speaking of more gun laws

[Bob_Church 7]

You'll notice that a lot of people say "why create laws when we don't enforce the ones we have?" I'd add "at least not adequately."

I remembered reading this article but just now found it. The problem is that it turns out to be in a paper I don't subscribe to. Well, didn't, I signed up. Since this is behind a firewall I made a pdf and will add it as an attachment. It's important to read the entire thing so you get the ying of how many serious laws he broke for how long, and the yang of a very mild sentence.
As some people say, including me, we have to be careful that new laws don't only affect people who obey laws.

Coolville gunshop .pdf

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

Hi Bob,

Quote

when we don't enforce the ones we have?

It looks to me as though the laws he broke put in the slammer. Good; this what we need to do with these scofflaws that think they do not need to comply.

Other than that, I do not know what you are trying to say.

Jerry Baumchen

[Bob_Church 7]

JerryBaumchen

Hi Bob,

Quote

when we don't enforce the ones we have?

It looks to me as though the laws he broke put in the slammer. Good; this what we need to do with these scofflaws that think they do not need to comply.

Other than that, I do not know what you are trying to say.

Jerry Baumchen

He got three years for illegally selling hundreds of guns that will be impossible to trace. His wife got probation.
And it took them a couple of years to figure out that he was selling guns to someone who had the same name that he did.
Enforcement of existing laws is a joke.

[Phil1111 910]

That may not be the case. Who knows what other co-operation he made with ATF or prosecutors.

[Westerly 61]

Bob_Church

***Hi Bob,

Quote

when we don't enforce the ones we have?

It looks to me as though the laws he broke put in the slammer. Good; this what we need to do with these scofflaws that think they do not need to comply.

Other than that, I do not know what you are trying to say.

Jerry Baumchen

Enforcement of existing laws is a joke.

Depends on where you live. It's not all lackadaisical everywhere. I've seen some very ridiculous sentences handed down for rather minor offenses. People have gotten prison time for stuff that wouldn't even be worth bringing up charges in some areas. In some cases, they have gotten prison time for something that is not even illegal in the next state over. That happens all of the time. For profit prisoning has lead to over sentencing of relatively minor offenses, and took substance and mental health abuse and turned it into a criminal matter so now instead of sending addicts to doctors we send them to prison so they can become career criminals and visitors of the system for life.

So yea, you are right, it is a bit of a joke. Just not quite how you think it is.

[riggerrob 558]

Agreed!
The biggest difference between American gun laws and Canadian gun laws is that here, background checks are performed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, before (firearms) Posession and Acquisition Licences are issued.

One of my pet peeves - about Canada - is all the hundreds of laws that are still on the books but rarely enforced. For example: Canadian police ignore hundreds of minor traffic violations everyday and only charge scoff-law drivers - with minor offences - after an accident. Often a variety of charges are laid to give lawyers leeway to plea-bargain. If they can convince the accused into pleading guilty to a minor offence, then they do not need to waste court time.

Any new law should include a sunset clause, forcing Parliament to review its effectiveness 5 or 10 years later. Sunset clauses allow ineffective laws to quietly disappear.
New laws may be well-intentioned, but career criminals eventually find loopholes.

[tkhayes 125]

simple solution. background checks move to law enforcement and LEO's act as an escrow for all gun sales. period. all of them. no transaction happens without going through LEO directly to complete the purchase. the gun, the money, the bill of sale and the tracking and background checks.

yes that creates a black market for guns, but that arguably already exists, as demonstrated by the article. But it eliminates the lack of background checks for private sales and removes the compliance from the dealers.
LEOs, many of them, are elected officials, so the burden of compliance goes back to the people in some way shape or form to choose the people that will supervise the system.

Society does not see a gun dealer whose sells a handgun without a required check as a 'criminal', especially if they are a white, local good-ol-boy local gun shop. He's just one of us, he made a mistake, he's not really a bad guy, so the system is not enforced for a lot of societal and cultural reasons, not just legal reasons, and he criminal justice system does not reward LEOs for going after this guy. LEOs get rewarded for going after low level drug offenders of color.

Put the gun sales and checks directly in the hands of LEO and increase the penalties. ATF can then focus on that black market, as they should. Track all guns sales so that when a gun shows up at a crime, we can find out where it came from and how it got there. i.e. who was the last person that had this before it went to the guy that committed the crime.

I am pretty sure all those 'legal gun owners' as we like to call them, will think twice about selling that gun under the table because they know it might show up someday at a crime scene and they will be held responsible for it.

