Fisking Federal Gun Control Proposals

I was asked recently what I thought about the proposals offered by the Obama administration in response to the Sandy Hook spree killing. I responded that I hadn’t looked at them carefully, mostly because I suspected they would likely be some kind of kabuki dance that, had they been in place at the time of the shooting, would have done absolutely nothing to stop the Sandy Hook killer. But I found a list at the New York Times and read through them. As I suspected . . .

Of the 35 items on the list, few would have had any appreciable chance of saving the lives of the Newtown victims. Exceptions include actions that might increase the number of school resource officers (what exactly are those “incentives”?), which is exactly what the NRA proposed. Much of it is data gathering, national dialoguing and other bureaucratic navel-gazing.  Some of it sounds legally problematic. To the surprise of no one who’s been paying attention for the last four years, many of them are obvious expansions of Federal authority.

A reinstitution of the Clinton era “assault weapons” ban is proposed, and a strengthened one at that. What “strengthened” means is left intentionally vague. The AWB made no measurable difference on gun crimes when it was law, but it did deprive Americans of firearms that have proven to be very popular after lifting the ban. Destroying the thousands of jobs that depend on the AR-15 and other firearms seems like a high price to pay for an effort that is, charitably, of inconclusive usefulness in saving lives. Note that theses studies don’t review incidents where an otherwise banned firearm allowed the owner to prevent a crime.

So for S&Gs, here’s by breakdown of Congress’s and the President’s proposals and how they would (or wouldn’t) have affected the Sandy Hook Killer:

Congressional actions:

1 – Requiring criminal background checks for all gun sales, including those by private sellers that currently are exempt.

Sandy Hook Killer (SHK) did not buy his gun from a dealer

2 – Reinstating and strengthening the ban on assault weapons that was in place from 1994 to 2004.

SHK did not use an “assault weapon” in spree killing

3 – Limiting ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.

It takes less than five seconds to change magazines. The best estimate of Newtown LEO response time that day was two minutes. SHK had plenty of time in the gun-free zone to change magazines.

4 – Banning the possession of armor-piercing bullets by anyone other than members of the military and law enforcement.

SHK did not use armor piercing bullets.

5 – Increasing criminal penalties for “straw purchasers,” people who pass the required background check to buy a gun on behalf of someone else.

The person who bought the guns used by the SHK followed all applicable laws. 

6 – Acting on a $4 billion administration proposal to help keep 15,000 police officers on the street.

May be useful – perhaps an extra cop or two in Newtown could have arrived in time to limit the spree killing to, say, 20 instead of 27.

7 – Confirming President Obama’s nominee for director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Replacing the dumbass who walked guns to drug cartels in Mexico sounds like a good idea. However, given the level of federal dumbassery, the new ATF director needs to be a non-dumbass. Good luck with that.

8 – Eliminating a restriction that requires the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to allow the importation of weapons that are more than 50 years old.

SHK’s firearm was not 50 years old

9 – Financing programs to train more police officers, first responders and school officials on how to respond to active armed attacks.

Having police who are well trained in dealing with an active shooter show up after a pile of people are killed isn’t as helpful as it sounds. SHK appears to have killed his victims in less than five minutes. The cops were, most likely, about eight minutes out. When seconds count, cops are only minutes away, even cops fully trained in dealing with an active shooter.

10 – Provide additional $20 million to help expand the a system that tracks violent deaths across the nation from 18 states to 50 states.

A good idea, so long as the data is gathered honestly. No effect on the SHK.

11 – Providing $30 million in grants to states to help schools develop emergency response plans.

While not objectionable on its face (save for a Federalist objection), why don’t schools already have these plans – it’s not like Sandy Hook was the first school shooting ever. Local schools have money to do all sorts of non-education-related booshwah and twaddle. Why do they need more money to make plans to protect students? Are school administrators, with six figure salaries and expensive degrees, so incompetent that they cannot come up with a plan with the resources they already have?

12 – Provide financing to expand mental health programs for young people.

The details will matter for this proposal and if past performance is any guide, look for a boondoggle that does nothing to screen for and intervene on behalf of someone like the SHK.

Executive actions

13- Issuing a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

Details matter – and what data are the feds holding back that would have prevented the SHK?

