Once again, some asshole legislator is blaming the lack of new gun control laws, specifically universal background checks Preemptively Prove Your Innocence (PPYI) prior restraint on human/civil rights.
It’s true that the Santa Fe scumbag would not have been able to pass a background check, being seventeen years old, but… he bypassed any such checks by obtaining his weapons unlawfully in the first place. He stole them, from a locked cabinet. Does Douche Deutch honestly believe that if universal PPYI were in effect that an underage person intent upon mass murder to the point that he violated laws would suddenly exclaim, “Oh, darn! That would be illegal. Never mind.”?
The simple facts are that 1) 64% of murderers have prior felony convictions* prohibiting them from lawfully obtaining guns, but they manage it anyway; 2) 88% (or as high as 90.5%) of firearms murders are committed using stolen guns, which means they were obtained unlawfully; 3) criminals generally don’t obtain their firearms through lawful channels, doing so only 7% of the time. Pray tell, how does one enforce a lawful background check in an unlawful transaction?
And the touted background checks? No doubt, you’ve heard all about how checks have stopped sales to bad guys 2.5 million (or whatever number is being bandied about of late) times. The reality is that with a false positive rate of 94%, that’s actually 2.3 million innocent people whose Second Amendment rights were mistaken abridged. That’s why there have been so few prosecutions (I think 140-something was the last number I saw; not 140,000, not 1,400… 140. Nationwide.) coming from those millions of NICS denials. At last report, the DOJ still had a backlog of tens of thousands of denial challenges to process.
Prohibited folks intent upon committing crimes just bypass pesky PPYI inflicted on the innocent.
New gun control laws would target only the honest folks who aren’t committing the crimes. So such laws violate rights without even the lousy excuse of enhancing public safety.
So naturally the gun control crowd whines, “But we have a growing gun violence problem, and you aren’t offering any solutions.”
No, we don’t; and yes, I am.
First: No. We don’t. Even when you include the recent uptick, “gun violence” is a mostly solved problem already.
- Firearms homicides are down 24% from 1993
- The rate of firearms homicides is down 37%
- Accidental firearms deaths dropped from 824 (in 1999) to 489 (in 2015)
Again, even with the recent jump — largely attributable to the media plastering killers’ names and faces everywhere, showing psychotic copycats the road to fame — school shootings have been trending downward for decades.
Violence isn’t really up. Violence reporting — thanks, 24/7 news networks, in desperate need of material to fill time slots and draw advertisers — is up. So kids (chronological and mental) who haven’t looked at the real data get the impression that schools are less safe than ever before in history.
We are safer because of honest folks lawfully arming and defending themselves. 338,700 times per year even according to the anti-gun Violence Policy Center. Other researchers estimate defensive gun uses at 2.5 million, which recently located CDC data (suppressed for 20 years) suggest is a better estimate than the VPC’s.
But those upticks?
There are 3007 county units in the US. 54% — more than half — had no murders in 2014. 5% ( counties) provided 68% of all murders. 2% of the counties (60 counties) accounted for more than half of all murders. Care to guess where?
Would you like to narrow it down further? According to the Wall Street Journal, one-third (33.3%) of the national homicide spike in 2016 came from just five neighborhoods. In one city: Chicago.
Huffington Post narrows it down even more. Although you have to look at the FBI UCR data on victim and offender to see what they try to avoid stating outright.
A mostly solved problem; violence declining almost everywhere.
Second: But there is more that can be done to address the still-present (if declining) problem:
1. Teaching people the things they need to function in an honest society.
2. Providing second chances and skills to those who slip and survive.
3. Providing skills and equipment to those who want to stop the real violence.
But for the gun people controlling victim disarmers, those answers are unacceptable because they reduce their control over the population.
Solved problems are a problem for them because those don’t provide an excuse to exert more control, spend more money, generate more victims from which to profit.
The people controllers suppress self-respect and self-reliance in favor of violating everyone’s human/civil rights.
And it could backfire on them.
* Recently, I’ve been checking on regional firearms murder reports. Where the offender is identified, the prior felony rate is more like 70%. When other disqualifiers are factored in — domestic violence conviction, restraining orders, felony indictment, mental incompetency adjudication — at least 90% of the murderers were already prohibited persons. That doesn’t even count the people like the Santa Fe killer, who apparently had no disqualifying record, but was under-age to obtain his destructive implements of choice.