“Gun Lobby Has Pa. in its Grip” Your Problem Being?

 

Holy moly am I sick and tired of all this talk of “the gun lobby” (a.k.a., the NRA). Start with this: it’s a gun rights lobby. Sure, the National Rifle Association is closerthanthis to gun manufacturers. But the NRA gets its strength and the lion’s share of its operating budget from its members. Who give the NRA money because the NRA defends their gun rights . . .

Even if we cede the antis their firmly-held belief that the “gun lobby” is trying to get more people to buy guns, or more gun owners to buy more guns, what the hell’s wrong with that? OMG. What would the country be like if “the gun lobby” convinced every law-abiding American to exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Unthinkable!

Oh wait. Here’s the real problem: the NRA is subverting “common sense” (i.e. knee jerk) gun control. To wit, this from philly.com . . .

It seems there is no limit to the depths to which some Pennsylvania lawmakers will slither to appease their campaign-cash-distributing masters in the gun lobby.

Because the National Rifle Association has its minions in the legislature on speed dial, it is able to quickly direct them to act whenever there is even a hint of any change in current gun laws.

Such is the case now, with state lawmakers poised to pass a bill that would circumvent the efforts of 30 cities — including Philadelphia, York, Lancaster, Chester, Conshohocken, and Pittsburgh — that have passed ordinances requiring gun owners to notify authorities when a weapon is lost or stolen.

I’m not Bruce Krafft. I can’t marshal a phalanx of facts to disprove the assertion that a mandatory missing gun reporting law decreases the chances of a police investigation hitting a proverbial brick wall. But I can try.

Let’s focus on the sole stat offered by the Inquirer’s unsigned editorial (a journalistic tradition that irks me no end) in support of their “keep the stolen gun registry” position.

Most homicides in Philadelphia are committed with guns, many of which were purchased illegally. The city has had a lost-or-stolen gun ordinance for four years, and so far, owners have reported 350 guns missing. None of that, though, matters to legislators intent on ensuring the gun lobby can bully towns trying to better protect their citizens.

So, 350 law-abiding gun owners living in the City of Brotherly Love told the po-po their firearm went walkies. Wait. The paper said 350 guns, not gun owners. For the sake of argument, let’s assume it was 350 owners. Anyway, according to the Philadelphia police’s crime stats, there were 1,330 homicides from 2007 to 2011 (inclusive).

Are we to believe that 350 of those cases were solved thanks to the stolen gun registry? If they were, if any of them were, what’s the bet that philly.com’s editorialist would have mentioned it? What’s the bet that none of these homicides were solved by the registry?

I know: if ONE case is cleared-up it was worth it. Never mind the expense involved or the time consumed. Only that’s not true. Because the chance of breaking a case isn’t worth the potential dangers posed by the law itself. And what, pray tell, does the Inquirer say about the argument against the stolen gun registry?

The gun lobby’s lackeys say the ordinances infringe on lawful gun owners’ rights, which is untrue. The ordinances don’t restrict anyone’s ability to purchase or own a gun. But they do attempt what Harrisburg won’t — to reduce the number of stolen or lost guns used in crimes, and perhaps cut into the lucrative business of “straw” buyers selling or renting guns to criminals.

Attempt? Perhaps? Renting guns to criminals? Are you shitting me? Is that the basis for sound public policy on any issue?

And yes, the stolen gun registry does infringe on lawful gun owners’ rights. According to The Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986 (Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926 (2) (a))):

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.

I realize that the ATF has pissed all over FOPA. But that doesn’t change the fact that PA’s stolen gun registry contravenes federal law. A law specifically designed to prevent gun confiscation (a la post-Katrina new Orleans) and keep local, state and federal governments OUT of gun owner’s houses (i.e. checking to see if any guns have been lost, stolen or sold).

Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware), who represents the violence-torn city of Chester, can stop this sham. And he should, unless he wants to be remembered as the chump who let the NRA pull a fast one that left Chester and other Pennsylvania towns less able to protect citizens from gun violence.

How can a rational human being get such an important matter—a matter of life and death—exactly backwards? And even if they are that stupid and ignorant, perhaps [sic] willfully so, how can any self-respecting editorialist fail to include a fair depiction of the counterargument to their polemic?

The fight for gun rights is a never-ending battle. As much as I distrust and deride the NRA, they are fighting for our gun rights against those who would see them sacrificed on the altar of “father knows best” fascism. Gun lobby? Include me in.

comments

  1. avatar matt says:

    Cause you know, bad guys never file off the serial number from a gun, surely they must all be traceable.

    1. avatar Sanchanim says:

      Unless they use a grinder you can sometimes get the number back using an acid wash but in the end it isn’t the point.