14 – Addressing unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

These legal barriers are called “the law” which was passed by Congress, signed by the President and have withstood judicial review. Same goes for state laws. Will we be better off in the long run if the President can just declare duly enacted laws “unnecessary”?

15 – Improving incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

Why would states need a bribe to do something that could actually stop someone like SHK?

16 – Directing the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

This seems, at best, pointless. Giving the AG wider latitude to arbitrarily define who is “dangerous” would be, well, dangerous. People like convicted felons are already prohibited from owning firearms. The undiagnosed mentally ill who have not yet committed a crime cannot be screened either. SHK was disturbed, but he did not get his firearm through retail channels. To stop him, you would have had to confiscate his mother’s firearms. No effect on the SHK.

17 – Proposing a rule making to give law enforcement authorities the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

Does he mean a NICS check, or something more intrusive? Can cops then just seize guns and run background checks after something like a Terry search? How long will “a full background check” take? No effect on the SHK.

18 – Publishing a letter from the A.T.F. to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

Background checks generally only serve to inconvenience the law abiding. No effect on the SHK.

19 – Starting a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

You mean an educational program with the thundering success of, for instance, the No Child Left Behind act? How about using the successful one that’s already in place – the NRA’s Eddie Eagle program. No effect on the SHK. 

20 – Reviewing safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

Again, pointless at best. Some gun locks that engage the trigger are unsafe with a loaded firearm, but those designs have been phased out. Safes are safes, and the market already knows which ones are better than the rest. Exactly how the SKK’s mother stored her firearms still hasn’t been made public. 

21 – Issuing a presidential memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

If you trace a stolen gun back to its original owner, will they return it? Why would knowing the original owner matter? Is this a prelude to punishing a gun owner whose property was stolen? No effect on the SHK. 

22 – Releasing a report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and making it widely available to law enforcement authorities.

Data honestly collected and analyzed is usually helpful. Emphasis on honest. No effect on the SHK. 

23 – Nominating an A.T.F. director.

See note 7 above. No effect on the SHK.

24 – Providing law enforcement authorities, first responders and school officials with proper training for armed attack situations.

See note 9 above.

25 – Maximizing enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

This is another meaningless statement. Did the folks who made this list go to college? Did they get a degree? Can they get their money back? No effect on the SHK.

26 – Issuing a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to research gun violence.

Gun violence is not a contagious microbe. Has the CDC done such a good job in their primary work they have extra time on their hands? This sounds more like the Attorney General’s job. No effect on the SHK.

27 – Directing the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenging the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

What the hell does this mean? Why is the AG doing this. If it is a safety issue, why isn’t the Consumer Product Safety Commission doing it? No effect on the SHK.

28 – Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

My response to such a question from my doctor is “None of your damned business.” Does the ACA compel me to answer? If a criminal is asked the question and answers “yes” does the doctor have to report it? And again, HIPAA. This sounds like a pointless distraction from the work of preventative medicine. How exactly is a doctor grilling patients about the guns in their home going to prevent the next school shooting?

29 – Releasing a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

You’d like to think that someone with eight years of medical school training would already know this, but lots of doctors voted for Obama, so, maybe this is necessary. Again, no effect on the SHK.

30 – Providing incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

Police patrols is a state issue, not a federal one. How about we reduce the federal burden on states so they can pay for their own SROs. And yes, this is one that would have, potentially, had a positive effect on Sandy Hook. The NRA is anxiously awaiting their thank-you card from the President. 

31 – Developing model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

Will it be done by the same geniuses who advise that victims throw a book at an active shooter? Will armed citizens be part of the plan? Spree killers don’t stop until they meet armed resistance. And when they do, the majority of the time they punch their own ticket. Will an Obama-directed response plan include arming school staff or allowing armed citizens on campus?

32 – Releasing a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

No particular objection, but the SHK was not a Medicaid patient.

33 – Finalizing regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within insurance exchanges.

ObamaCare will wreak havoc on the health care system. There’s no reason to believe it will be any better for mental health services. No effect on the SHK.

34 – Committing to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

This looks like a repeat of 33, padding the list.  See note 25. No effect on the SHK.

35 – Starting a national dialogue on mental health led by Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, and Arne Duncan, the secretary of education.

So far, the national conversation has centered on demonizing gun owners. How would that have stopped SHK?