Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

I know there are quite a few of the members here who are from Loudoun County. And I was curious on their thoughts for next Tuesday's election for the Sheriff.
My thoughts are as follows:

Steve Simpson: Current Sheriff. I have basically seen more crime every year in Eastern Loudoun under his leadership. Some may argue that it would happen with anyone as Sheriff, but I don't see his methods turning the trend around. I have seen a dramatic "Militarization" of the Deputy force under his tenure. Why does Loudoun County need a "SWAT Team"? If you read the newspapers in the area, you are seeing more and more frequently that Loudoun County Sheriff Department's Swat Team was called in or involved in some way.

Mike Chapman: Reading about him, his past worries me. He spent 7 years on a SWAT team and 23 years in the DEA which quite often employees SWAT style tactics in raids. He was trained as SWAT, so his solutions will most likely lead towards SWAT. Again what I see happening if he is elected is a continued escalation of force and more militarization of Deputies. We have seen that this doesn't work under Simpson's leadership. Why will it work under Chapman's?

Ron Speakman: It is a little concerning that he has been out of the law enforcement for a while. But that can cut both ways. He will probably be less likely to run the Sheriff's department the "Same ole way". But he may not be as familiar with current issues as the other two candidates may be facing the County. I think the one big plus for Speakman is that out of all three candidates, he is the only one to address the 2nd amendment on his issues tab of their campaign websites. He not only addresses it, he goes so far as to officially support "Castle Doctrine."

While no one favors a scenario in which every individual is an armed vigilante, law abiding citizens in the privacy of their own homes should not have their right to self-defense compromised by the protections extended to dangerous criminals in the pursuit of a felony.

To be honest I do not like that he limits it to "in the privacy of their own homes", but that is more than the other 2 candidates have addressed on this topic.


So other Loudoun County residents what say you? Heck even you are not a Loudoun resident I would still be interested to hear your opinions.

Simpson: He's crooked. Look into his dealings with el Atari and you see why he needs to go.

Speakman - psyco idiot. Cheated on his wife twice and sent a photo of a penis (not his) to a female co-worker as a "joke."

Chapman - no skeletons (so far) and a staunch supported of 2A rights. Endoresed by the VCDL.

Why wouldnt you have a SWAT team? Just about everyone does. Its like saying why do they need a sex crimes unit or auto theft unit. Because they are used is ways other members of the department arent. They serve as a special purpose or tool as does every other specialty unit in a police department. Dont know if Loudouns swat team should be the deciding factor of the election...Police departments are "para military" structure. Loudoun Deputies arent notorious for being the gestapo

SDChop wrote:Why wouldnt you have a SWAT team? Just about everyone does.

So you want to keep up with the "Jones"? That mentality is what caused this predicament we are in. Deep debt and it just keeps getting deeper. If the monetary cost isn't enough to argue against it, then look at the cost of life other such SWAT teams have caused.

Marine Killed:
http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/16/marin ... tours-in-i
Cop Died, Father defending his home initially sentenced to death, but now granted a new trial:
http://news.change.org/stories/new-tria ... -maye-case\
Girl killed by Cop:
http://newworldorderreport.com/News/tab ... amera.aspx
When was the last time Pedophiles were actually violent against a cop? so why SWAT????:
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/a ... uter.shtml
Wrong House:
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=32704
92 year old woman shot and killed:
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/200 ... ice_kill_w

Another wrong house:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317398,00.html

Such mistakes are a fact of police work, some experts said.

Why are they? Thought LEOs were supposed to be held to a higher standard????

CATO Institute investigation from 2006 (the numbers have only increased in the last 5 years)
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476

Executive Summary

Americans have long maintained that a man's home is his castle and that he has the right to defend it from unlawful intruders. Unfortunately, that right may be disappearing. Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units (most commonly called Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT) for routine police work. The most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.

These increasingly frequent raids, 40,000 per year by one estimate, are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they're sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. These raids bring unnecessary violence and provocation to nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom were guilty of only misdemeanors. The raids terrorize innocents when police mistakenly target the wrong residence. And they have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries, not only of drug offenders, but also of police officers, children, bystanders, and innocent suspects.

