… let us give thanks.
Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed.D has a plan.
“Gun violence could be stopped with some simple measures
While no single or a combination of measures will completely eliminate firearms deaths and injuries, I have constructed a list of proposals to buck the current deregulation trend, intended to substantially diminish the plague of violence:
I read that column with amused fascination; his list of proposals shows that his knowledge of the subject is rather limited. Just for example, those with domestic violence convictions, or those subject to restraining orders are already prohibited from buying firearms. And there is no federal “ban on the purchase of firearms and ammunition on the internet” to strengthen. Nor is there a federal waiting period to lengthen. It is already a felony to sell armor-piercing ammunition to civilians. A person with “a history of serious mental illness” is not not necessariy a prohibited person; one who been adjudicated to be mentally deficient already is.
And banning semiautomatic firearms, then banning bump-fire stocks? Perhaps he thinks they can turn bolt-action rifles into machineguns.
To go forward effectively, you need to understand where you are starting from. I would have thought they’d cover that in the Education department, but I studied engineering, so what do I know?
Fortunately for the doctor, The Zelman Partisans have prepared a “Gun Culture Primer” to assist those newly come to the field. It summarizes various federal laws and applicable court decisions, and history. You will also find helpful definitions and explanations of firearms terminology, and other useful bits of knowledge complete with links to more detailed source material. It’s written in language simple enough for even an Ed.D to comprehend.
Additionally, I would like to present Blumenfeld with a little three step thought experiment, which might be useful as a test of a proposal’s effectiveness.
Convicted felons are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms. Yet 64% of those who commit murder using a firearm have prior felony convictions. Nearly 91% of firearms used in crime are stolen. Multiple federal studies have shown that no more than 7% of criminals obtained their firearms through lawful channels.
The first experiment/test is to ask how a proposal would impact felons who already evade laws like licensing or background checks.
The second experiment/test is to ask how such a law could be effectively imposed on those same criminals in compliance with the Supreme Court’s HAYNES decision.
The third step is to consider your first results, applied to a comparatively small group (11,004 murders in 2016 implies no more than 11,004 murderers) of known, registered felons, and figure out how to apply them to honest gun owners of unknown numbers (estimates range from 55 million to 120+ million) when you don’t who or where they are. Nor do you know how many firearms there are (estimates range from 265 million to 750 million).
If you cannot successfully gain compliance from a small known group, then exacting compliance from an unknown group several thousands of time larger may be problematical.
But so long as the victim disarmers concentrate on dreaming up new redundant laws, they probably won’t ever get around to coming up with real ways and means of enforcing their little 18 U.S. Code § 241 & 242 violations.
Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!