Saturday, January 19, 2013

KCPD CHIEF FORTÉ SUPPORTS PREZ OBAMA GUN CONTROL AND WANTS TO DO MORE TO FIGHT KANSAS CITY VIOLENCE!!!



An important endorsement of President Obama's policies in Kansas City Proper recently captured a great deal of attention.

Fox4:Kansas City, Missouri’s top cop says that he supports President Barack Obama’s plan to ban assault weapons, but he says that new gun laws alone are not enough to cut down on the gun violence plaguing the city.

To wit . . .

TKC QUESTION:WILL TAKING AWAY ASSAULT WEAPONS MAKE KANSAS CITY SAFER?!?!

This endorsement of President Obama's gun control measures could mean that gun shows might one day be added to the list of local "hotspots" which contribute to local crime.

Whatever the case . . . It's clear that the national effort aimed at gun control can quickly have repercussions in Kansas City.

Developing . . .

41 Comments:

Anonymous said...

Maybe it will help. Let's get guns out of the hands of criminals first.

Anonymous said...

Does that mean Obama will take away the officers patrol rifles? I hope not. If anyone needs them its the officers. This place is out of control.

Anonymous said...

I think this is common around the country. Big city police Chiefs(politically controlled) favor whatever their masters desire. The poor beat cops(who for the most part are thrown under the bus when they need support from above) don't. Prove me wrong. Talk to me beat cops.

HB 170, appropriately titled the Second Amendment Preservation Act said...

On Tuesday, January 15, Missouri State Representative Casey Guernsey (R-Bethany) introduced a bill that would prevent the president from seizing weapons owned by citizens of the Show Me State.

The bill — HB 170, appropriately titled the Second Amendment Preservation Act — would nullify all acts of Congress, executive orders, and regulations that infringe on the right of the individual to own and possess guns and ammunition.

In relevant part, Guernsey’s bill reads:

Any official, agent, or employee of the federal government who enforces or attempts to enforce any act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the federal government upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in the state of Missouri and that remains exclusively within the borders of the state of Missouri shall be guilty of a class D felony.

Conviction of a class D felony in Missouri carries a possible sentence of four years in prison.

Nullification is a concept of constitutional law recognizing the right of each state to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that exceeds the few and defined powers allowed the federal government as enumerated in the Constitution.

Nullification exists as a right of the states because the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.

As President Obama and the United Nations accelerate their plan to disarm Americans, the need for nullification is urgent, and liberty-minded citizens are encouraged to see state legislators boldly asserting their right to restrain the federal government through application of that very powerful and very constitutional principle.

It is important to remember, finally, that any act of the federal government exceeding the limited powers granted it by the Constitution is not a law at all.

Anonymous said...

How many killings in Kansas City involved an AR or AK? Probably NONE! As a starter lets just stop selling guns and ammo to niggers and see what happens.

Anonymous said...

Support police and take guns away fro criminals. That is the best plan.

Anonymous said...

Here is an idea leave the guns and take away the black people. They are the ones that seem to do most of the shooting and if it can keep "One child" safe then it is worth it.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to see some numbers in terms of how many homicides in the last 10 years were committed with an assault rifle. My suspicion is that there is very little evidence to support Chief Forte's position on the issue of gun control. This appears to be nothing but a knee jerk reaction by another local politician.

Anonymous said...

Here's an idea: Send Barry Soetoro back to Indonesia and pack up police chiefs like Forte and send them along as well. One-way tickets, confiscate their passports, deny re-entry in the future.

The Facts About Assault Weapons and Crime said...


Commenter #1 @ 8:25 AM - Follow the link for some info realted to your curiosity.

Here's a snippet:

"Seven years later, in 2004, they published a follow-up study for the National Institute of Justice with fellow criminologist Dan Woods that concluded, "we cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence."

Moreover, none of the weapons banned under the 1994 legislation or the updated version are "military" weapons. The killer in Newtown used a Bushmaster .223. This weapon bears a cosmetic resemblance to the M-16, which has been used by the U.S. military since the Vietnam War. The call has frequently been made that there is "no reason" for such "military-style weapons" to be available to civilians."


And another:

"Since the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired in September 2004, murder and overall violent-crime rates have fallen. In 2003, the last full year before the law expired, the U.S. murder rate was 5.7 per 100,000 people, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report. By 2011, the murder rate fell to 4.7 per 100,000 people. One should also bear in mind that just 2.6% of all murders are committed using any type of rifle.