As it stands today in most places, that private sale is not tracked nor is it required to be. therefore there is no criminal aspect even if the buyer walks across the street and shoots someone in the face right after they buy it.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

this is a glaring loophole that easily puts guns in the hands of people that most Americans would agree should not have them. And then we claim that 'we are not enforcing the existing laws'. The existing laws are fundamentally ineffective. go ahead and enforce them, it will only make a minuscule difference.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

As it stands today in most places, that private sale is not tracked nor is it required to be. therefore there is no criminal aspect even if the buyer walks across the street and shoots someone in the face right after they buy it.

I tried to explain to Billvon that Colorado’s universial background check law would un-enforceable. He didn’t believe me. Well, there hasn’t been any enforcement of it.

Derek V

[tkhayes 125]

is it unenforceable due to constitutionality, money, unwillingness or a host of other reasons? Any law is enforceable, but generally there are ways to stop laws that are on the books. The common way to do it is to defund the enforcement side of it

Which is a sign of irresponsible govt. Should be obvious that if you are going to pass a law, then you MUST fund the enforcement of that law. Another political game that we let our elected officials get away with and I am sure the Constitution allows it as well.

Do not call lists come to mind. It still exists but there is no money to enforce the violators with the penalties. SO you get 6 calls a day because no one gives a shit.

[Bob_Church 7]

tkhayes

is it unenforceable due to constitutionality, money, unwillingness or a host of other reasons? Any law is enforceable, but generally there are ways to stop laws that are on the books. The common way to do it is to defund the enforcement side of it

Which is a sign of irresponsible govt. Should be obvious that if you are going to pass a law, then you MUST fund the enforcement of that law. Another political game that we let our elected officials get away with and I am sure the Constitution allows it as well.

Do not call lists come to mind. It still exists but there is no money to enforce the violators with the penalties. SO you get 6 calls a day because no one gives a shit.

And in this case we get a federally licensed gun shop owner, not some parking lot or gun show deal, selling hundreds of guns and putting them in his own name for years. It's hard to imagine anything that undermines the idea of gun control any more than that. And yet he got a year less than the OU janitor who got caught stealing an old vcr.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Hooknswoop

Quote

As it stands today in most places, that private sale is not tracked nor is it required to be. therefore there is no criminal aspect even if the buyer walks across the street and shoots someone in the face right after they buy it.

I tried to explain to Billvon that Colorado’s universial background check law would un-enforceable. He didn’t believe me. Well, there hasn’t been any enforcement of it.

Derek V

Can you try and explain to me how gun-free zones create the safest environment?

[tkhayes 125]

If the entire country was a gun free zone, then there would be a large reduction in gun violence methinks. But because you can have a gun free zone and right next to it a gun show that gives away AR-15's to anyone that wants one, the idea of the gun free zone actually becomes ineffective.

Like trying to keep the dandelions out of you yard, or the fire-ants.... if the neighbor is not doing the same as you, then there is only so much you can do.

Funny, we have no mass killings by death ray lasers..... and that is because there are no death ray lasers readily available to anyone to use.... The world is a death-ray-laser-free zone and it appears to be working.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

I asked him because he is generally has been against gun-free zones. Yet when the NRA had to provide a safe environment they reverted to a gun-free zone.

[billvon 2,396]

>I tried to explain to Billvon that Colorado’s universial background check law would un-enforceable.

So:

"We don't need any new laws; just enforce the ones we have."
"The laws are unenforceable."

Clever.

[Bob_Church 7]

billvon

>I tried to explain to Billvon that Colorado’s universial background check law would un-enforceable.

So:

"We don't need any new laws; just enforce the ones we have."
"The laws are unenforceable."

Clever.

It never fails to amaze me how you oversimplify things to the point that they're not just incorrect, they don't even make sense. Now we're talking "The Law." Is that like "Ape Law?"

[billvon 2,396]

>It never fails to amaze me how you oversimplify things to the point that they're not
>just incorrect, they don't even make sense.

Then no doubt you will continue to be amazed.

I think most other people will recognize the oft-repeated phrase "just enforce the laws we have" as a common trope of gun right supporters. It is indeed ironic that Derek then takes great pleasure in announcing that this particular law is unenforceable.

[Bob_Church 7]

billvon

>It never fails to amaze me how you oversimplify things to the point that they're not
>just incorrect, they don't even make sense.

Then no doubt you will continue to be amazed.

I think most other people will recognize the oft-repeated phrase "just enforce the laws we have" as a common trope of gun right supporters. It is indeed ironic that Derek then takes great pleasure in announcing that this particular law is unenforceable.

