ARs with 50 round mags. Here is a pic of my boy shooting a suppressed .22. Difference between “legalized” and “not” is the simple fact I had to pay 200 bucks to ATF for this “right”…

I love the suppressor. It allowed me to teach him to shoot without the loud bang. No flinching issues. No anticipation issues. He’s now a better shot than half the guys I work with.

Mark from Law Enforcement Against Gun Control – As for suppressor, dropping the need for a tax stamp would have saved my hearing. I am very happy about that being a possibility.

Officer Blue from Blue Lives Matter – This law could potentially make it easier to spot stupid criminals trying to conceal guns with giant suppressors attached.

General consensus:

Most police officers welcome less gun control. In a recent poll, 76% of police chiefs said that they think armed citizens could help stop violent crime. In the end, the bad guys are still going to get the guns that they want. With better mental healthcare plus better background checks, there will be less people who shouldn’t have guns.

What do you think about Trump’s reform on firearms? Let us know on our Facebook page or in the comments below.