The large-capacity ammunition magazines used by some of these killers are also misunderstood. The common perception that so-called "assault weapons" can hold larger magazines than hunting rifles is simply wrong. Any gun that can hold a magazine can hold one of any size. That is true for handguns as well as rifles. A magazine, which is basically a metal box with a spring, is trivially easy to make and virtually impossible to stop criminals from obtaining. The 1994 legislation banned magazines holding more than 10 bullets yet had no effect on crime rates."

Anonymous said...

Forte seems to be in favor of "infringing on my right to bear arms". So much for the oath he took to uphold the constitution.

Anonymous said...

Forte and Obama do nothing to stop their own people from killing each other. They ignore the elephant in the room. As always, it is the law abiding white man's fault. Law abiding citizens need firearms to protect themselves because Obama's government and Forte's police department can't protect them.

Obama And Forte FORBID You To Read This said...


But I say that you can. And should. Follw the link...

Snippet:

"Enter today's debate over guns. Obama, Biden, and the rest of the political left are using similar language and characterizations in their description of gun owners. Theirs is a coordinated effort to paint American gun owners as crazed, government-hating lunatics, whose guns, used for sport, recreation, and defense are somehow a great danger to our society, potential Adam Lanzas or Jared Loughners.

Of course, this should come as no surprise. Recall Barack Obama's description of middle-class voters and the challenge he faced in getting their votes way back in 2008, "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Today's push by the leftist media has managed to raise the insult level even higher recently. Take Carol Costello of CNN for example. On December 27th, in questioning NRA President David Keene, she shared this comment from her Facebook page, "Why is the NRA crazy? Why are they, like, out of touch with reality?"

Costello paints a picture of gun owners as out of step with society, yet recent polling is hardly indicative of such. A Gallup poll conducted earlier this month found that only 38% of Americans are dissatisfied with current gun laws, while 43% are either satisfied or believe the laws should be loosened.

Other polls have found only a slight majority of Americans believe there should be any increase in gun control legislation. Yet, we the legal gun owners of America are somehow considered out of touch and crazy? According to the liberals, legal gun owners who want to sustain their ability to defend themselves against those who wish to do them harm is some type of right-wing, extremist idea...an idea that they lament is found in our Constitution in the Second Amendment.

Oh, but there is plenty more insulting characterizations of legal gun owners from other prominent liberals and the White House....."

Anonymous said...

Let the niggers kill each other. We will all be better off.

KCPD CHIEF FORTÉ SUPPORTS MAYOR SLY'S NUTSACK said...

I wish he would support President Obama's policy of razor control and shave that "Hobo" face of his.

In gun control push, Obama abandons logic and facts said...


What did you expect Forte, the lackey, to do? It's laughable on that level, but much more serious as a whole.

Obama is shamelessly standing on the graves of Sandy Hook to push an agenda which offers no solutions to the problem.

The agenda is what matters to Obama, not the actual problem.

Follow the link.

Here's a snippet:

"Whenever a politician proposes a policy surrounded by children, skepticism is in order. But skepticism, logic and sound argumentation are the enemies of President Obama in his gun control push, which kicked off Wednesday on a White House stage filled with kids.

After December's Sandy Hook massacre, Obama has reached deeper than usual into his bag of debater's tricks and rhetorical ploys. He assigns evil motives to those who disagree with him on policy. He tries to pre-empt cost-benefit analysis with facile assertions that any policy is mandatory if it will save "only one life." And the most contentious policy he seeks -- a ban on so-called assault weapons -- has near zero correlation to the problem he claims to be addressing."

Anonymous said...

Hey dumb ass the shootings that has caused these gun issues to be possibly outlawed was caused by white men. They (white men) are the ones doing the mass shootings. You racist prick.

Guns and the Government said...


Forte supports unconstitutional actions by Obama? Well, knock me down with a feather! Whodathunkit?!

Maybe he should read this snippet(follow the link for the entire article):

"The Supreme Court has ruled consistently and countless times that the "police power," that is, the power to regulate for health, safety, welfare and morality, continues to be reposed in the states, and that there is no federal police power. All of this is consistent with the philosophical principle of "subsidiarity," famously articulated by St. Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas argued that the problems that are closest to the people needing government intervention should be addressed by the government closest to those people. Its corollary is that all governmental intervention should be the minimum needed.

