Monday, July 18, 2016

Hey, Here's a Cool Way That the Feds Could Stop Gun Violence!

By William Teach

Democrats are desperate to enact “common sense solutions” to deal with gun violence. Their ideas, of course, are ultimately about denying the majority of citizens their Right to bear arms, and, if they have to violate a few other Constitutional Rights along the way, such as Due Process, so be it. Yet, there are a few ways in which to reduce gun violence, ones that do not infringe on the Rights of citizens, which they utterly ignore:

(Judicial Watch) One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile “gun-walking” operation known as “Fast and Furious.”

Well, there’s one way: the administration shouldn’t be running guns which end up being used in all sorts of shootings. Funny how the same Democratic gun grabbers aren’t particularly concerned over the shootings involving F&F guns, which have killed and wounded hundreds of Mexicans, including children, at least two US Federal officers, and now people in Paris.

What else to do?

(CNBC) But here’s the funny thing, in a tragically laughable way of course: we already know how to reduce gun violence and gun crimes because we’ve already done it many times before. That’s right, we actually solved the issue of rising gun violence in America in the mid-1990’s and again in the early 2000’s by doing something really radical. We enforced the law.

Now Republicans often get off too easy with their base voters by talking the talk about enforcing existing gun laws and leaving it at that. While it’s technically true that there are already enough gun laws on the books to put the hammer down on gun violence, most Republicans know all too well that law enforcement all over the country needs a lot more funding and other tools to enforce those laws better. And that became clear during both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations when new funding programs to cut down on gun violence were instituted and they worked.

Uh oh, this is leading somewhere uncomfortable for Democrats. Not just the whole “enforce the existing laws” notion, but:

I’ll start with the Clinton years and remind everyone that it wasn’t the Brady Bill or the Assault Weapons ban that made the real difference. It was the increased funding to police departments from his 1994 crime bill that showed real progress. I was on the White House lawn that day in October, 1994 when President Clinton was joined by an army of police chiefs and mayors to announce the $200 million being released to put 100,000 more cops on the streets. It’s not clear just how close the Clinton Administration came to reaching that 100,000 number, but the message the funding sent had almost as much of an effect as however many new cops actually hit the streets.

Yes, that’s right, funding the police and putting more on the streets in the areas with the highest violence. President Bush boosted funding for prosecuting those who illegally used guns and the FBI to go after gun runners. Now the current administration runs guns. Violent crime dropped heavily under the Bill Clinton administration, and under the George W. Bush administration. Under the Obama admin, which wants all sorts of new laws and has demonized law enforcement, it has spiked.

That leaves us with a unique double “put your money where your mouth is moment” when it comes to guns in America. The Democrats, if they really want to slow gun violence in this country, need to put their money where their mouths are and support renewed efforts to enforce existing gun laws like Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush did in the recent past. Republicans, if they really want to prove they believe enforcing the existing gun laws is all we need to do, need to put their money where their mouths are and get proactive about offering money funding for that enforcement up front.

Democrats now despise the police, especially in light of their support for the #BlackLivesMatter crew. They’d rather that gun violence, including the high levels in Black communities, remain high instead of pushing law enforcement as a solution, so as not to lose the votes of the Black community. Plus, reducing casual gun play means fewer shootings and “mass atrocities”, which would make their march towards gun grabbing, Rights denial, and more federal power harder.

Read more at The Pirate's Cove.


Mike aka Proof said...

I've already solved the problem. My gun violence self identifies as a "pillow fight".

Cascadia said...

An astute caller to the Mark Levin show today, correctly pointed out that when someone shoots civilians (Islamofascist or racist whackjob, for instance), the hypocritical and tyrannical Left calls to eradicate the Second Amendment and take away our right to bear arms; but are totally silent when cops or soldiers are killed or wounded.