This paper presents a history and overview of the issue of paramilitary drug raids, provides an extensive catalogue of abuses and mistaken raids, and offers recommendations for reform.

SDChop wrote: Its like saying why do they need a sex crimes unit or auto theft unit. Because they are used is ways other members of the department arent. They serve as a special purpose or tool as does every other specialty unit in a police department.

Loudoun County does not have a Police department. They have a Sheriffs Department. And personally I do not want a Police Department. As it has been noted in other posts, Police Departments inevitably becomes tools of the governmental politicians. Some may argue that Sheriffs Departments can become tools of the politicians too, but the difference is that the voters can kick out the Sheriff. The Voters are at the mercy of the governing body to kick out a Police Chief.

SDChop wrote: Dont know if Loudouns swat team should be the deciding factor of the election...

The reason I focused on the SWAT team is, because if you look at their websites, they all basically rehash the same platform: Crackdown on gangs and Crackdown on Illegals by implementing ICE agents 287 (training deputies to do federal responsibilities) and Crackdown on Drugs. Speakman was the only one to actually stand out by actually stating he supported Castle Doctrine.

SDChop wrote:Police departments are "para military" structure. Loudoun Deputies arent notorious for being the gestapo

Posse Comitatus was enacted to prevent the local governments from using the military for Law Enforcement. Why do you want a substitute military enforcing your laws? Can you tell me why Loudoun Deputies need Full Auto carbines? Especially when the average Citizen is faced with the defacto ban on full autos, because of the price caused by the NFA. Do you want to have to worry if the person you might have to shoot since they are breaking into your house and you don't know if they are some thug looking to score your TV, rape your wife or kill you, OR some Thug with a badge and a gun? Why should you have to wonder? The last thing you need to be thinking of at 4am is if the person coming up the stairs is a cop. When do you say stop militarizing the Sheriffs Department? When do you say they have gone too far?

KaosDad wrote:Simpson: He's crooked. Look into his dealings with el Atari and you see why he needs to go.

Speakman - psyco idiot. Cheated on his wife twice and sent a photo of a penis (not his) to a female co-worker as a "joke."

Chapman - no skeletons (so far) and a staunch supported of 2A rights. Endoresed by the VCDL.

Is VCDL really supporting Chapman? I don't see any endorsement on the VCDL site and I don't see any questionnaires that were sent to any of the Sheriff candidates. On Chapman's campaign website it does not mention any official VCDL endorsements. The closest I could find was that Ed Levine (who is part of VCDL) "Personally" endorsed Chapman. I also don't see any 2nd amendment supporting statements on his site. Clarification on these points would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for the info on Speakman, and anyone who has kept an eye on the Sheriffs department is all to familiar with the issues that Simpson presents.

Post as many headlines as you want. I can post headline after headline of a cop being killed by citizens. I can post storys of officers being shot and surviving and watching their partners, brothers being killed in the line of duty becuase they werent "swat trained" or had the same resources of a swat team. Swat causes debt? that is complete judgment. Everything causes debt, including schools which are not always taking a turn for the better unfortunately.

Why are officers expected to be at a higher standard. You frown upon them for making a mistake yet dont want them being robots, I suppose you NEVER made a mistake. Maybe you should focus your anger towards law makers rather then law enforcers

Your statement regarding.....

SDChop wrote:
Its like saying why do they need a sex crimes unit or auto theft unit. Because they are used is ways other members of the department arent. They serve as a special purpose or tool as does every other specialty unit in a police department.


Loudoun County does not have a Police department. They have a Sheriffs Department. And personally I do not want a Police Department. As it has been noted in other posts, Police Departments inevitably becomes tools of the governmental politicians. Some may argue that Sheriffs Departments can become tools of the politicians too, but the difference is that the voters can kick out the Sheriff. The Voters are at the mercy of the governing body to kick out a Police Chief.

SDChop wrote:
Dont know if Loudouns swat team should be the deciding factor of the election...

