“At least three other times during the period studied by The Star, charges of possession by a serious violent felon were dropped against someone who later was charged with a gun-related homicide. All three of the brutal deaths occurred when the killers would have been in prison if they had been convicted on the earlier gun charges and given the advisory sentence.” And there you have it: the reason why “gun violence” is endemic in Indianapolis, Indiana, the home of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America founder Shannon Watts. A “stay-at-home” Mom who has nothing to say about her hometown’s failed criminal justice system. She’s too busy trying to get the Kroger supermarket chain to ban open carry. Which raises another question . . .
Is Shannon Watts racist? If the Moms jefe was really concerned about reducing the number of firearms-related homicides in America, she’d be focusing her efforts on urban African-American communities. Because that’s where “gun violence” lives. Not in the gated communities and the Lady and the Tramp streets where her children live, as well the majority of her supporters.
When mapped, the geographies of gun violence concentrated themselves in isolated pockets of the city — small neighborhoods with predominantly black populations.
Papachristos said the crime statistics were no anomaly. From Boston to Stockton, Calif., research showed Chicago was representative of a larger trend in the U.S. It was similarly noted that disparities in obesity, education and poverty could easily be mapped to the same impoverished areas.
The above quote comes from Using Data to Combat Gun Violence [via govtech.com]. At no point does the article mention gangs, drugs or violent felons. The panel – New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu, ShotSpotter Senior Vice President David Chipman, Philadelphia Youth Commission Executive Director Jamira Burley and Yale University Sociologist Andy Papachristos – dance around these central indeed defining “data points” like a City banker avoiding a pile of poo.
Which is some trick.
Recent supporting statistical evidence of the disparity between black and white victims of gun violence was published in a Columbia University-authored study in August 2013. In a state-by-state analysis — taken from 2000-2010 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — research revealed that firearm related deaths are twice as high for African-Americans compared to Caucasians.
Landrieu said that in his opinion, such pervasive and repeating statistics aren’t just indicative of a problem for a minority population, but display a racial apathy from the governing majority.
The Mayor of New Orleans is not wrong. The Democratic governing majority of New Orleans – and other cities with large African-American and Hispanic populations – doesn’t give a shit about “gun violence.” They’re not ready, willing or able to address the fact that “gun violence” is almost entirely restricted to their communities’ criminal population. And that the systems designed to combat and control this group are both corrupt and ineffective.
As the Indy Star investigation reveals, the criminal justice systems where violent armed felons ply their trade singularly fails to lock-up firearms-wielding bad guys until it’s too late. And then not long enough. “Leandrew “L-Rock” Beasley, a drug dealer with a history of gun violence, took part in a wild and deadly shootout on the Northeastside not long after getting out of prison in 2012.” What more needs saying? Just this . . .
America is home to firearms-related homicides by domestic abusers. There are deadly negligent discharges too. Spree killers, even. But the numbers don’t lie. Providing we’re excluding suicides, America’s ballistic carnage has NOTHING to do with legal gun owners. It’s all about the gangs, who operate mostly (but not exclusively) in minority communities.
Anyone who doesn’t face that fact, anyone who justifies meaningless gun control laws in the name of public safety, is turning a blind eye to the suffering in America’s minority communities. Because they’re racists? What other explanation is there?
It’s about time somebody manned up and pointed this out. Want to reduce “gun violence”? Focus on suicide prevention and impoverished neighborhoods in urban centers. Recruit African-American community leaders to take a stand as well.
As for Moms Who Demand Action, well … go where the action is for a change.
If I were tasked with reducing ‘gun violence’ I would start by excluding suicide from the statistics (do we have ‘rope violence?’). In that moment I could cut gun violence by a huge percentage. I’ll take my bonus now, please.
I was speaking to the leaders of “gun violence prevention” groups. They’re fond of pumping up the numbers by including suicides committed with guns, so I was pointing out the hypocrisy of failing to go after the cause of the large majority of the numbers of deaths they trumpet. The #2 cause, by a large margin, has been illuminated by this report.
Instead, Bloomberg, Watts, Violence Policy Center, Brady & Co. have focused their efforts on the numerical minority, law-abiding gun owners. And their vitriol of their followers is directed almost exclusively at law-abiding gun owners. Can’t help but think that’s intentional, especially among groups that censor factual comments posted in support of 2A rights.