Now, back to Obama and Biden and their colleagues in the government. If the feds have no legitimate role in maintaining safety, why are they getting involved in the current debate over guns? We know that they don't trust individuals to address their own needs, from food to health to safety, and they think—the Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding—that they know better than we do how to care for ourselves. Obama and Biden and many of their colleagues in government are the same folks who gave us Obamacare, with its mandates, invasions of privacy, increased costs and federal regulation of health care. They call themselves progressives, as they believe that the federal government possesses unlimited powers and can do whatever those who run it want it to do, except that which is expressly prohibited.

This brings us back to guns. The Constitution expressly prohibits all governments from infringing upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This permits us to defend ourselves when the police can't or won't, and it permits a residue of firepower in the hands of the people with which to stop any tyrant who might try to infringe upon our natural rights, and it will give second thoughts to anyone thinking about tyranny.

The country is ablaze with passionate debate about guns, and the government is determined to do something about it. Debate over public policy is good for freedom. But the progressives want to use the debate to justify the coercive power of the government to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding folks because of what some crazies among us have done. We must not permit this to happen.

The whole purpose of the Constitution is to insulate personal freedom from the lust for power of those in government and from the passions of the people who sent them there."

Anonymous said...

After watching and reading everything the police chief wrote, I Have Zero respect for KCPD

Anonymous said...

Is Forte actually in charge of anything?

Really?

Wow! The KCPD leadership is regressing.

He's the poster boy for continued State control of the KCPD.

On that note, if Sly was in charge of the PD there would be no more squad cars. A police streetcar system costing $92.5 Billion would be built to "Stop Crime By Choo-Choo".

Today, America stands on the verge of domestic war precisely because America stands on the verge of dictatorship. said...


Forte is doing what the agenda calls for. He has no mind of his own or real talent for the position he holds. He's a puppet on a string.

The commenter at 7:54 AM raised this point:

"Big city police Chiefs(politically controlled) favor whatever their masters desire. The poor beat cops(who for the most part are thrown under the bus when they need support from above) don't. Prove me wrong. Talk to me beat cops."

I agree.

Here is a bit of perspective of what it is coming to in our nation (and includes the assertion that rank-and-file police, etc., are on the side of liberty as well).:

"Obama's political doublespeak and veiled hatred for any who oppose his personal views are near-perfect echoes of the mannerisms of history's murderous tyrants. Obama is not yet a mass murderer -- not unless you count unmanned drone bombings of children in other nations -- but he has set the stage for it, and America today stands as a tinderbox of potential revolt, ready to be ignited with even the slightest hint of further oppression.

True leadership is found in those who see the peace and prosperity of the nation as more important than their personal policy desires. To be a true leader is to put the future of the nation ahead of one's self; to steer America away from a dangerous rise in hate-filled rhetoric and the endless antagonizing of patriots and constitutionalists by the media, Hollywood and politicians.

Beware, radicals on the left. Beware what you wish for... and what you unleash. Your continued insulting and "terrorist" labeling of legal firearms owners across America is only strengthening the resolve of those you would be unwise to provoke. Do not make the mistake of thinking that the military and law enforcement are on your side; they are not. The most capable defenders of American society today are also the most dedicated, sworn defenders of the American constitution and its Bill of Rights. If you press your fascist agenda too far, you will trigger an almost automatic response from every sector of society, law enforcement and the military."


Follow the link for the entire article.

Anonymous said...

You speak the truth. Sincerely, law enforcement member.

Anonymous said...

Quit making fun of Forte. He's self smarted!!!

Anonymous said...

What a crock of shit kcpd has turned out to be. I mean you can't even hide it anymore. The incompetence is just so apparent. And this guy is the chief of police? I mean really?
This is so embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

I fella smart ? I do fella smart !

Anonymous said...

The only way to address urban violence is to send the police in to do what they do best. They are currently hamstrung by the black racist command staff who has no clue what they are doing. EVERYONE in positions of power; mayor, chief, kcstar, etc all refuse to address or speak about the black subculture of violence.

Anonymous said...

We all have excuses

Doing my best said...

