This past Friday night, Newark NJ Mayor Corey Booker appeared on Bill Maher's HBO show and the topic of guns and gun control arose. Despite being in favor of strong gun laws (the type that get guns off of city streets), Mayor Booker said: "Legal gun buyers are not causing murders in Newark and Chicago and other places". A link to the relevant dialogue is attached.
For those who only read, the Mayor said:
"To me, the data should drive our decision making. So I know, I’m not afraid of people having guns who are law abiding citizens. In the analysis of gun murders and shootings in my city, I could only find one in the entire time I’ve been mayor – and unfortunately there have been hundreds and hundreds – where a person who was involved in a shooting where they had their gun legally, where they legally acquired their gun. The guns that are causing carnage in our cities, my city and our country, every single year are acquired illegally."
EVERY PERSON INVOLVED IN THE GUN CONTROL CONVERSATION SHOULD HAVE TO READ AND RE-READ THE ABOVE SEVERAL TIMES.
Like former NYPD Commissioner Bratton and the former prosectutor from DC, here we have another official who is involved with street gun violence every day saying his problems is not law-abiding gun owners.
How different can the gun crime/violence problem be in Newark relative to Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, etc.?
Booker follows up with making a point made by several speakers in Hartford last week but that seems to be ignored by the gun-unfriendly Media and the gun control voices like CAGV and March for Change, specifically the Mayor says:
"Newtowns are rare. What we see in America that doesn’t make the headlines, but there are young people being murdered every single day in communities like mine that don’t make the headlines…If I told you that the data shows that no legal gun buyer in Newark has been responsible for any of the shootings. If I tell you that right now, legal gun buyers are not causing murders in Newark and Chicago and other places."
If the gun control lobby and its allies in Hartford are REALLY interested in mitigating all forms of gun violence, why do they seem to be focused on the one segment of the population that is NOT part of the problem, the law-abiding gun owner?
Second, the vast majority of serious gun owners I know have one or more guns safes or lockable solutions (I have two safes). Third, no one can say with certainty where the guns that end up in illegal hands originate. Yes, some are recently stolen and make the transition from legal to illegal ownership that way. Some, were stolen quite some time ago and have changed hands in the black market multiple times. Some are purchased by straw buyers. Some are purchased in private market transactions where the seller does not check the buyer's bona fides. Some come the the streets through rouge FFL dealers who ignore the law. A small amount come through gun shows. On rogue dealers, a study suggested 60% of illegal firearms pass through 1% of the FFL dealers ("rouges").
- cracking down on rogue dealer - enhanced background checks - law enforcement follow up of failed background checks (that might have brought Lanza to the attention of LE) - requiring a valid pistol permit for the purchase of center-fire handgun ammo - secure storage enhancements - a reasonable limit on handgun purchases in a given period (not one, maybe five) - mandatory sentences for gun crimes and straw buyers where the gun they bought is used in a crime - fully funding police programs to get illegal handguns off the street. That's a start, no? Please do not think we all tow the line for the NRA. I believe in its main purpose but disagree with their vehemence on some issues. The problem is that the proposals put forth by the gun control lobby, taken in their entirety, go well beyond the above and that has me fighting those aspects that will have NO impact on mitigating the everyday causes of gun violence.
1. What do you mean when you say "enhanced" background checks. Are you in favor of background checks for all gun purchases? (Meaningful ones, where the data is up to date in the database?) 2. Why would you want to allow as many as 5 guns of the same type to be purchased by a private citizen at one time? Can you tell me who would need this for honest purposes? And even if they were buying them as gifts (and is that legal?) Why must they do it all at once? 3.Why not mandatory sentences for any straw purchaser? Either they are getting a firearm for a disqualified buyer, or they aren't? Thank you for your thoughts. Amy
Ok, that said, background checks where as much data is available as possible. As you likely know, CT has one of the better and more extensive systems in the USA. We need to better integrate mental health records with this system. Very tricky given the subjective nature of some diagnoses but better than nothing. Also, if someone fails a background check, local police should be notified for a follow up interview. It is rare that someone can fail a background check for reasons unbeknownst to them so why not ask them what they were up to. As for limits, I did say at "one time" and should have said, per month. Not sure if that works better for you or not. The problem with straw purchasers is proving the straw purchase before the gun is involved something that causes its serial number to be traced. If you can catch a straw transaction in the parking lot, great. Otherwise, it is usually a situation where a crime occurs, gun is recovered and then traced to straw buyer.