      1. avatar Kirk says:

        I would think most criminals now days will be using a dremel to grind of a serial numbers, if for no other reason then most criminals are lazy shits and a dremel turns 20 minutes of filing into a 1 minute job.

  2. avatar Bob says:

    Sounds like the editorial was written by the Brady Campaign. You can tell by the huge number of lies, half-truths, innuendos (implied but not explicitly stated lies and half-truths), and irrational conclusions based on faulty logic. Oh, and throw in a little fear-mongering based on cherry-picked anomalies used as anecdotal evidence, too.

  3. avatar Kelly in GA says:

    How does a stolen gun registry keep the already stolen gun off the black market? I do believe it’s already there. Ready for a criminal use and disposal.

    1. avatar Hawke says:

      It doesn’t keep the weapon off the black market but it will give the anti’s a person to blame for letting it get stolen, and maybe allow the families of the victim to sue the original owner. I think they are dumb like a fox.

  4. avatar Dan says:

    I’m fine with a stolen gun registry. So long as a weapon is removed from that registry upon recovery, I just can’t bring myself to care.

    An administrative rule mandating the reporting of a stolen gun, within a reasonable time frame of discovery of theft, sure why not. Couple-$50 fine if you’ve willfully failed to report a stolen firearm, sure. But it’s hard to prove that you didn’t think you misplaced it. But, since there’s no law requiring gun owners to keep records of serial numbers, the report will be of little use.

    Will either of these do any good? I doubt it. But we can always hope.

    A law opening crime victims up to Criminal penalties is insanity.

    1. avatar matt says:

      IL requires that everyone maintain records of their firearm transfers (purchases and sales) for 10 years, that does include private party transfers.

  5. avatar Bob says:

    “The lost-or-stolen ordinances make sense, and should stand. Police often hit a dead end while investigating a gun crime because an owner failed to report a missing weapon. That becomes less likely with a law requiring missing guns to be reported.”

    The second sentence is a half-truth that has been worded to try to prove a point. The sentence should say, “Police investigations often hit a dead end when the police find that the gun used in the crime had been stolen.” So the police waste a small amount of time looking for the previous owner of the gun. Does the previous owner have any idea who it was that stole his gun, or who might have found it after it was lost? The dead end is still there, whether a lost/stolen gun registry exists or not.

    Since the faulty logical statement in this paragraph seems to be the crux of the larger argument for the lost/stolen gun registry, and I have just destroyed that statement, then the larger argument falls apart completely. The FACTS don’t lie, but Gun Control Advocates do.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      This was my take exactly, and is the same faulty premise used for microstamping and case registries. The mere fact that I buy a gun and it is stolen tells the police nothing at all about its subsequent history. It doesn’t tell us who stole the gun, sho he sold it to, or anything else. It therefore cannot assist in solving crimes. You still have to find the guy that used the gun in the commission of a crime–and all that a stolen gun registry would do is provide an “alibi” for the original owner. (Even then it is not a solid alibi–what is to prevent you from reporting your gun stolen so that you can use it later in the commission of a crime? “Wasn’t me, I reported that gun stolen six months ago.”
      Didn’t NYC recently recognize that their casing registry was a multimillion dollar boondoggle that had had no utility in solving crime?

  6. avatar Bill F says:

    “Holy moly am I sick and tired of all this talk of “the gun lobby” (a.k.a., the NRA). Start with this: it’s a gun rights lobby.”

    Or even this: Lobby for gun owner’s rights.

  7. avatar GS650G says:

    Philly cops could care less about property crimes, including guns. Unless you report one that ends up being used in a crime then you are a person of interest real quick. The real rub with these ordinances comes when a gun is stolen, used for crime, and then traced back to the victim of the theft. Then they can hook the victim up for failing to report it stolen. He gets to sit in jail next to the thief.

    If your car was stolen and used in a crime while you were away for 2 weeks and you failed to report it stolen would they harass you for it? Blame you for not telling the po-po the car was stolen so they could do – – something?

    Philly and the 5 county area surrounding jurisdictions want their own restrictive gun laws desperately, they can’t deal with the problems so this is a sop to make it look like they are doing something. The word Should gets a lot of use as in they should not have this, should do that, should have to and so forth.

    Legally owned firearms keep SO many Philly people safe each day it’s not worth talking about disarming them.

  8. avatar the last Marine out says:

    It is a FACT that any firearms that are recovered will never be returned , I had a issue with another state that they would not return my gun, Conn. thinks all guns are bad and need to be destroyed,, and you can still get legal private sales in most states… so the only issue is about people control , 98 % of all laws are about CONTROL ,,,, not stopping crime or terror… has TSA ever stopped a Terrorist … NO, and may never …. their mission is control……….

