< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed  (Read 2580 times)

Offline unfy

  • Lead Benefactor
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Location: TN (was La Vista, NE)
  • Posts: 1830
  • !!! SCIENCE !!!
Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« on: July 19, 2013, 03:49:18 PM »
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/07/19/3041852/commission-allows-omaha-mayors.html



The administrator of the Omaha Douglas Public Building Commission granted the request for Chief of Staff Marty Bilek, who served for 38 years with the Douglas County Sheriff's Office. He retired from his position as chief deputy to accept the position with Stothert.



I approve.  Baby steps.

Also, recently spiff with fire fighter's stuff is also a thumbs up in my book so far.
hoppe's #9 is not the end all be all woman catching pheramone people make it out to be ... cause i smell of it 2 or 3 times a week but remain single  >:D

Offline Chris C

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2008
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 269
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2013, 05:12:16 PM »
:thumbs up:

Offline David Hineline

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Location: South Sioux City
  • Posts: 562
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2013, 02:13:33 AM »
Isn't it nice she has special security that the common citizen can not get?  And security that our children can not have in schools.
Machinegun owners blow thier load with one pull of the trigger

Offline CliffD

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 182
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2013, 08:09:39 AM »
I'll give her/them a thumbs up myself. This slight change of course in direction is a lot more optimistic than the path we've been on.

Offline AWick

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2013
  • Location: West Millard
  • Posts: 350
  • Home is where your armory is.
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2013, 09:10:33 AM »
I like the fact that the method to provide her added protection is by simply arming a current employee. And even better that this particular employee has so much experience in law enforcement and correspondingly firearms. That is what I call not only a step in the right direction but knowing and using your resources.
"Well-regulated" meant well equipped, trained and disciplined... not controlled with an iron fist.

Offline NE Bull

  • 2011 NFOA Firearm Rights Champion Award winner
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 3501
    • A "friend's" blog
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2013, 10:25:19 AM »
The only thing that that I see that could be a better story, is Mayor Stothert arming herself. ;) A pistol totin' lady mayor- now wouldn't that send a message?
“It is not an issue of being afraid, It's an issue of not being afraid to protect myself.”
 Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert
 "A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that."  Shane

Offline OnTheFly

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 2617
  • NFOA member #364
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2013, 12:30:41 PM »
And even better that this particular employee has so much experience in law enforcement and correspondingly firearms.

If you are saying he had a specialized job as a Sheriff, such as weapons instructor, then I would agree with that statement.

If you are saying he has a lot of experience with firearms simply because he was a Sheriff's deputy, then I would say that is not always true.

The Sheriffs may have more weapons training than other police departments, but unless they were specialized in their job which required more than average use of firearms, then Sheriff does not necessarily equal experienced in firearms.

Not trying to insult any officers of the peace here, but I know a LOT of people who put more rounds downrange than most LEOs.  I've also met some officers who didn't know the model of firearm they were issued.  When i asked one officer what they carried, they said "Beretta".  When I asked what model, they said "Beretta 40".

ETA: Overall, I think this staff member carrying is a good thing.  However, the ignorance of the non-gunners is that the police are "highly" trained and us people on the street are just morons that are going to soot themselves or an innocent bystander.  This is the bigger hurdle we need to overcome.  The elite (Politicians, celebs, etc.) will always be granted these benefits, and all they have to do is give a person the right to carry a gun just because they had a badge in a prior job.  Even though they may have barely passed the shooting requirements each year.

Fly
« Last Edit: July 20, 2013, 07:20:45 PM by OnTheFly »
Si vis pacem, para bellum

Offline AWick

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2013
  • Location: West Millard
  • Posts: 350
  • Home is where your armory is.
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2013, 02:09:02 PM »
Fly,

Yeah, I agree with that. Just because someone is a LEO doesn't mean their a weapons expert and also just because a person wasn't in the service or a LEO doesn't mean that they're incapable or less than capable of their counterparts. I don't like the idea that LEOs automatically get special "rights and privileges" because of their badge even when they're off duty or retired.

