The Gun Debate: Gun crime prosecutions on decline, amid call for more laws
In radio and billboard ads across the country, the federal government is telling potential gun buyers "don't lie for the other guy." The campaign message is intended to stop those with clean criminal records from buying firearms for felons who legally can't buy guns on their own.We're told all of these things are needed; a ban on "assault weapons" (a vague and nebulous term with no grounding in reality); limitations on magazine capacity; safe storage laws; insurance requirements for lawful gunownership; etc. All of these new requirements come with draconian punishments for failing to comply. But there's a dirty little secret: No one's following up and punishing law-breakers:
The message underscores the full-court press in Washington to adopt sweeping new gun control laws, from universal background checks to a ban on military-style rifles and large ammunition magazines.
The Syracuse study found the number of federal weapons prosecutions fell from about 11,000 in 2004 to about 6,000 under the Obama administration in 2011 -- and ticked up to 7,770 in 2012.Got that? While the Obama administration is pushing all kinds of new laws aimed at making life more difficult for the law-abiding gun owner, they're doing less than their predecessor to punish folks who break existing gun laws. They claim that the Justice system is limited - yet propose making millions of rifles and hundreds of millions of magazines illegal. If their recommendations are codified into law, this already strained legal system will be pushed long past the breaking point, and it is quite possible that even fewer prosecutions will occur.
IOW, rather than making us safer, all these laws are going to do is take firearms away from the good people - who should have them - while not punishing the bad people for having them. Does this make any sense to anyone? How can anyone take the government seriously when it states that it doesn't have the manpower to prosecute in one breath, and then tell us in the next that they want to add more laws to "keep us safe"? It's rather insulting to think that we'll just blindly accept such competing statements without question - but the sad part is, most probably will.
Too few question the disconnect between "we don't have the manpower to go after all these criminals" and "let's pass more laws!". Too many cry out for "SOMETHING" to be done - good, bad, indifferent, they really don't care what the end result is, they just want to feel like the government is DOING SOMETHING about an issue. No one asks for accountability - how many criminals have these laws stopped; how many prosecutions; how many criminals have gone to jail as a result of the laws passed? They can't - won't - answer these questions, because the answers, quite frankly, are embarrassing to the government.
But hey, they did something alright - they took rights away from people that never did anything wrong.
That is all.