The reason I focused on the SWAT team is, because if you look at their websites, they all basically rehash the same platform: Crackdown on gangs and Crackdown on Illegals by implementing ICE agents 287 (training deputies to do federal responsibilities) and Crackdown on Drugs. Speakman was the only one to actually stand out by actually stating he supported Castle Doctrine.

First of all i know its a Sheriffs dept, i live here. Second of all you only stated Sheriffs being puppets and basically anti law enforcement.

Then you state you focus on the swat and the depts crackdown on gangs, 287G cert officers (to correct you) and crackdown on drugs.... uhhhh yes i care about that. No i want gang, drugs and illegals in my streets pleease. Oh wait its ok cause speakman said he supports castle so that makes it ok. Lets not have a proactive force taking care of gangs drugs and violence on the street so they can break in my house. But i will vote for speakman cause he says he supports castle so when i do and will shoot them he says i will be ok. God forbid my kids grow up in these streets where the swat teams and gangs teams are trying as humanly possible to clean it up. Or maybe they will hurt my kids cause they mistakes like every other person does.

Why do deputies need full auto carbines.....news flash, bad guys dont follow laws buddy. So as long as there are bad people who carry illegal guns, LE are out gunned and face fatal situations. Perhaps you would like to tell children, wives, mothers, brothers, sisters, husbands that their loves ones are dead cause you didnt think we needed specially trained units or full auto weapons.

Have you ever listened to a 911 call of a women being raped and taken against her will then held hostage? I have. So then yes i will tell you it takes units trained for those situations. Have you interviewed someone who had to fight for their life against an intruder in the middle of the night who cried for their life? I have. When the sheep are attacked by wolves they call on a sheep dog to save them, not some pencil pushing politician who says what you wanna hear about some bull crap doctrine about your castle. Bottom line, all politicians are gonna say what they think you wanna hear. Sorry if you buy into it, i rather have a sound LE dept with the resources they need to make it a safer living community.

Speakman Coverage:
http://wapo.st/rtwaHP

I stand corrected on the VCDL & Chapman. You are correct, it is a PERSONAL endorsement by Ed.

A few thoughts, being fairly deep into Loudoun Politics:

Steve Simpson: Agree with more crime each year. Population growth and the current democrat heavy Board of Supervisors have allowed more weight to befall residential growth rather than business growth and to accommodate a fledgling housing market, we see a massive influx of lower cost townhouses, rental apartments, etc. Equally, the metro will be coming to Loudoun with the new Sterling line stopping right at Rt606--no way is Loudoun prepared for the ease-of-access this will bring to our area. Simpson is a 16 year incumbent, very close to retirement regardless of whether he wins and has many outside business interests other than the Sheriff's department. One of those interests, his ownership in a sports drink called Nine Iron, has him in a major law suit by a partner alleging, among other situations, that he has sold product and/or contracts and illegally kept the funds for himself. Due to his oversight, a lawsuit was just filed against Simpson and the Sheriff's department by current Loudoun County Deputies for issues related to failure to pay overtime. Simpson was just involved in two FBI investigations into his campaign contributions and other associations. While a decent person, it is simply time for Simpson to go and definitely time for new law enforcement leadership for those of us in Loudoun. Finally, post 9-11, cooperation from other agencies, task forces, etc., where the Loudoun Sheriff's department is, in the least, informed, would seem SOP, but not here in Loudoun. Simpson does not have a TS clearance and will not get one so they do not even contact him when a situation occurs anywhere in Loudoun (and there are a number of them and growing). Speakman could not get at clearance due to his background yet Chapman has had a TS clearance for 20+ years, is currently TS or higher cleared and brings that ability. Remember, Loudoun has been a staging center for several terrorist related situations, back then and several very recent, but Simpson was not even aware or brought into the loop. Chapman will have a team of TS cleared Deputies to provide oversight in this area, not only protecting Loudoun from too much federal involvement yet invoke assistance when required.

