140707_GovtWaste_screengrab
University of Wisconsin Madison’s Police Chief Susan Riseling is a bad dancer, and a worse researcher.

As the Wisconsin campus carry debate continues, one police chief is shockingly ignorant of the facts of gun free zones and citizen’s Second Amendment rights.

University of Wisconsin Madison’s Police Chief Susan Riseling said in an interview broadcast Sunday on “UpFront with Mike Gousha”, that not only is it untrue that more guns means less crime, but also that prevention and so-called “gun free zones” are the only way to stop campus shootings.

“I hope the people of Wisconsin realize that college campuses are different and are unique,” Riseling said. “Where does this end? Do we then make sure that our school zones are not gun-free anymore? It just keeps going on and on. The proliferation of weapons in our society is actually leading to more problems, not fewer problems.”

You may recognize Chief Susan Riseling from her carefree music video filmed in Madison last summer. Riseling was among about 25 department employees (on duty at Wisconsin taxpayer’s expense) who made a video to the Pharell Williams’ song “Happy” in an effort to have officers appear “hipper and approachable”.

Riseling did not appear very hip when she said, “Look at all the different places that violence takes place in America. Very few of those situations are in gun-free zones,” she said. “Most of the gun problems in America take place in public places, out on the street corner in which people can legally carry.”

In direct contradiction to that statement is the Crime Prevention Research Center’s findings on mass shootings and so-called gun free zones. Their documented research proves all but two mass public shootings since 1950 have taken place in areas where guns are prohibited.

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, who was also interviewed, was quick to defend the rights of those who wish to carry. “They cannot decide what constitutional freedoms other people can have,” Clarke said. “These are individual rights. So if they don’t want it, fine. But their thoughts on constitutional freedoms shouldn’t then carry over to somebody else.”

“Targeted violence is best eliminated by prevention,” Riseling said. “That’s why we have threat assessment teams, that’s why we interrupt, that’s what we get people mental health services on campuses. That’s the way to prevent these things from happening. It’s not the way to react by letting everyone be armed. That’s not going to solve any of our problems. It’s not going to prevent anything.”

Apparently Chief Riseling is unaware that 60% of violent criminals admit they would not attack a would-be victim if they knew they were armed for self defense and 40% admit they would not attack a potential victim if they even thought they were carrying a gun. How does allowing students and faculty to carry for self defense and the protection of others “not prevent anything?”

“There’s a lot of academic research that’s been done on this, and if you look at the peer-reviewed studies, the bottom line is a large majority find a benefit of concealed carry on crime rates — and, at worst, there’s no cost,” said John Lott Jr., President of the Crime Prevention Research Center. “You can deter criminals with longer prison sentences and penalties, but arming people with the right to defend themselves with a gun is also a deterrence.”

Chief Riseling’s assertion that arming people for self defense is ‘not going to prevent anything’ may be half true in that an active shooter could still potentially enter a campus with a gun and pull the trigger. Knowing this, why would she willingly allow the students and faculty she is tasked with protecting to become defenseless victims?