A gun-toting lady mayor would be in stark contrast to mayors elsewhere. A woman taking her own protection into her hands instead of the **** eating grin fake empty suits that of other big cities. :)
"Well-regulated" meant well equipped, trained and disciplined... not controlled with an iron fist.

Offline OnTheFly

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 2617
  • NFOA member #364
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2013, 07:18:39 PM »
A gun-toting lady mayor would be in stark contrast to mayors elsewhere. A woman taking her own protection into her hands instead of the **** eating grin fake empty suits that of other big cities. :)

If one of these elites actually took responsibility for their own personal protection, then THAT would be the best thing for our cause.

Fly
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 12:42:52 AM by OnTheFly »
Si vis pacem, para bellum

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2013, 08:30:46 PM »
I believe it is only right that even though the  "building" didn't allow concealed weapons Marty Belik be allowed an exception while working for the mayor simply because as a LEO for 38 years he probably has put away a few bad guys.  No doubt there are a  couple among that number who  would love to "get  even" and aren't concerned about gun laws and gun free zones.  What better place would there be to ambush someone than a "gun free" zone?

I'm in exactly the same situation, which is the reason why I got my CCW.   I make it a point to stay out of GFZ's as much as possible, and never advertise where I'll be at any given time.

Offline ProtoPatriot

  • Post approval required
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Posts: 175
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2013, 08:55:09 PM »
This is not really in the  "right direction"... politicians have no problem making exceptions for themselves or those they can benefit from....this has never changed and never will (just look how they like to exempt themselves from Obamacare and gun control).

So, nothing new here and nothing has moved anywhere....this decision means nothing.


LEO = woopy doo-da when it comes to firearms....they are nothing special.
The USA is a Republic...
This is a Democracy...
This is not the USA...

Offline CliffD

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 182
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2013, 10:21:14 PM »
I would rather read in the news that our new Mayor is requesting a concealed gun be allowed versus reading that our ex-Mayor is focusing his campaign on gun control. That is the change in direction I referred to.

Offline ProtoPatriot

  • Post approval required
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Posts: 175
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2013, 10:59:50 PM »
I would rather read in the news that our new Mayor is requesting a concealed gun be allowed versus reading that our ex-Mayor is focusing his campaign on gun control. That is the change in direction I referred to.

I'm sorry, but what's new? What's good for us?

So, the politicians and those close to them continue to have armed protection while the rest of us are left defenseless...what's new?

And again, this is to "protect the mayor"...nothing new that they will arm those around them to safeguard themselves.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20130719/NEWS/130719192

And this isn't the first time this kind of "exception" has been made.


When they disband registration, purchase permits, CCW permits, killing zones ("gun free zones"), and realize that public property (including that city building, courts, etc.) is owned by the populace (including those that exercise their rights and arm themselves) and not the government...

Then there will be something to cheer about.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2013, 11:03:41 PM by ProtoPatriot »
The USA is a Republic...
This is a Democracy...
This is not the USA...

Offline CliffD

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 182
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2013, 11:29:43 PM »
You do realize we are of the same mind here, right? :)

I'm not cheering by any means, my reply was a simple "thumbs up". I agree with you on where we should be, where we need to be. This is all only a step in the right direction for a change.

Offline ProtoPatriot

  • Post approval required
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Posts: 175
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2013, 11:57:21 PM »
You do realize we are of the same mind here, right? :)

I'm not cheering by any means, my reply was a simple "thumbs up". I agree with you on where we should be, where we need to be. This is all only a step in the right direction for a change.

Yes, I do...

But I am just trying to figure out what this "change" is that you are talking about...

A politician has armed someone to protect them (the politician) while leaving the rest of us defenseless... nothing new..."exceptions" like this occur all the time.

Is it just that it was in the "news"? Because I really don't find this "news"...stuff like this makes the news from time to time...

I have question for the mayor though....if they need the increased protection...what do they have planned? and for which cause does their plan benefit?