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Well OF COURSE not! Now it is a “crime gun” that must be held as evidence until all possible criminal proceedings have terminated–at which time the evidence will be destroyed. Didn’t you know about the curse of the crime gun? Once it has killed, it can never be trusted not to kill again!

    2. avatar James says:

      I had a gun stolen from the trunk of my car. I got it back after the perp went to jail.

      Git it back from Detroit Police, no less.

      1. avatar Jarhead1982 says:

        Geez, walking on water comes to mind!

  9. avatar jkp says:

    The article is off-point from the get-go.

    The Pennsylvania Legislature has ALREADY pre-empted municipal ordinances regarding firearms (Pa. Uniform Firearms Act, sec. 6120). The laws that Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and the other municipalities have passed ALREADY have ZERO effect. They are unenforceable, and are unconstitutional under the Pennsylvania Constitution.

    Many municipalities have been passing their own ordinances despite the fact that the legislature preempted for purposes of political grandstanding.

    The proposed bill would explicitly authorize people who are ‘adversely affected’ by any of those unconstitutional ordinances to file suit against the municipalities and to collect ‘reasonable expenses’ to cover court costs, attorneys fees, etc.

    Why expect a Philadelphia editorial writer to know what he’s talking about, though?

    (Aside: The observant will note that a Pennsylvania License to Carry Firearms is required to carry a pistol openly or concealed inside Philadelphia — whereas a license is not required for open carry outside of that city. This is not a municipal ordinance — the state legislature specifically passed this law. A license is required to carry a firearm in any “city of the first class” (which is defined solely by population–currently Philadelphia is the only city belonging to that class.)

  10. avatar Ralph says:

    I really enjoyed the editorial. The hysterical, sometimes hateful tone, the (figuratively speaking) wringing of hands and soiling of panties. The whole thing was almost exactly what we’ve come to expect from the little douchebags with room temperature IQs who want everybody else to be completely under the control of their masters.

    However, the writer left out the ultimate gungrabber’s cliche: IT”S FOR THE CHILDREN! With that omission, the editorial missed it’s chance to become an underground classic.

  11. avatar Totenglocke says:

    how can any self-respecting editorialist fail to include a fair depiction of the counterargument to their polemic?

    Because journalists – at least professional ones – don’t give a rats ass about the facts or being fair. They go into the industry to push an agenda and by Allah, they’ll push that agenda until they die – no matter what the facts or popular opinion say.

  12. avatar Sanchanim says:

    Ok here is a question for everyone.
    First off the law shouldn’t stand and is bad, I don’t agree with it.
    Having said that.
    If you had a break in and one or more of your firearms were stolen would you report it?
    I would say for me yes. Why?
    It is a two part question. If you have insurance then you file a report pay your deductible and gt money to replace your lost items. This includes your guns.
    Second and most important to me is if I didn’t report it and it was used in a crime and recovered, then there is a good chance I might get a nice little visit from a SWAT team thinking I did something bad. That is something I prefer not to have happen.
    Just based on that I would think the law would be unneeded. Lets face it some of you probably have guns in your locker which are worth more than my car. Others might have certain types of firearms which you needed specific licenses for, you know the ones that put a lot of lead down range in a hurry. All of these we would want replaced or at least get monetary compensation for.
    Making a law requiring it is just nonsense. But then again most of us here have IQ’s larger than our shoe size. 🙂

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      The point of the law is so that they can manufacture more “gun crime” by claiming that a person didn’t notify them fast enough. It’s the same reason that some congressmen in my state (Ohio) are trying to get rid of the duty to inform when encountering a cop – it’s a great opportunity for them to say “He didn’t inform me fast enough” and you’re in jail with a felony.

      1. avatar Parthenon says:

        That’s also the whole point of brandishing laws, duty to retreat and just about every other gun or self defence related law on the books. They are “gotcha” laws intended to secure conviction and subsequent stripping of voting and second amendment rights regardless of liberty, justice, common sense or the needs of society.

  13. avatar Thomas Paine says:

    wow. you said Conshohocken. The center of the known universe! my life is complete.

  14. avatar Low Budget Dave says:

    A responsible gun owner will normally report a stolen gun. They are trying to prevent gun owners from selling their used inventory under the table. There is already a law or two against it, just not enforceable ones.

    A stolen gun registry won’t fix this issue.

    On the other hand, if the NRA is defending the loopholes that circumvent gun laws, I am not sure if that is the same as defending basic gun rights.