Please keep in mind that Chief Forte' is NOT the Kansas City Police Department. He is the Chief, but he is only one (1) person. His opinions and decisions do not always (in fact, rarely ever) reflect the attitudes of the hundreds of KCPD employees actually doing police work. The Chief and his lackeys may be in the public eye negatively influencing the public perception of the KCPD, but the working stiffs are still out there, day in and day out, responding to the citizenry when they call for help, trying to meet their needs in a fair and impartial manner.

The REAL cops are trying. Really, we are.

Anonymous said...

What do you expect? Affirmative action and all this liberal multicultural bullshit has destroyed us from within.

Byron said...

Anon 10:21

Your comment is self-contradictory. You're saying that if we call you crazy gun owners, you will get mad & shot us. Thank you for making our point. It is you who are the lunatic, fascist fringe. Most Americans are not armed & ready to start a civil war. Most Americans would rather not be distracted from their middle class, middle school mini-dramas.

Anonymous said...

Get off of the teat Byron.

Be a man.

Stick to your own local issues as well. No-one in KC gives a rip what a Social Services leech from West Virginia thinks.

Byron said...

I guess you didn't see the post where Tony welcomed my comments. You should start an email campaign urging Tony to block to block my IP. But, unlike you, Tony is a stanch advocate for the first amendment.

Oh NO!!! Tony, Tell Us It Isn't So! said...


Tony,

Why did you tell Byron that you want to stop or restrict the first amendment?



stanch
/stônCH/

Verb

1.Stop or restrict (a flow of blood) from a wound.
2.Stop the flow of blood from (a wound).

Synonyms

staunch - stop - stem

Byron said...

whatever ...

You know what I meant. Keep attacking the messenger, because its not effective.

Anonymous said...

We hope Tony isn't a stench advocate.

Superdave said...

The Adam Lanza's of America have always been here and always will be. They'll commit atrocities such as Newtown whether with an AR-15, handgun, knife, brick, etc. It's not a "God given" right to have guns, it's a God given right to defend yourself and a constitutional right to do so with a gun. One only has to look at recent history to see the effects of banning guns. I suggest doing a little research on gun related crime statistics in Australia, both pre and post nation-wide gun ban. Car-jackings, armed robbery, home invasions, murders have all increased, and not by a little. I recognize the fact that there is a problem with gun related violence in our country and I wish that I had a solution, but I am certain that taking the guns out of the hands of law-abiding, responsible citizens and leaving whatever is left in the hands of individuals who are up to no good is no solution either.

Anonymous said...

That's some Superior Daveulocity

Anonymous said...

Forte is awful and needs to go now. So does deputy chief hundley.

Anonymous said...

If having a 30 round clip in my pocket vs three, ten round clips is a solution then the mathematicians must be in complete awe. If defining most black rifles as assault weapons is the answer then we have reached the ultimale level of ignorance for a modern society. Nevertheless a few ignorant politicians will serve up some hogwash bill and the ultraleft will jump on the bandwagon while absolutely nothing will happen to crime statistics. I agree there needs to be a solution to issues of violence, but it has to be a SOLUTION - not some joke of a piece of legislation that hypes up the winning team, but has near nothing to do with safety or reducing violence. People need to get their heads out and be objective instead of riding the ol' drama queen train.

Anonymous said...

Let's start with getting the prosecutors to charge people for gun crimes then get the judge to lock them up not give out probation....oh wait taking guns from people who legally own them and do not commit crimes would be easier! At least that looks like the politicians are doing something....at the naive people think so

Anonymous said...

You hear the sounds of an intruder breaking into your home during the night/day… You go to your phone to dial 911 (5 to 10 seconds). You dial 911 and get the call taker who asks you several questions for the situation (20 seconds) Call taker finally sends info to the dispatcher who reads the call before dispatching (another 10-20 sec at best) Dispatcher puts the call out by radio to the officer (if available).
I suggest many look at KCPD’s current manpower and number of officers on the street any given time per patrol division.
Okay, intruder just kicked the door after 40 -45 seconds. Cops are on the way and average response time is 3-4 minutes in a perfect scenario of location, call time, etc. Now, I ask all the anti-gun group…Which would you rather have in that scenario? A gun to protect you and your family in an immediate situation or wait the perfect scenario of 3-4 minutes for the good guys to get there? And yes, this is a perfect time elapsed scenario. You make the choice. Sh*t happens quick!