I know they also claim it's for his protection...but what about our protection?

"Cohen said this is the first concealed-carry request from the Mayor's Office in his 13 years at the commission, but he said he would approve other requests if applicants could prove they needed to carry a gun as part of their job."

So, government officials/representatives lives are more important than our lives? We have to justify why we want to be able to defend ourselves?

The police get to carry their guns into banks and other "restricted" places all the time...their lives are somehow more important?
The sheriffs carry in the courts and such...their lives are somehow more important?
Secret Service carries everywhere...their lives are somehow more important?
Who is going to protect us from the LEOs?

LEOs are not there for our protection (even our corrupt courts recognized that)...that is just an inadvertent side-effect that may occur from time to time...and sure some may actually put their life on the for someone else...but most of the time the officer is merely defending themselves as an attacker is going to target the biggest threat first and that would be the officer.

I know ....preaching to the quire....I am just saying this to illustrate there is nothing new here.

(BTW...Nothing against the good LEOs out there, they are few...but just recognizing the reality of things...though I don't agree with anything more than a small sheriffs office and maybe the secret service...no city/state/etc. police... sheriffs once enlisted the populace in the enforcement of law directly as needed (i.e. manhunts), we should do that again...not to mention the sheriffs are elected, they have the final say on law enforcement in their county, even over the state and feds.)
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 12:22:09 AM by ProtoPatriot »
The USA is a Republic...
This is a Democracy...
This is not the USA...

Offline Husker_Fan

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 717
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #15 on: July 21, 2013, 07:00:06 AM »
I like it. Anything that desensitizes the general populace to the idea of concealed carry is a good thing.

Offline CliffD

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 182
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2013, 07:28:19 AM »
You are making some very good, very strong points. And like I eluded to, I can't argue with you.

I may be the black sheep here, but to be honest, I don't mind a lot of the current gun control laws we have. I know without a doubt I would never fire a firearm at anyone ever unless it was literally a life or death situation. I can't even imagine it to be honest. I know a very large portion of the member's of this forum are the same way. Even a large portion of our society fits this description. I'd be just fine knowing you are armed and I am not while we're hanging out together.

I don't mind having a background check ran on me if I buy a firearm. I don't mind having to wait a few hours/days for the Sheriff to run a background check before allowing me to freely purchase firearms. I don't mind having to go to a class before I can legally conceal carry. I don't mind...because I know others are doing it too. I am adamant about not giving up any more freedoms, but our current "inconveniences" do not permit me from buying any firearm I would ever want. I grew up with my rifle in the rack behind the seat of my truck. No one ever discussed gun safety because we lived it. We respected firearms, but viewed them only as tools. I guess you could say I was raised responsibly and expect the same from my fellow citizens.

In essence, the Sheriffs, Deputies, Police Officers, etc are YOUR paid, armed protective service. Us everyday people don't have the means (or necessity thank God) to hire a paid gun man to accompany us on our routine through out the day. Granted, if I am caught speeding, I am going to pay a fine. But, I also know these same law enforcement officers wouldn't hesitate to draw and fire on anyone who threatened me if I am unable to defend myself.

Why is our Mayor allowed an exception or say someone like me? Well, for one thing, nearly everyone in this city knows her, very, very few people here know me. There isn't a thing I do that will ever cause someone to lose their property, make their taxes go up or cause their children to have to go to a different school. Our Mayor is at a lot higher risk of offending someone than I am.

As confirmed earlier, this recent allowance is not earth shattering news, its not reason to celebrate and claim victory. It is merely a positive bit of news in what has been months of anti gun discussions and actions. Per the organized effort of our Board Members and others here in the Association, I wrote a LOT of emails and made a LOT of phone calls several months ago. I voted for a Mayor that I felt was a positive change for us all. I am an advocate of legal gun ownership and promote gun safety any time I discuss firearms. I am member of the NRA and I freely donate finances to this Association. I don't mind at all that our Mayor understands and accepts firearms.