Heck, VPC even keeps a (partly falsified) running tally of shootings allegedly perpetrated by CCW holders, despite their something like 10-times-lower propensity for committing crime of any type. It’s called “Concealed Carry Killers,” and it includes suicides, justifiable homicides, shootings by retired LEOs and even shootings by people who clearly were not CCW holders. It also focuses attention on a category of firearms-related fatalities that is about 1 percent of the total numbers claimed by anti-gun groups.
Any economics professor will tell you that if you want to reduce costs, focus on the biggest expense categories, not the outliers. Why do the antis obsessively focus on the wrong things?
That’s not a rhetorical question, btw. I’d really like to hear answers.
“Why do the antis obsessively focus on the wrong things?”
Long answer short, it’s a power play. Most of these folks want to have some form of power over the public because it makes them feel important and rationalizes their feelings that they are right and good and everyone else is wrong and bad.
Plus, this is easier that actually addressing the real problem and suffering the backlash from that portion of society that would start calling them racist and/or hating the poor. This is why you never see members of Moms Demand Assassination of Gun Owners in America (hey, it’s detailed here how the group’s supporters want to commit violence against gun owners) in any urban center, in the poorer crime ridden neighborhoods trying to get the multiple felons to give up their guns. You’ll never get Shannon or her Mommy supporters anywhere near an area like the South side of Chicago or North side of Milwaukee without a presidential size police presence.
Lastly, by ignoring the plight, they can spin and manipulate those in the affected communities for votes. Sierra Guyton is less valuable to the gun control complex than her killer Sylvester Lewis because the emotion over her death has ebb, but if they can find a way to get Sylvester to be able to vote, he’s alive to give false promises to in exchange for his vote.
Even shorter answer:
The criminals would do illegal things to them. Right quick.
“Why do the antis obsessively focus on the wrong things?”
Because their leaders don’t want to solve the real problem, and their followers are gullible enough to follow wherever their leaders lead.
It is painfully clear what is causing the crime, violence, even ‘gun violence’ in America, and with enough effort we could solve the problem. But then the people in those crime-ridden neighborhoods/cities would have to start voting for workable (conservative, Republican) solutions. In other words, they would have to start voting against the failing (progressive, Democrat) solutions, and admit that those ‘solutions’ have created the problems.
The Civilian Disarmament Industry is not about reducing crime or violence. It is about taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. Period. All of their tactics are intended to make it more and more difficult for people to legally possess firearms. Senator Dianne Feinstein said it best many years ago, “If I could have taken away every gun in America – Turn them all in – I would have. But we just didn’t have the votes.”
Statements like “We need to have a national conversation about gun violence” presupposes the question.
Let’s have a national conversation about violence, instead, and see where that leads us.
Thank you. This is exactly the reply I give to anyone who claims to care about the reduction of gun violence. Let’s just drop Gun from the equation and talk about the underlying problem of violence. That pretty much covers it all.
And also shuts them right down.
There is a difference between realism and racism. The difference is a racism being racism for the sake of an emotional response is not fact based. Realism can come to any conclusion and be simply that. A conclusion that was reached by assembling all the facts available and then finding the most probable unbiased answer to any given question.
One could ask in the end if the question itself was flawed but one cannot question the end result unless the means to which were questionable.
If a woman is better at sales than her husband than an unbiased conclusion would be that she is going to be better suited to the car dealership. If there is a statistical trend showing most women are better at sales… That would not be sexist unless you reverse the gender and a group lacking critical thinking skills were to call you on it.
If you don’t like the idea of a disease spreading from a region of predominantly darker skinned peoples…
If you don’t agree with the current darker skinned president…
label it racism and move on to the next hurdle on our way to socialism.
I’ve been down this road. I did lots of statistical work on this subject in the early/mid-90’s, when DiFi and her cohort were ramming the Brady Bill, AW “ban” and other legislation down our throats.
No one wants to hear the truth. Why? Because you can’t handle the truth. Reading the actual, hard, unflinching statistical truth about this subject requires people to quit making excuses for blacks’ behavior and start demanding accountability.
And the vast majority of people won’t do that.
CORRECT.
Thanks Dys. Facts matter, especially as to 2A rights, and being frank about them here is a service, that many who lurk seeking information, just aren’t going to find elsewhere.
