NY AG Wannabe: Fight Gun Crime with Microstamping, Multistate Gun Registration

The pre-mid-term elections buzz says voters are about to exchange one set of bums (pro-gun control liberals) for another (Dan Baumiam pro-gun rights liberals or plain old gun rights-lovin’ conservatives). At the same time, the Supreme Court’s McDonald ruling is sending ripples of revolution through a once placid sea of restrictive gun control legislation. With all that going on, you’d think that Democrats looking to suckle on the public teat (i.e. get elected) would keep their heads down on gun control . . .

In the main, they have. But if you’re running for Attorney General in a bluer-than-blue state looking to DO SOMETHING about gun crime, the urge to support gun control is mighty hard to resist.

Ladies and gentlemen, Democratic New York State attorney general candidate Eric Schneiderman’s “Justice on Main Street” program . . .

“We have an epidemic of shootings across the state,” the Manhattan Democrat said during an interview before his brief speech to a crowd of about 75 people.

Schneiderman, who attended the double funeral of cousins Tiffany Wilhite and Shawn-Tia McNeil, two of the four people killed in the City Grill shootings, promised to make illegal guns a priority if elected attorney general.

One of his first steps would be the creation of a multistate coalition of lawmakers and law enforcement officials to deal with cross-border smuggling of guns.

The coalition would share information on gun crimes and sales, he said, citing figures that suggest 90 percent of the illegal guns in New York are smuggled in from states with weaker gun laws.

“There’s a small number of criminals who are responsible for diverting guns,” said Schneiderman, a state senator. “This would help us track those people.”

He also wants to pass a “microstamping” law that would require guns be manufactured so that each one left a unique mark on each shell fired from that weapon.

“That would be a great tool for law enforcement, he told The Buffalo News.

A “coalition”? Right. Like we there aren’t enough law enforcement agencies whose jurisdiction includes investigating stolen guns: local and state police, FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, Customs & Excise, etc. A coalition of these forces with lawmakers would be a hugely expensive CF that would slow down the pace and effectiveness of investigations.

Over at his website, the New York Times-endorsed candidate fleshes out this proposal:

Eric will lead an “I-95” coalition of state attorneys general, and state and local law enforcement agencies, to share and track data on gun crimes and gun sales between states.

As for micro-stamping, I thought we’d all agreed that the idea is completely useless (summarizing). Apparently, it’s still the magic feather for liberals who want to present a palatable anti-gun stance for their anti-gun base and independent voters who just might, if you really pushed them, support the Second Amendment.

But hey, Schneiderman might know better, right? Perhaps he knows how the technology could be made to work. I mean, the self-avowed “progressive Democrat” used to be a “deputy sheriff and co-chairman of Legislators Against Illegal Guns, a national group dedicated to reducing gun violence.”

hang on; does formed Deputy Sheriff Schneiderman pack heat? Now THAT I’d like to know. And that gun violence reducing group would be the STATE Legislators Against Illegal Guns, a clone  of Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns (SLAIG) that has done sweet FA about anything gun-related. Thank God.

Your Tuesday morning takeaway: aside from Portland and Chicago, liberal candidates in the Blue State heartland are backing away from gun control measures and playing it straight down the middle on gun rights issues. How great is that?

comments

  1. avatar Martin Albright says:

    From a politician's standpoint, there' s nothing better than strongly supporting a bill that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever getting enacted into law. That way he can look tough and uncompromising to his supporters, while at the same time not drawing the ire of his detractors since the proposed bill ain't ever going to happen (this is the reason, for example, that some pro-life politicians like to champion an anti-abortion amendment to the Constitution, since amending the Constitution is extraordinarily difficult – as it was designed to be.) Standing up for a bill that is DOA is a good way to look like you're "doing something" and when the proposed bill fails to get a hearing, the same AG can blame any future problems on "those stupid politicians" who refused to pass his bill. Win-win.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email