The most important thing though that I want to say...is after reading your signature, I want to thank you for your Service :)




Offline AWick

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2013
  • Location: West Millard
  • Posts: 350
  • Home is where your armory is.
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2013, 07:47:01 AM »
I like it. Anything that desensitizes the general populace to the idea of concealed carry is a good thing.

This is a big one. I have some very liberal anti gun friends that actually agree and are comfortable with CC. This is a news article that gets broadcast that puts CC in a positive light and that's what we need more of. It's hard to get changes for the better when we lose the propaganda battle on a nightly basis when they cover the near daily shooting in Omaha. Those shootings are almost all gang, drug, or illegal activity involved but people don't connect the dots that they broke tons of laws to even obtain those firearms.
"Well-regulated" meant well equipped, trained and disciplined... not controlled with an iron fist.

Offline NE Bull

  • 2011 NFOA Firearm Rights Champion Award winner
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 3501
    • A "friend's" blog
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2013, 09:02:41 AM »
Having spoke to the new Mayor numerous times, and knowing that she is a huge supporter of the NFOA  (in the past, was pretty much the only person on the city council that listened to what we had to say and and reiterated it to the council- almost to the point of - "Hey, listen to what Andy and the boys are telling us. Maybe we have this wrong and what do we need to do to make it right. " )
I believe this my be a little wink in our direction to let us know she hasn't forgotten us. ;)  At least I hope so.
I truly think, with Mayor Stothert in place and some work, we may be able to remove Omaha's handgun registration, which would be a huge step.

“It is not an issue of being afraid, It's an issue of not being afraid to protect myself.”
 Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert
 "A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that."  Shane

Offline ProtoPatriot

  • Post approval required
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Posts: 175
Re: Commission allows Omaha mayor's aide to be armed
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2013, 11:57:10 AM »
Having spoke to the new Mayor numerous times, and knowing that she is a huge supporter of the NFOA

If this is true, great...but never should a politician, they should be watched over with a magnifying glass.

There are many examples of politicians doing things to placate (or play off people's emotions for what they want....Johnson, Bush(jr), etc.) people while behind the scenes they move to destroy them.

I like it. Anything that desensitizes the general populace to the idea of concealed carry is a good thing.

Yes and no...it shouldn't be desensitizing, it should be about educating them to realize what the real problems are. That objects are not the problem and that the so called controls on the objects are actually controls on people.

Not desensitize, but knowledge that someone with an object is not the problem, that it is the person they must look at. It should be the norm to see weapons. Basically to where they want to see people armed.

Desensitizing is very bad thing for any purpose.

(Though, I do suppose that is what you are actually meaning.)


In essence, the Sheriffs, Deputies, Police Officers, etc are YOUR paid, armed protective service.


Not so actually. They are paid to enforce laws, but they supposed to enforce certain laws over others when there are conflicts in the law (i.e. Constitution enforced over all other laws). They are not paid to protect us, nor would it be a good idea for us to do so or think so. When you outsource your personal safety and protection to someone else, you have just given that person control over you.

The individual is the ONLY one that can protect themselves, no one else can or be required to do so (btw - requiring someone to do so would be a violation of that persons rights...if that person chooses to do so, that is their choice...and no one has any right to put someone else in danger for their sake).

After all, for a crime to occur at all, there has to be 2 individuals involved (property is an extension of the individual). Who is already at the scene from the very beginning? The victim. Law enforcement are never and can never be there, except of course on the off chance they are the victim or randomly walk onto the scene as things kick off.

Law enforcement (and government in general) are pure reactionary, as it should be. They can only get involved after the fact. Giving them pro-active powers would mean we no longer or soon will no longer have any rights at all.

"Security/Safety provided by another, is nothing more than tyranny breaking in through the back door."

Remember: Governments loves crime, it gives them a way to push laws/regulations to take control over the people. It is in government's best interest to keep crime levels high and people in fear. That is yet another reason why the better armed the populace is, the safer the populace is.
The USA is a Republic...
This is a Democracy...
This is not the USA...