Lots of interactive data here from Pew: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/08/22/race-demographics/
and their careful PC speak says volumes: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/08/22/kings-dream-remains-an-elusive-goal-many-americans-see-racial-disparities/
The damage done to the black family by the left-progressive “narrative” still can’t be acknowledged, even as black citizens hopes fade from the fakery foisted upon them in 2008 and 2012.
Just to add to the blunt opinion, IMHO, the biggest setback to civil rights in this century will be hiring a POTUS simply based on skin color, rather than accomplishments and experience, and worse, for Congress to allow his activist AG, peddling the same old victim falsehoods, to continue as long as he did, to abuse justice.
The good news is many REAL responsible black role models spoke up after Ferguson, and called it the way they saw it- and as proof of the tide I hope is slowly turning – they didn’t get run out of town and Uncle Tom’d as so many before them, Thomas Sowell, Bill Crosby, Judge Thomas.
Of course Shannon is racist. No love for Dirk 🙂
much truth in that statement
Once you go Dirk …
There are no easy answers to this problem. That pisses Americans off, because we always have to have an easy answer (or a new pill) to solve problems in this country.
That being said, if you want to put a major dent in violence in the US, then we need to stop specializing in incarceration. The culture of the prison is now on our streets. Look at the tats, the baggy pants and the apathetic approach kids take to being locked up (“So what, I can jail!”). We–through our demand for “tough”criminal justice policies–have created this.
And the policy that keeps the incarceration machine chugging along is drug prohibition. Prohibition of any kind creates an employment program for gangsters, sociopaths and desperate poor people who are willing to take huge risks to get paid. Scrap prohibition! Set up systems of legal, regulated sales for currently illicit drugs. This will, in time, seriously undermine organized criminal groups and reduce incentives for street violence.
Again, there are no easy answers (like “sensible gun control). But doing away with our latest form of prohibition could be a game-changer.
Yep, said the ex-cop. Many in law enforcement have said this for years.
I’m not sure that having pharmaceutical grade crank and smack available to all comers at the corner candy store will be the best solution. The law of unintended consequences and all that. Thoreau put it well when he said that there are a thousand striking at the branches of evil for every one that is striking at the root. What we need in our society, among many other needs, is more virtue. That won’t be an easy task.
I can’t argue with more virtue. But let me explain my position a little further.
I’m not talking about putting narcotics in any old corner store. Narcotics like Heroin and other “hard” drugs (Meth, Coke, etc) would need to be treated differently from Marijuana, which should be treated like alcohol and tobacco. Harder drugs should be most widely available at medical facilities, where addicts can be weaned off of drugs instead of suffering from withdrawal symptoms. These drugs could also be sold at pharmacies and may be available by prescription to addicts who don’t wish to go to the clinic. If adults really want to experiment with heroin, cocaine, etc, then they should be able to obtain it from a pharmacist after signing a waiver form acknowledging that they understand the risks and won’t sue if they OD (or something like that).
For more information on legalizing and regulating drugs, I’d encourage you check out the website of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP).
+1 You have hit the nail directly on the head. You want to reduce violence, figure out a way to make recreational drug use legal. There are plenty of examples out there.
“They’re not ready, willing or able to address the fact that “gun violence” is almost entirely restricted to their communities’ criminal population. And that the systems designed to combat and control this group are both corrupt and ineffective”
Oh, they could stop it if they wanted to, but the political calculus is as follows: They believe if they crack down on the core Democratic voting groups, that they will then loose their position of power and their seat in government.
They are FAR more successful at blaming someone or something regarding the problem and then showing up for photo-ops at funerals to decry the violence than to actually do the necessary work. IN many ways, that violence is power because it make dependence for the party in charge. Oh sure, they will do a little bit here or there to make headlines, but their hearts are not really into it otherwise the issues could have been solved many years ago. I look at Stockton, CA or Camden, NJ were doing nothing and complaining about it is normal.
There are plenty of stories from around the country (I will give a h/t to New Haven, CT) where when the police ACTUALLY does something, you see crime go down. You can argue how successful Rudy Giuliani’s “broken window” policy ultimately was but it actually cleaned up large portions of New York.
Or, you can just continue to believe this report that says “unleaded gas” and “Xbox” are the greatest contributors to all crime reduction nation wide. (http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/04/22177302-are-the-xbox-and-unleaded-gas-helping-keep-you-safe-from-violent-crime)
Too few people seek elected office to solve problems these days. Office is an end, not a means. True of both major parties, unfortunately.
