Baltimore County, Md., Police Chief James Johnson [see correction at the end of this post] was brought in to testify at today’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on gun violence.┬áJohnson, a self-professed hunting enthusiast and gun owner, doesn’t see any reason for regular citizens to carry guns:

NRA Chief Wayne LaPierre defended the Second Amendment, stating that it gives citizens the right to defend themselves against government tyranny. According to Chief Johnson, though, citizens don’t really need to defend themselves. The constitutional right to self-defense is way overrated, and people like LaPierre who believe the Second Amendment should be upheld are totally “creepy”:

Thanks, Chief Johnson, for your input. And you’re more than welcome to practice what you preach and surrender your weapons. Meanwhile, we “creepy” bitter clingers will continue to defend ourselves against tyranny, as is our right.

Editor’s note: This post originally referred to Johnson as the “Baltimore police chief.” It has been amended to reflect that he is the Baltimore County police chief. Additionally, we incorrectly reported that Johnson’s remarks were about the Second Amendment; they were in fact regarding LaPierre’s explanation of the Second Amendment. The post has been corrected to reflect that distinction. We apologize for the errors.

  • WJJ Hoge

    And now you know why I avoid Baltimore whenever possible.

  • therantinggeek

    *facepalm*

  • Jack Deth

    Says the politically appointed, corrupt Police Chief of one the mangiest third world s*it holes on the east coast.

    Last trip to Baltimore was to pick up a .45 ACP Commander two decades ago. Would not return under threat of death.

    • NRPax

      My Reserve Unit is spitting distance from Baltimore. I don’t blame you for your opinion about that place.

  • Steve_J

    Creepy is having a Chief of Police that isn’t concerned with the safety of the citizens of his city.

    • UNHATER

      Ask him about his oath he took. Why isn’t he being fired?

      • Modres

        Same reason Mr. Obama hasn’t been impeached yet…when you take an oath and lie, you’re fine…unless you’re a conservative.

  • RIChris

    Chief Johnson’s views, and those of his gun-grabbing cohorts, are why we have the Second Amendment. Feinstein’s aim to exempt ‘government officials’ from gun control legislation is another reason.

  • scott

    You people know nothing about Baltimore, and chief Johnson is not from Baltimore. Baltimore County is very different.

  • TocksNedlog

    And then Gabby Giffords, bless her heart, got up there and literally said “We have to do SOMETHING!”
    It truly is a disease, this notion that life is supposed to be a Utopia and any aspect of life that isn’t perfect can be brought closer to perfection by means of government control.

    • Modres

      And simply proves that Congress is too often willing to make laws based on EMOTION, as opposed to reason and certainly NOT based on the Constitution.

      • UNHATER

        Not emotion. Agenda 21 is what is going on. Can’t have a utopia with gun’s…

        • Modres

          Right, but they are using emotion as the public reason for changing the law. I agree with you though about Agenda 21.

  • Gary DeBates

    The economy right now is more important. Talk about guns later.

    • 1SkepticalChick

      Most of us are capable of talking about more than one thing. Shallow voters only paying attention to one thing is part of the problem. We have multiple problems, we should be multitasking. Kinda like walking and chewing gum at the same time. Exactly when should we talk about guns? Before or after they’ve taken them away from us?

      • Gary DeBates

        Yes Kenna I agree with you ,alot of problems out there. Guns are important to me also, and more shootings etc. today. So where do we really start?

        • 1SkepticalChick

          Guns, economy, immigration, government spending, taxes, education….just go to the Twitchy Home Page, choose one, and start talking. Jumping into comments responding to a report about gun-grabbing and then saying you don’t want to talk about that right now, you’d rather talk about something else is what? Why try to change the subject here? Others want to talk about now. Just not you.
          Ha! Gary Debates…got it.

          • Gary DeBates

            OK Kenna I just got connected with twitchy . Will have alot to say later on. I have been on other sites. I respect your opinions and hope to hear more from you in days to come. I live in Mt. so I hope you already know what I think about guns. The rest we will talk about later.

          • Gary DeBates

            OK Kenna I just got connected with twitchy . Will have alot to say later on. I have been on other sites. I respect your opinions and hope to hear more from you in days to come. I live in Mt. so I hope you already know what I think about guns. The rest we will talk about later.

  • V the K

    And they wonder why people don’t trust them when they claim “We’re not coming for your guns.”

  • Guest

    geography! good job, everyone!

  • Bob

    Jim Johnson is a typical police administrator and politician…he is so narrow minded when asked today what evidence he had to support his opinions he couldn’t answer the question because he has NONE..he has been with the same agency for over 30 yrs and has a real lack of oversight ..he fails to accept the facts which are in geographic areas like his led by liberals and have the highest amount of gun control and regulations his homicide rates and crimes with guns are way high whereas other areas of the country with b=very little gun control laws crimes with guns including homicudes are way less ..those are the simple facts ..joNhson is a Obama strong supporter and gives working street police officers a bad name .. background checks are great ..but lets not control law abidding cits ..

  • j.k. rollin’

    If anyone cares about facts:
    Baltimore County Police investigated 23 criminal homicides in 2012, a decrease of 20.7% from the previous five-year average of 29 homicides.