Not even close. Not all laws are the same. Some laws are good. Some laws are bad. But any time you pass a law, no matter how good it would be if it were carried out, that can't be enforced it's a very bad thing to do. No, that doesn't mean laws aren't enforceable. Some aren't. It doesn't mean laws are good. Some laws are. And some laws are bad. We should enforce the laws we have but if they can't be enforced, no matter how good the intent, then they shouldn't be laws.

[billvon 2,396]

>Not all laws are the same. Some laws are good. Some laws are bad.

I agree 100%. Which is one reason "enforce the laws we have, rather than add/change them" is a poor approach.

>We should enforce the laws we have but if they can't be enforced, no matter how good
>the intent, then they shouldn't be laws.

Or they should be fixed so they can be enforced.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

The laws are unenforceable."

Your words, not mine. You made ‘laws’ plural, not me.

Derek V

[wmw999 2,121]

One problem is that people never, ever, want to remove bad laws, even if it's to replace them with better ones. which is why we have those stupid "granny can't skydive naked on Tuesdays" laws. Because someone out there will remember just how embarrassed they were when granny did.

Or just think of the children.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

billvon

I think most other people will recognize the oft-repeated phrase "just enforce the laws we have" as a common trope of gun right supporters. It is indeed ironic that Derek then takes great pleasure in announcing that this particular law is unenforceable.

Well, in this particular case (the CO background check law), it really isn't an "existing law" (although it is already on the books).

It was passed shortly after the Aurora CO movie theater shooting.

Often, in response to these sorts of incidents, laws are passed. Sometimes they address areas that would have prevented or lessened the carnage, but that doesn't happen much.

More often (far, far more often) they are simply 'knee jerk' reactions following the 'do something, do anything' panic.

This background check law is a good example of that. The shooter, Holmes, purchased his guns through an FFL holder. Background checks and everything.
Similarly, he used a shotgun and a pistol, in addition to the military-style rifle. So calls for bans on those would not have stopped this shooting either.

When proposed, this law was called 'unenforceable' by many, including a large portion of the Law Enforcement community. It's not just Derek.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[jcd11235 0]

wolfriverjoe

More often (far, far more often) they are simply 'knee jerk' reactions following the 'do something, do anything' panic.

Had Auraora been the first mass shooting in contemporary America, one might be able to reasonably call the response a "knee-jerk reaction". As it actually occurred, no few descriptors are less accurate.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[DanG 1]

Quote

law was called 'unenforceable' by many, including a large portion of the Law Enforcement community. It's not just Derek.

And there's the problem. When the cops declare ahead of time that they won't try to enforce a law, it become a de facto unenforceable law.

The background check law is unenforceable only if you think enforcement means there is a cop hiding under a table every time a gun is sold person-to-person. It is enforceable at the point when a gun is used in another crime. Then the (willing) cops can go after the person who sold the gun. Will they always be able to trace the gun back to the point of sale? Of course not. But if so-called responsible gun owners know that the cops might come after them if Shady McGee goes on a robbery spree with a gun they sold him, they have a strong incentive to self-enforce.

- Dan G

[Bob_Church 7]

wmw999

One problem is that people never, ever, want to remove bad laws, even if it's to replace them with better ones. which is why we have those stupid "granny can't skydive naked on Tuesdays" laws. Because someone out there will remember just how embarrassed they were when granny did.

Or just think of the children.

Wendy P.

This is especially true when having a law means setting up a large data collection center that hires your constituents to run it.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

The background check law is unenforceable only if you think enforcement means there is a cop hiding under a table every time a gun is sold person-to-person. It is enforceable at the point when a gun is used in another crime. Then the (willing) cops can go after the person who sold the gun. Will they always be able to trace the gun back to the point of sale? Of course not. But if so-called responsible gun owners know that the cops might come after them if Shady McGee goes on a robbery spree with a gun they sold him, they have a strong incentive to self-enforce.

3 points;

1- it is not enforceable not because law enforcement is unwilling, it is not enforceable because you cannot trace a firearm back to who sold it without a national registry. Some criminal says I sold them a firearm. I say I didn’t. I am innocent until proven guilty. Law enforcement has the word of a criminal against mine and no other evidence to prove I sold them the firearm. Case closed.

2- There already is incentive not to sell a firearm to a shady character. I’ve never sold a firearm, but if I did, I probably wouldn’t sell one to someone I didn’t know. If I did, I would go to a dealer and have them pass a background check first.

3- It is laws like this that make me question if it is about reducing fatalities or restricting firearms for anti-gun people.

Derek V