“Oh, they could stop it if they wanted to, but the political calculus is as follows: They believe if they crack down on the core Democratic voting groups, that they will then loose their position of power and their seat in government.”
This is it. You nailed it. Why do minority gang members get a pass from our criminal “justice” system, while Progressive politicians continue to blame law-abiding gun owners? It’s as simple as this: the true power in a democracy does not reside in “The People,” it resides in the people who tell the people what to think. The commoners are basically a big voting bank for our Progressive overlords. When certain minority populations fall in line at the voting booth, they can pretty much do whatever they want in between. When other populations refuse to fall in line on Progressive thinking, they must be punished, preferably by eradicating their culture from the earth. The average Progressive thinks of gun owners as white, male, blue-collar folks. (The fact that this stereotype is inaccurate is irrelevant.) These are exactly the people that Progressives want to be able to count on as a voting bank, and they respond viscerally that we refuse to fall in line. Look at how the Left responds to Sarah Palin: a common person (she went to the University of what? and who can even understand her in that gauche flyover accent?), and a woman at that, how DARE she have the nerve to oppose Right Thinking?
Gun control punishes us as a population since we won’t fall in line. Our Progressive overlords could give a rat’s behind about crime or violence. If they did care, they’d check to see how Giuliani turned NYC from a murderous rat’s nest into a livable first-world city. (I’m talking to you here, Rahm.) But they’re not interested. Just keep the votes coming. The Millennial Kingdom would be right around the corner if it weren’t for those pesky mouth-breathing hunter types.
Maybe we should be focused more on improving these impoverished neighborhoods instead of wasting money on gun control laws…
Looking at you Gates, Allen, and the mother of all Bloomberg….
A gang isn’t as appealing when you have something to live for. The best anti gang program is a decent job and a family. Not saying that’s easy to accomplish, but that should be the goal.
The best anti gang program is a decent job and a family.
Of course, but neither can be created by government. Neither will be created by government. And judging by events, the G hates jobs and families.
And that’s the truth that no one wants to talk about.
No one wants to admit that the “Great Society” programs, and all the other programs since for single mothers, have utterly destroyed the black family in the US. Out of wedlock birth rates in the black community now run 74 to 75%, whereas before the Great Society programs, the OOW birth rate in the black community was about 29%.
When children don’t have father figures, they get their clues on what is acceptable male behavior from older males around them, and if those older male figures are thugs, guess what? Thuggish, criminal behavior is seen as acceptable.
No one wants to admit that lily-white, “caring” liberals destroyed the black family in the US, not even conservatives. Everyone wants to tip-toe around the issue and just keep doubling down on the failed policies since the late 60’s.
And now, the “doubling down” comes in the form of sanctioning rampant immigration of unskilled labor from third world countries, which depresses wages worst of all for young, single black males. If we want to re-establish the black family in the US, it has to be at the very least economically viable and feasible to form families.
Aw hell, I’ll admit it: inner city blacks and Hispanics (and illegal immigrants) have an unusually high crime, poverty, and pregnancy rates. Typically lower than white and Asian populations. There, I said it, and I’m white.
The failure of our politicians and voting populace to stare unflinchingly into these truths continues to pull our nation into a downward spiral. And if these truths cannot be used to celebrate government growth and inefficiency, they are not useful to “let’s solve problem with more government” style politicians.
Our words here would instantly be dismissed here by the liberal progressive media as racism. They’d be calling for our jobs, and our heads.
Gun control and registration initiative 594 in Washington State. Big contributors? Bill Gates half a million. Melinda Gates, half a million the same day. Nicolas Hanauer one million. Steve Ballmer, 580 grand. Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen, half a million.
Gee, a few million dollars spent in the urban centers of Washington State would probably go a longer way toward helping inner city drug and gang violence than persecuting law abiding Washington state citizens will.
+1000
The Gates Foundation (funded almost completely by Bill and Melinda Gates) does several very good things with their millions of dollars every year. Occasionally, the Gates family does something we might not agree with. Overall, they are doing a lot of good for the world and their community.
Political correctness has got to be the most ass backward policy to ever dribble out of the reeking sludge that is prog thinking. They wring their hands over what to do while refusing to even acknowledge the issues at hand. As was demonstrated very well in the UK this year.
