Gun Control Is Not Crime Control


“The thing that we have to remember is that laws are only as good as our citizen’s willingness to obey them.  Now, law abiding citizens, do in fact, obey them.  Criminals don’t obey them.”  – John Boehner, Speaker of the House, April 12, 2013

Criminal use of weapons, whether it is a firearm, knife, bat, hammer, hands, etc. is a statement of fact.  Criminals will use whatever means they have at their disposal to gain whatever advantage they can over their victim to gain whatever they want.  That’s the “sane” criminal – the criminal with a specific goal in mind for material gain.

The insane criminal, like those who are responsible for the horrific mass-murders in schools and shopping malls, really do not care about laws.  Their goal is to rack up a high body count before they’re stopped or killed so that somehow they will have their name in a record book.

Now I realize that the above is an over simplification of classes of criminals in our society, but bear with me.

In both cases, the restriction of a person’s ability to defend themselves with a firearm puts that person at risk for either one of these criminal groups.  It doesn’t matter if the person is in public or in their home, the safety of the individual is a personal responsibility.  It is not the responsibility of law enforcement, and this has been adjudicated in both State and Federal courts

This is nowhere more evident than the city of Chicago. Guns are banned, and yet the incidence of violent crime (gun and otherwise) being inflicted upon the disarmed populace is horrific. The police are not able or not willing (and definitely not obligated) to protect the neighborhoods from criminal violence and activity. People cannot legally defend themselves or their neighborhoods with firearms. Criminals now rule Chicago, and I’m not talking about the ones in City Hall.

Politicians and the elected “leaders” do not go after the criminals with weapons – that’s too hard and too dangerous.  Besides, the murders of people (usually the poor & defenseless in these crime-ridden cities) do not have the attention of the politicians because it’s too embarrassing to admit that there is no control of the criminal element in their city.  Instead, they jump on high-profile mass-murders like Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech to get their faces in front of their constituents so they can appear strong and leader-like.  And the media is their willing accomplice.

What really bugs me is that anytime some psycho goes on a rampage, the law-abiding citizens are held responsible and are punished by the passing of more rules, regulations, and restrictions.  The inevitable result is that now more and more people are now subject to that same violence.  And that means that the percentage of my being a victim of a violent crime goes up.  Perhaps now you understand why I have such an aversion to increased gun control banning legislation. The safety of my family and of myself is being compromised.

This, I cannot stand.

I am writing my Washington Congresscritters every week, and will start writing to the DNC stating my objections to the positions taken by my duly elected representatives which are against not only my personal concerns, but in violation of their oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

I invite you to do the same.

UPDATE:  April 14, 2013:

PoliceOne.com is an online resource for law enforcement officers, and recently surveyed 15,000+ officers concerning gun control.  Here are the results (full link is here):

  1. Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.
  2. The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.
  3. About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.
  4. Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions. Similarly, more than 61 percent said they would refuse to enforce such laws if they themselves were Chief or Sheriff.
  5. More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent).
  6. The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.
  7. More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.
  8. More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.
  9. More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.
  10. When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required. About 42 percent say it should be required for all weapons, with the remainder favoring training classes for certain weapons.
  11. While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.

About Tom Roland

EE for 25 Years, Two Patents - now a certified PMP. Married twice, burned once. One son with Asperger's Syndrome. Two cats. Conservative leaning to the Right. NRA Life Member.
This entry was posted in Gun Rights?, Political and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Gun Control Is Not Crime Control

  1. mabbam says:

    Someone asked a question on the Gretawire blog why anti- gun senators or congressmen don’t go on Sunday morning show like meet the press or face the nation. Obviously, the hosts of these shows are far from being impartial and are often biased in the extreme. The question. Is alwAys put this way, why are you against this legislation. Do you want to see the killing stopped. Even though no body who supports the legislation ever reads it. Even though the legislation will have no effect on the ability of a criminal to obtain a weapon whenever one is needed. The killing caused by the mentally deranged or psychiatric patient is difficult to stop because the pathology is not Always obvious even to the experienced clinician much less a layman. And even if it were so in the case of the shooter in Arizona current laws do not always permit such a person to be hospitalized and must be treated as an outpatient which has as we have seen many shortcomings. As Yogi Berra once said, or didn’t say, if this were a perfect world it wouldn’t be. If there was a guard at the bank it would ‘t be held up. False. If there was a policeman there it would have ended differently False. If the firemen got there a minute sooner they would ‘t have died False. This is an imperfect world and no matter what we do bad things are going to happen. Many times without rational explanation. Gun violence as well as every other conceivable kind of violence is often tragic beyond description. Why did this happen. Why did my child have to die . Would it have made a difference if it was not your child but your child’s best friend or the child of your best friends. There is no rational explanation anymore than there is when a plane crashes or a car crashes and some are dead and some have barely a scratch. B ut to insist on passing laws that will do absolutely nothing to prevent occurrences such as the Sandy Hook School murders just to score political points for the next election is disingenuous at best and provides a false sense of security for some until the next Aurora or Columbine or Sandy Hook. Both president Obama and Connecticut senator Blumenthal are exactly who I am referring to.
    reply from Wise Conservatism: Exactly. We have gotten to the point where if someone is killed it is supposed to be personal for all of us. It isn’t. Death, no matter how it comes is random and always has been. One minute one way or another and the results will be different. We have to realize this, or this PC crap that is happening is going to destroy us.

  2. tapline says:

    robert, I read with interest your take of the current anti-gun campaign being waged against law abiding American Citizens. It is Totally against the Constitution and I can’t for the life of me understand why recall petitions are not flying. Doesn’t our present Congress, Judiciary, and President’s swear allegiance to the constitution,this nation and to it’s laws. It seems to this writer that none of those legal representatives of the people, none of them, are upholding their oaths’ of Office. I cannot, cannot,, understand the present thinking coming from the Reps…They certainly are not representing the people. They have bankrupted the country. Tanked the dollar descimated the military, created a welfare mentalityand state, and communal thinking,,,infiltrated the Educational system,to create a new society,SOOOOOOO,,,( I just deleted the last part of my post because it was redundant) The point I was trying to make is now what’ s left…The ONe big thing this adinistration has been trying to do since beFore “Fast and Furious” Complete control ove the country without a means of the individual to protect himself or his propety……We have met the enemy and he is us.

  3. Thanks for your comment Tap….but I have another writer here, and he is the one that wrote this excellent post. We do need to wake up and smell the coffee. Traditional Americans like you and I need to start putting a stop to all of this.
    And Tom, thanks for the update that you put on this. It adds to an already excellent post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s