Tuesday, January 15, 2013

"What I saw as a prosecutor in Washington, D.C., makes me wary of strict firearms laws."

A Gun Ban That Misfired

By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

In the wake of the horrific elementary-school shootings in Newtown, Conn., last month, many Americans, desperate to do something in response, have decided that much stricter gun control is the answer. Democrats have proposed reinstating the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein has proposed legislation that would even restrict the use of some semiautomatic handguns.

As a former prosecutor in Washington, D.C., who enforced firearms and ammunition cases while a severe local gun ban was still in effect, I am skeptical of the benefits that many imagine will result from additional gun-control efforts. I dislike guns, but I believe that a nationwide firearms crackdown would place an undue burden on law enforcement and endanger civil liberties while potentially increasing crime.

The D.C. gun ban, enacted in 1976, prohibited anyone other than law-enforcement officers from carrying a firearm in the city. Residents were even barred from keeping guns in their homes for self-defense.

Some in Washington who owned firearms before the ban were allowed to keep them as long as the weapons were disassembled or trigger-locked at all times. According to the law, trigger locks could not be removed for self-defense even if the owner was being robbed at gunpoint. The only way anyone could legally possess a firearm in the District without a trigger lock was to obtain written permission from the D.C. police. The granting of such permission was rare.

The gun ban had an unintended effect: It emboldened criminalsbecause they knew that law-abiding District residents were unarmed and powerless to defend themselves. Violent crime increased after the law was enacted, with homicides rising to 369 in 1988, from 188 in 1976 when the ban started. By 1993, annual homicides had reached 454.

The Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department also waged a war on firearms by creating a special Gun Recovery Unit in 1995. The campaign meant that officers were obliged to spend time searching otherwise law-abiding citizens. That same year, the department launched a crackdown called Operation Cease Fire to rid the District of illegal firearms. But after four months, officers had confiscated only 282 guns out of the many thousands in the city.

Civil liberties were endangered. Legislative changes empowered judges to hold gun suspects in pretrial detention without bond for up to 100 days, and efforts were made to enact curfews and seize automobiles found to contain firearms. In 1997, Police Chief Charles Ramsey disbanded the unit so that he could assign more uniformed officers to patrol the streets instead, but the police periodically tried other gun crackdowns over the next decade—with little effect.

Read the rest here.

18 comments:

  1. Criminals and Government have the same interests at heart: unarmed targets from which to take things at will.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here's a youtube video of Big Boi from the rap group OutKast supporting gun rights. "we need guns to defend against tyrannical government"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jw2ovbox_k

    And here's another video of Big Boi saying he's a libertarian and voted for Gary Johnson

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9Nx7xvg7X8

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget Ice T saying guns are against tyranny and not to hunt...

      Delete
    2. SWEETTTTTTTT!

      OutKast (Andre+BB) is brilliant. "Bombs over Baghdad" is a great anti-war song, and they really pushed the "hip hop" spectrum.

      25 years ago my best friend and I argued about rap, and the future of music. I said that it was a brilliant way of "repurposing" music (Beastie Boys "Paul's Boutique" would never happen in today's IP gulag) and giving poor black people a new voice.

      Unfortunate that I won that bet- most "rap" is bullshit misogyny and consumerism and celebration of violence- but the real innovators like Big Boi and BoB and Snoop and even Eminem (Lose Yourself is one of the best libertarian anthems ever written) have changed music for the better.

      YMMV.

      Delete
  3. Anonymous @9:08PM - that's because Government is a form of organized crime.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Amount of raw deaths associated with rifles in 2011 in the US: 323
    Amount of raw deaths via shooting in Chicago alone in 2012: over 500

    Murder and violent crime rate in the last twenty years: down by 50%
    Number of new self loading ar15 style rifles sold in last twenty years: 3 million

    Case closed.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gun registration is a horrible way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Since only law abiding citizens purchase guns at gun stores, I am fully confident in having property owners decide who can buy their product; the same way a bar owner should be able to decide who can consume alcohol at his/her establishment.

    I have full confidence this would work far better than some statist conception of so-called "mental health screening." Besides, if printable homemade guns ever hit the consumer market, that will change the game completely. I'd like to see most of the country possess firearms. That will add teeth to the principle that people on their own property are the sovereigns.

    How wonderful it would be to see people carrying firearms everywhere, including airplanes. I have no doubt we would see a huge reduction in the risk of another 9/11. The government proved it was ineffective at providing this country with protection on that day. Pilots should be armed, people should be armed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Never Again! Gun Advocates are Hlocaust Deniers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And such an idea shows that you must deny intelligence exists within your head.

      Delete
    2. Seek mental health help, Holocaust denier "Anonymous". You might as well state all oranges are wrenches.

      Delete
    3. Ironically, the actual people who did the Holocaust proposed and passed the same sort of laws that Obama and the fascist left favor. Registration, licensing, the "sporting purpose" clause aka "why do you need this," etc. And after they disarmed the Jews, they murdered millions of them as if they were animals. This same process repeated itself in multiple nations last year. Who is the denier again?

      I saw a great line on a gun forum - Rosa Parks didn't "need" to sit up front anymore than I need to own a self loading AR15, but rights aren't based upon "need."

      Delete
  7. This is one of those, "Well, duh!!!" moments. This stuff is such common sense, it hurts me that people fall for the anti-gun bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Only an imbecile keeps trying the ideas that don't work, over and over again, and expects the result from their latest experiment to be different than all the other times it has been tried.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes ; you have just proven that ' part .

      Delete
  9. I think politicians may be more concerned about their own safety.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have never seen such open defiance and calls for violence against any authorities attempting to confiscate their firearms before, and I have been paying attention to this very closely since the 90s. I have certainly never seen states and local counties threatening to arrest federal agents and/or not carry out any of their orders before. The politicians in DC ought to be very scared.

      Delete
  10. No doubt it is a ploy due to the rise in militia in reaction to the seditious men infiltrating government.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Never Again! Gun Advocates are Hlocaust Deniers."

    And just how would the Holocaust have occurred if the Jews and gypsies had enough guns to protect themselves? Hitler first instituted gun control. Then everything else bad happened.

    ReplyDelete