“Sir, we’re getting reports from girls that gangs of Asians(Arabs) are sexually harassing them in the streets. It seems they’re facing repeated and coordinated attacks involving rape and sexual slavery. Should we do something?
Of course not, how dare you even imply the rapists were Asian?(Arab)
Sir, the victims are the ones claiming their rapists were groups of Asian(Arab) men.
Well clearly they and you are a bunch of ignorant racists, and we can’t have people thinking we’re not tolerant like the damn Yanks.”
The result? You have definite proof that prog thinking enables and even protects the systematic rape of minors. All in the name of political correctness. Keep it classy progs.
obesity, education, poverty/gov’t grants . translation: fat, dumb and happy. Shannon needs to re-focus and find some real (single) moms who demand their kids make it to age 18 . . . how about that Sweetheart?
BAM!
Here’s how I look at it. It’s not race, it’s culture. Nobody should be surprised if the majority of those who embrace the drug/rap/gang general style of culture happen to be from a particular racial group, but neither should we be surprised when members of all other races embrace it in lesser or greater numbers.
Equally, members of any race can also embrace cultures which celebrate order, respect for your fellow human beings, hard work, and all the other traditional American values the other side seems to hate.
Race and culture are pretty closely linked in LA and Chicago. I have less experience with the racial issues in NYC.
I’m up in WA, and sure, race and culture are closely matched. The white guys trying to talk like rappers are a minority, but man for man they cause about the same amount of trouble. The ridiculous thing for me has always been the thug life guys trying to minimize the achievements of people like Colin Powell, Condi Rice, and everyone else like them.
Even Harry Reid called Clarence Thomas a white man a few months ago, and the media barely noticed. Those blacks and hispanics who actually integrated into mainstream culture are just as successful as anyone else. If there is going to be any success in changing the massive bias in crime numbers where racial minorities are concerned, it will come from destroying the culture and welcoming the people into regular America.
That’s what really frosts me.
OK, so the black thug culture wants to blame everything on whitey. OK, I get that “demonization of the other” thing. It might not be accurate, it might be a convenient excuse for their own failings, but I get it.
But when the usual black leaders (eg, the Justice Brothers, Van Jones, et al) start tearing down the most accomplished blacks in the US who happen to be conservative and/or Republican, just because these highly accomplished people aren’t peddling the usual racial victimhood line, and the thugs claim that kids who study, learn and show academic achievement are “acting white,” that’s when I just lose any patience for their twaddle.
Gun control advocates are racist. They have been since colonial times. The very first gun control laws, passed in the colonies and later these United States, were written explicitly and exclusively to disarm people of color. The same goes for every single solitary law that was written before and after the birth of this nation. It only makes it harder for the poor and disadvantaged to get their hands on guns, a significant portion of which are minorities, most of whom live in or around the inner city cesspools deliberately created by neo-Liberal social and economic policies.
Indeed. Clayton Cramer wrote a paper years back on the “Racist Roots of Gun Control.”
The modern gun control movement was started to keep guns out of the hands of freed blacks after the Civil War. The earliest found gun control laws were in the north and put prohibitions on free blacks from owning and carrying guns even before the Civil War.
God almighty I can’t believe what I just read. Bravo to TTAG for telling it (almost) like it is. Black people kill each other by the thousands every year, and nary a peep. But let a white person kill a black person, and you have Ferguson.
Cities throughout America evolve the same as any other organic entity. What you are seeing in Ferguson for instance is yet another majority black neighborhood in the final stages of destroying itself. As the white flight continues in our large cities one of the results is that the crime increases, until you have another Detroit. It WILL happen in Ferguson. And when it does, white people will be blamed for it. Per usual. Ho hum.
I don’t think that we have a race problem, per se. I truly think that this is something so simple that it is insidious. They are just plain stupid. I, being a Black person, can comfortably say that. This is not all, of course, but definitely enough to lend credence to the notion. I live smack dab in the hood. I always have. This understanding is far from being anectdotal as many of you have also witnessed it. This is also not an attack, no, it is an observation. What I have to look at every single day that I walk out of my door is the effects of a people who have, en masse, chosen to be entertained and not informed. There is no understanding about how anything in this world works, what a work ethic is, what our government actually is, what their rights are, etc, etc. Until that switch is made expect more violence, more brutality, more madness, more ridiculous protests, more excuses for barbarism, more detachment from reality, and more insanity.
