20,000 Gun Laws Didn’t Stop this Killer – Why Not?

The National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups have claimed for many years that America already has “20,000 gun laws” on the books including federal, state and local laws.

And while this number can be open to interpretation we certainly have plenty of gun-control laws while those laws often are not being enforced and are always ignored by criminals anyway.

Just look at the astronomical gun-crime rate in Chicago which has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Or the many gun crimes that are committed in “gun free zones” like the recent killings in Aurora, Illinois or the 2007 murders at Virginia Tech.

Just look at how Americans are willingly migrating by the millions to states with less-restrictive gun laws like Texas. Shouldn’t they be going the other way to get away from the guns?

Good question. Meanwhile even biased anti-gun government statistics claim that there are 15 successful defensive gun uses for every gun murder, i.e., guns save many more lives than they take.

Now look at this story from Robert Gearty at Fox News:

The disgruntled worker who killed five people in Aurora, Ill., last week … had passed two gun background checks five years ago, despite a criminal record that should have prevented him from possessing a firearm, Fox News has found.

The first check allowed Gary Martin to acquire an Illinois Firearm Owner’s Identification card, or FOID card, to possess a weapon. The second allowed Martin to purchase a Smith and Wesson .40-caliber handgun from a local dealer in 2014.

Neither check uncovered Martin’s 1995 felony conviction in Mississippi for aggravated assault.
In other words the existing laws should have worked but didn’t, apparently because of human error or incompetence somewhere along the line.

Thus if existing laws are not being properly enforced then we do not need more laws as liberals claim but we need to enforce existing laws.

We also need to crack down on bad people which Democrats often refuse to do. Democrats in many cases reflexively take the side of criminals, murderers, rapists, illegal aliens, terrorists, etc. Look at this from Fox News about the Aurora killer:

The (1995) Mississippi conviction resulted in a five-year prison sentence for Martin, who served less than three years, The Washington Post reported.

Martin pleaded guilty to abusing a former girlfriend, at one point hitting her with a baseball bat and stabbing her with a knife, according to the paper.

So the court gave lenient treatment to a dangerous criminal who served less than 60% of his sentence. This is typical of how liberals go easy on bad people. Fox News continued:

Martin’s conviction was finally discovered when he underwent a third background check for a concealed carry permit he sought five days after the purchase of the Smith and Wesson.

As a result, his concealed carry permit application was rejected, his FOID card was revoked and he was sent a letter notifying him to voluntarily relinquish the gun to police, which he never did. It’s also unclear if police conducted any follow-up to the letter.

Thus Martin should have turned in his gun five years ago, but did not. Where was the follow-up by the police? This is a sterling example of how a known bad guy was not stopped even when it would have been easy to do. This shows yet another glaring failure, and even negligence, in the enforcement of our laws and our gun laws.

Meanwhile liberals blame the National Rifle Association for all gun crimes. Yet NRA wants all existing gun laws – and all criminal laws – strictly enforced and wants thorough safety training for lawful gun owners. If NRA were put in charge of enforcing the laws then gun crimes would drop dramatically. Fox News continued:

Aurora Police Chief Kristin Ziman told a news conference the (1995 Mississippi) conviction would not necessarily have shown up on a criminal background check conducted for a FOID card. She did not elaborate.

This is false. Gun expert John Lott said that the original check for the FOID card would have meant running Martin’s name through the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System. “If his name was entered correctly it would pull up his criminal background,” Lott said, and it eventually did for the concealed-carry permit. This meant that his name indeed was in the system but does not explain how he was able to get the FOID or buy the Smith and Wesson.

Thus on four separate occasions there was a failure in the existing law that led to the Aurora killings – the lenient sentence served by Martin for his 1995 conviction; the two background checks that missed Martin’s criminal past; and the failure of Martin to turn in his gun or to have it taken away by police.

But to Democrats it was all the fault of the National Rifle Association.

This situation is repeated thousands of times over in America ever year. And so we can see clearly that the problem is not guns but is the failure to enforce the law.

The Aurora police chief then tried to cover her tracks by claiming that the third background check, for the concealed-carry permit, used digital fingerprinting, which wasn’t used during the background checks for the FOID card and the gun purchase.

Lott said that that does not explain why Martin’s conviction was not flagged on either of those two original background checks.

But Democrats don’t need to be bothered with these pesky facts. They have already declared the guilty party – the National Rifle Association.

So then we must wonder if this female police chief was chosen for the post on account of her sex, under pressure from feminists, and that she may not really know what the heck she is talking about.

That might explain her inability to answer the background check question when “she did not elaborate”.

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!) and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.