    1. avatar the last Marine out says:

      having a gun stolen, lost, or given as a gift, or sold in private sale, is none of the governments role to control, if found the governments role is to protect or return private property, and last to catch law breakers, and see that we the people are being served…. We the people need to start thinking about who does what and why or you have no LIBERTY…. A CRIME is when someone is hurt , that means also your private property…. sorry if someone kills their self by taking drugs that is a moral sin not crime…. We need go back to basic thinking and learn what is a personal sin or a real CRIME… the Bible answers all this … that is why everyone is getting so mixed up today…

      1. avatar Low Budget Dave says:

        In a way, it is the government’s business. Let’s say you buy 260 guns for self-defense. Later, you have 259 of them stolen. Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean you should do it.

        Also, if it turns out that what you really did was sell 259 handguns to gang members, then the local cops would like a word with you. It was a private sale, of course, but still endangers public safety. Should they be able to arrest you? Sure. We live in a country of laws, and you broke the law.

        The law is different for a single gun than for 259, but the morality is the same.

        Let’s say an innocent bystander got shot using one of your former guns. Would it make a difference to you if you sold it to the killer? Even if it had been stolen, wouldn’t you be worried that you could have been more careful?

        1. avatar jkp says:

          The question of the wisdom of the lost/stolen reporting ordinances is immaterial in this case. All of the ordinances at issue in Pennsylvania are already unenforceable because the legislature has pre-empted local ordinances concerning firearms. They are unconstitutional according to the Pa. Constitution.

          The bill under consideration by the legislature is to authorize lawsuits by private citizens to challenge these unconstitutional ordinances and to allow them to recover reasonable attorneys fees.

          If anything, the Pa. legislature is attempting to close a loophole whereby municipalities can pass unconstitutional ordinances and allow them to stay on the books, creating a situation where an uninformed police officer could harass a law-abiding gun owner under color of an unconstitutional ordinance.

  15. avatar Greg Camp says:

    I’ve recorded the serial numbers and descriptions of my guns and hidden the record in a less than obvious place for exactly the reason that Low Budget Dave gives. If any of mine get stolen, I’m reporting to law enforcement and to the local gun and pawn shops. But I’m realistic enough to know that most likely, the guns will disappear into the black market.

    Is it just on television, or do criminals try to shed crime guns after use? It would make sense that a gun with a body on it would end up in the river or in the hands of some unsuspecting person. How much good is a stolen gun registry going to do then?

    1. avatar Jarhead1982 says:

      LOL, a few good old boys who work at a steel mill comment how such things end up in the smelter/melting pot.

    2. avatar the last Marine out says:

      Gun lists are only for control of We the people…. The Founders knew that a evil man will always find a way to do evil…. the idea that guns are evil or do evil is WITCH CRAFT , so we have to say yes the government act of gun control is witch craft making the government just as evil if not more so.. the NRA does good as it brings to public light the evil of government… any one not supporting the 2 nd.. ADM. right NEVER gets my vote…. the most pro-gun guy to ever run for office was Ron Paul,, so what do the gun people vote for John MCCain who is a out and out ONE WORLD supporter… Why are people voting to destroy America???? IT is our right to buy a million guns , cars, houses , etc… and sell them… LIKE i said it is NONE of the governments area and the founders say this a 100 different ways… and i mean no governments local, state, fed. or the UN..give up your rights to be safe and you end up with Chains and slavery… history say you can Liberty if you can fight for it or be a slave…

      1. avatar Low Budget Dave says:

        People give up rights all the time for the good of society. If you had a big back yard, and decided to operate a landfill there, the government would stop you. It is your land, of course, but the groundwater belongs to everyone.

        In the same way, your right to sell guns is limited by the government, for the good of society. If you choose to sell to a known felon, the government will stop you. It is your gun, of course, but the right not to be shot by a known felon belongs to everyone.

      2. avatar Low Budget Dave says:

        Also, I think it cheapens the argument to compare loss of gun rights to slavery. Slavery is an affront to the laws of God and man. Guns are a symbol of freedom, but they are not the freedom itself.

        Guns can no more defend you against slavery than citizenship can defend you against terrorism.

  16. avatar homobangbangamus says:

    “How can a rational human being get such an important matter—a matter of life and death—exactly backwards?”

    No intelligent human could, unless there was a reason to and a desired outcome.

    There is and they do have them and they have nothing to do with safety and crime control. It’s all about control of the population because at some point they are going to get mad about what is being done to them and the people who are doing it.

    “Gun control” is a means of insuring that they don’t suddenly have to take a European vacation or permanent relocation.

  17. avatar Montesa_VR says:

    Ever see the movie Runaway Jury, with Gene Hackman? They took a novel that was written about the tobacco industry and changed the villains to the “gun lobby.” It was a perfect work of propaganda to magnify the revenue of the American gun industry by a factor of thousands. In reality, the US gun industry is a mouse pee in the ocean of our nation’s business, and would have gone bankrupt spending a fraction of the money the bad guys used to control the cinematic jury.

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