I agree completely. And so did Dr. King, many years ago.
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” ― Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
And I think the ROOT CAUSE is a society that has encouraged them to become dependent on government for every part of their life.
“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.” ― Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia: Query 19, 1787)
In a development of true irony, the print version of the Indy Star report carried the headline “Gun Laws Too Weak.” That fact illustrates yet another chronic and substantial contributor to the problem: members of the media who are either ignorant, incompetent or possessed of a personal agenda. The point was not at all that the laws are too weak; it’s that the laws are not being enforced. With a couple of keystrokes, an editor (or whoever wrote the headline) transformed an otherwise fact-based article into an advertisement for the agenda advanced by MDA and their ilk.
This is not a minor point. Perhaps it’s part of the same journalistic mindset that led the vast majority of media outlets covering the shooting rampage at the Appalachian School of Law to omit the fact that the shooter was stopped by individuals using legally owned guns, and instead report that he was tackled by unarmed bystanders. (Covered by John Lott, Ph.D., in More Guns, Less Crime.)
#1 this study was conducted by a newspaper. It wasn’t “scientific” at all. No one screened for bias, in fact their basic research questions were biased to start out with. Why aren’t the results of this “study” published in some criminal justice professional journal? Because it is all BS and they are just trying to push an agenda.
#2 why doesn’t the media talk about the results from the scientifically conducted research by the CDC and NIH (national institute for health) about gun violence? You know the one the President of the United States ordered after Sandy Hook in a big publicity stunt surrounded by kids as part of his 13 Executive Orders…. That study was closely vetted to ensure no bias or politics one was or another played a part in the results. Oh that’s right, same answer to the first question… Answered don’t fit their agenda
Excellent article. Backs up the trite but true statement that prisons have a revolving door. If the article could be condensed further into some sound bytes we might be able to make some progress towards addressing the issues. It’s always difficult to form a strategy based on facts when your opponent chooses to fight a war of attrition.
When I point out to gun-control advocates that over half of gun deaths are suicides, and of the remainder, about two-thirds are gang-related, nobody ever seems to have a response.
Violent felons need to be incarcerated for much, much longer (for life, where murder, rape, etc. are involved). If we do that, then our violent felony rate will decrease sharply (given the number of violent felonies committed by repeat offenders). And while I can’t get behind making illicit drugs legal, perhaps there’s another solution than incarceration with violent felons? (Oh, and if we close the freaking border, maybe we can stem the inflow of those drugs – and their distributors – in the first place.)
I firmly believe 3% of our population (police, lawyers, judges, corrections) have a VESTED interest revolving criminals (about 10% of the population) through the judicial system. Job security
Gun ownership is a civil right. Opposition to civil rights puts the holder of that opinion into a category of people who are both a minority and outcasts within American civil society. They have a right to hold that opinion, but civilized society has a right and an obligation to marginalize and ostracize them.
Here is another commentary thats relevant:
Eric Raymond, Armed and Dangerous
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6286
Some well meaning people here are taking a short sighted and simplistic approach to ths problem. According to the latest cencus bureau numbers, 48% of children (0-18 years old) have a Mom that has NEVER been married. Add in the single parent housholds due to death or divorce and you have a recipe for disaster. We have driven religion from the public square. We devalue the traditional family. We have a social welfare system that provides incentive to not get job skills in entry level jobs or get married. Then we wonder why we have a generation of narcacistic, entitled punks who for any perceived slight or “disrespect” feel justified to resort to violence. Until we address the root cause we are just putting a finger in the hole in the dike. In the meantime we have to protect society by putting the violent behind bars.
I hit up the link to see if they actually had a map available (which they don’t seem to) then I found this little tid bit at the bottom of the page. It made me kinda chuckle; in a “go cry me a river” kinda way.
“What you have to do to actually trace a firearm would appall you, when today we’re talking about big data, and Uber and all that stuff,” Papachristos said. “[Often] to trace a firearm, you have to physically go to a federally licensed dealer to look for a piece of paper, and it could be hundreds of miles away because we don’t allow that part of it to be regulated.”
Awww, is your little federal registration system not as good as you want it to be? Boo hoo hoo…
Comments are closed.