Mike Chapman: Very clear from his history that he has a stellar law enforcement background. Yes it included SWAT but in no way should that worry anyone. The worry is in anyone wondering why Loudoun would need this experience which indicates that you may not be current on what is coming. In short, we don't need Loudoun becoming a Herndon, PWC or any of these surrounding places where there was no time for pro-active measures, it was reactive to the overrun of crime related to; drugs, gangs, immigration, etc. Loudoun has typically been a more affluent community separated by size, cost of living and being off the grid from convenient access. That is all changing NOW, therefore NOW, not 4 years from now and another election, is the time to bring in someone like Chapman to lead a pro-active movement. Mentioned was talk of the Castle Doctrine. While the current case law in VA is stronger than most of the Castle Doctrines enacted by many states, this is NOT a law-enforcement issue, it is legislative. The fact that Speakman is running his campaign, in part, on support for the Castle Doctrine, a legislative decision which in no way involves him, demonstrates that he is simply attempting to overshadow the fact that most voters hear these trigger words and think he must be a good candidate. Support of the Castle Doctrine does not in the least demonstrate that he can run one of the largest Sheriff's departments in Virginia. It is not part of a plan or vision for his involvement with Loudoun.

Ron Speakman: Continuing from above, Speakman also campaigns under the premise that "he" has a "plan" for illegal immigration here in Loudoun. Again, this is all smoke and mirrors--illegal immigration is a Legislative action in Richmond which is slowly turning toward greater laws and restrictions to deal illegals. However, the subject is so deep and involves the feds that no county has really done a great deal as they are extremely limited. Again, Speakman can only enforce the law, he as an elected Sheriff, CANNOT make the law. Point in fact, Fairfax has a heavy immigration problem so they give each illegal a cash immigration bond as they cannot house illegals at 25K/yr and the feds, who are the ONLY ones who can deport via a lengthy administrative procedure. So, they bond each illegal to come back for an administrative immigration hearing. They never show so Fairfax has over 4K fugitive warrants. PWC enacted what is called a "Resolution" by the Board of Supervisors which makes is difficult for companies to employ illegals and they have made efforts to arrest illegals, but they eventually realease them unless they are caught for violent crimes. It is much deeper, but that is a light overview. Nevertheless, Speakman campaigns on his "plan" to deport illegals which he has no authority to do. In fact, he erroneously attempted to twist a comment by AG Ken Cuccinelli into saying the AG endorsed his "plan" yet since Ed Levine is personal friends with the AG, once that came to the AG's attention, Speakman was forced to immediately make a public retraction. Speakman's address of the second amendment is also equally a dog and pony show to pull votes on trigger words. Just like the other issues, the Sheriff is an enforcer of the law, not law maker. WHATEVER the legislation enacts, the Sheriff enforces, regardless of his beliefs. It is people like VCDL endorsed Dick Black, who is a champion of gun rights, who make the laws, clarify the laws or remove the laws.

Personally, I can tell you that Chapman is a supporter of the 10th amendment, 2nd amendment, and legal open and concealed carry along with support for the castle doctrine.

This is where things like endorsements lend a clue as to a person's character. Local elected officials perform their due diligence both for themselves and so they can pass their discovery efforts to their constituents. Candidates do the same. Speakman has a few endorsement from his drinking buddies who he has known for 20 or 30 years and hangs out with at the local biker bar in Leesburg (where he recently got jammed up sending a lude photo of a man's penis to a women who did not appreciate it and made it news that a Sheriff's candidate should not be acting in this manner; hanging in a biker bar and sending lude photos to a woman he barely knew). Simpson has no posted endorsements. The reason that neither Speakman nor Simpson have any legitimate endorsements--Chapman has them all. Every constitutional officer, nearly every candidate, nearly every present elected official, even bi-partisan support and a plethora of top brass in major agencies who have either worked with him or employed him have endorsed Chapman.

A final note--fiscal responsibility. Typically a candidate's campaign begins to tell the tale of how fiscally responsible a leader will be with monies they request and monies granted from the BOS. Chapman's campaign, with an ALL volunteer staff, has spent just over 40K with tremendous support county-wide. Both Speakman and Simpson have spent well over 100K each and are struggling for voter support.

Two more days and we will know but any reading this, the choice is very clear that of the three candidate's, Chapman is asking for and deserves the vote.