Selectively enforced gun control laws
Interesting piece today by Stu Bykofsky:
THE KNEE-JERK response by some to Philly's soaring murder rate is to demand More Laws.
Others respond by asking: Why don't we enforce the 20,000 gun laws currently on the books across the nation?
The current buzz is about "straw buyers" and "straw sellers" and how to stop them. "Straw buyers" and "sellers" are people with clean records who buy guns legally, then pirouette to sell them - illegally. Those illegal guns create much of the chaos on our streets.
"The only way you can legally transfer a firearm in the state of Pennsylvania," says attorney Jon Mirowitz, a recognized authority on gun laws, "is to go through a licensed dealer, and it's been that way since the 1930s."
Enforcement of that law should be mandatory. But that cries for common sense, which we know is rare as a game-show host's sincerity.
I'll illustrate with a case from the past. . . . .
What follows in the piece are some great examples of how the gun control laws are selectively enforced.
Others respond by asking: Why don't we enforce the 20,000 gun laws currently on the books across the nation?
The current buzz is about "straw buyers" and "straw sellers" and how to stop them. "Straw buyers" and "sellers" are people with clean records who buy guns legally, then pirouette to sell them - illegally. Those illegal guns create much of the chaos on our streets.
"The only way you can legally transfer a firearm in the state of Pennsylvania," says attorney Jon Mirowitz, a recognized authority on gun laws, "is to go through a licensed dealer, and it's been that way since the 1930s."
Enforcement of that law should be mandatory. But that cries for common sense, which we know is rare as a game-show host's sincerity.
I'll illustrate with a case from the past. . . . .
What follows in the piece are some great examples of how the gun control laws are selectively enforced.
posted by John Lott at 3:18 PM
2 Comments:
The basis of this article is to enforce existing law. The NRA frequently calls for the enforcement of existing law. However, a better alternative would be the repeal of existing law. Do we, who are pro 2nd Amendment, really want the enforcement of all existing gun control laws, to the full extent of law enforcement's ability. Do we really want that and what that would entail?
We should be calling for the repeal of ALL existing gun control laws. Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, and other states have very lax gun control laws, yet have very low rates of violent crime. Any one who wants a gun in those states, except criminals who are in jail, can get a gun. Yet, violent crime is low, and comparable to the more "civilized" nations across the Atlantic Ocean.
I have heard enough from the pro-gunners who call for the enforcement of existing laws. It is time for the 2nd Amendment community to call for a repeal of those laws as oppossed to their enforcement. The evidence is clear that gun control laws do not reduce crime, so why would we want them to be enforced? The only reason I can think of is so that we can prevent other laws to be added to the books and for the eventual elimination of the gun control laws currently on the books.
One of the things the author wants scrutinized is multiple purchases. He states "I'm not endorsing the trampling of anyone's rights, but an immense purchase, or multiple purchases, ought to be better scrutinized by ATF." I recently bought two hand guns in one day. So, I guess according to the author I should be scrutinized, although I violated no law. I wonder what sort of scrutiny that would entail.
Dear Brent:
I wouldn't come to the conclusion that the existing laws have been useful, but what I find most interesting is how selectively the laws are enforced. Obviously the laws that would have gotten most of us in trouble didn't seem to apply to the Mayor.
Post a Comment
<< Home