    Read More at: http://foxbaltimore.com/news/features/fighting/stories/baltimore-county-homicides-decrease-more-than-20-2012-28.shtml#.UQl2MfIZ-So

    • NRPax

      Actually, we do care about facts. And you notice that the linked article has nothing to do with a Police Chief making derogatory statements about citizens who want to be able to protect themselves?

      • j.k. rollin’

        Prior to the correction, the article implied that the chief was from Baltimore City, which DOES have a higher crime rate. Baltimore County, where this chief serves, does not. Context is important, even if it doesn’t support your agenda.

        • NRPax

          And again, did you notice that your linked article still has nothing to do with his statement? And I suppose you noticed that a correction was made in the above post?

          • j.k. rollin’

            Of course it doesn’t. I never said it did.

            Again, prior to the correction this article and the screen shots included, implied that the chief had no leg to stand on because he served in Baltimore (city). That was the purpose of my post. You can have whatever opinion you wish to have about what he said.

          • 1SkepticalChick

            I call strawman.

        • rinodino

          I guess twitchy makes mistakes as well, go figure??? most on this site won’t understand it’s not just the big bad scary left wing media that makes mistakes, but thank you for bringing logic to the discussion

          • NRPax

            Mind you, unlike the media, Twitchy quickly owns up and corrects their mistakes. Most of the media only does it while kicking and screaming.

        • Modres

          Tell that to MSNBC, will you? Thanks…

    • Michelle

      What do statistics about 6 fewer murders in Baltimore County last year have to do with my 2nd Amendments Rights and this Police Chief thinking I shouldn’t have them?

      • NRPax

        Because “shut up”, they explained. -:-)

        • Michelle

          Did you just heckle me? Bwahahaha.

          • NRPax

            All in good fun. Don’t mind me.

  • Michelle

    Anyone else notice we’re seeing stories of Police Chiefs backing the gun grabbing, but County Sheriffs saying they’ll refuse to enforce any new Federal gun laws? And here’s why…Police Chiefs are appointed, usually by city councils, they answer to city government. They don’t care what you and I think, they care only about the people who can fire them – the city suits. Sheriffs are elected – by folks like you and me, they answer to us because they know it’s the people who can vote them out of a job.

    • NRPax

      Not only that, but Police Chiefs wouldn’t be the ones getting their hands dirty if orders to confiscate weapons were given.

  • baggerrider

    Chief Johnson I am happy to inform you that the 2A is not about protecting us from proper law enforcement. It protects us from creeps like Durbin.

    • UNHATER

      He is NOT proper law enforcement. He took an oath. He should be gone..

  • 2ifbyT

    Durbin is an idiot.

  • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

    Police carry guns for their OWN protection, NOT YOURS! Buy a gun.

  • arrow2010

    Can we dismiss the notion that all LEO are on our side?

  • camnpat

    As Jason Lewis always says, the cop on the street understands the importance of people being able to protect themselves. On the other hand, the “chiefs” and those with political aspirations within these police departments are always anti-gun.

  • Modres

    These morons from the Left are actually given attention. If the guy knew history and the Constitution, he would realize just how ignorant and uneducated his comment is…

    These elitists all think the same way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.gray.967806 Robert Gray

    First, I would ask the Chief if he would support the use of guns to defend against an armed invasion by multiple perpetrators. He would probably agree that is reasonable. Second, I would ask if he would support the use of guns to defend when being shot at by a group of armed thugs. He would probably agree that is reasonable as well. I would then provide some examples for my two questions. For the first question, I would list several instances across the US where police SWAT teams invaded the wrong home in the middle of the night and innocent people waking to hear their doors and windows being broken down and in the dark seeing masked men in black carrying and pointing rifles. I would say those people would be justified to fire away if possible and kill as many cops as possible. For the second question, I would cite the instance where Louisiana police fired their weapons toward innocent persons to keep them from evacuating New Orleans after Katrina. If any of those individuals believed they were being directly fired upon, they had the right to fire back and kill as many cops as possible. So it is not so farfetched to believe that the police may act in a way that requires a legally justified armed response from ordinary citizens.

  • http://www.facebook.com/robert.gray.967806 Robert Gray

    First, I would ask the Chief if he would support the use of guns to defend against an armed invasion by multiple perpetrators. He would probably agree that is reasonable. Second, I would ask if he would support the use of guns to defend when being shot at by a group of armed thugs. He would probably agree that is reasonable as well. I would then provide some examples for my two questions. For the first question, I would list several instances across the US where police SWAT teams invaded the wrong home in the middle of the night and innocent people waking to hear their doors and windows being broken down and in the dark seeing masked men in black carrying and pointing rifles. I would say those people would be justified to fire away if possible and kill as many cops as possible. For the second question, I would cite the instance where Louisiana police fired their weapons toward innocent persons to keep them from evacuating New Orleans after Katrina. If any of those individuals believed they were being directly fired upon, they had the right to fire back and kill as many cops as possible. So it is not so farfetched to believe that the police may act in a way that requires a legally justified armed response from ordinary citizens.