Prosecutors enforce existing gun laws in wake of Sandy Hook

| June 13, 2013

The Washington Times reports that, for some strange reason, prosecutors have prosecuted criminals in violation of gun laws at a higher rate since Sandy Hook than they did before the tragedy;

In November, the month before the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School claimed the lives of 20 schoolchildren and six adults, the federal government prosecuted 482 weapons cases, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University — the lowest single-month total since November 2009 and the second-lowest monthly total since President Obama took office in January 2009.

The number of prosecutions increased to slightly more than 500 in December, January and February and then shot to 673 in March and 697 in April, as Congress debated — and ultimately rejected — Mr. Obama’s call for stricter gun control laws.

“As far as I can see, there’s been no increase in the size of the agency or its legal authority,” David Burnham, co-director of TRAC, said of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. “What triggered this, I don’t know. This really looks like perhaps outside criticism had an effect.”

Well, it’s like we’ve been saying for decades, there are enough gun laws in this country if the government would just use them for a change instead of piling more restrictions on top of law-abiding gun owners and gun dealers. But see, they don’t figure that’s enough, the New York Times reports today that the Obama Administration is planning another assault on gun rights;

“We’ve only just finished round one in our fight to get Congress to pass common-sense measures to save lives, and we will continue to join 90 percent of Americans in calling on them to close loopholes in the background check system,” Denis McDonough, Mr. Obama’s White House chief of staff, said Wednesday in an e-mail. “But in the meantime, we are doing everything in our power without them — including strengthening the existing background check system.”

Good, strengthen the current background checks, that’s fine – it’s what you should have been doing all along. But where are these “loopholes” you want closed? In the last three years, I’ve bought twelve guns of varying types and went through background checks at every purchase, even the guns I’ve bought at gun shows. The “loopholes” are private sales which is nearly impossible to check – the ones they want to stop are between criminals, not legitimate owners, and no matter what restrictions they put on folks who will follow the law, it won’t effect the criminals one whit. 90% of Americans don’t want to prevent me from buying a gun. Ask them.

Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Comments (11)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Only twelve? Slacker.

  2. PintoNag says:

    The “loopholes” = private sales. They’re starting back in on restricting private sales again.

  3. Tim says:

    Where do they keep dragging this BS 90% number from?

  4. B Woodman says:

    Dear Libtard
    You want a “common sense measure to save lives”?
    Commit suicide. Leaves more room and resources for the rest of us. Also you emit less CO2 being dead. As well as having less progeny to pass your Stupid genes on to.
    I’ll even give you the rope or knife. But no guns. Wouldn’t want to offend your tender sensibilities.

    Sorry to all here. Off track and subject. But I am Sick And Tired of having the “common sense” meme continually thrown at me.

  5. B Woodman says:

    I forgot
    (Dear Libtard)
    . . . . And refertilizes Gaia Mother Earth with your corpse. . . .

  6. Sustainer says:

    I am unfortunately a resident in Connecticut.

    With the latest politically motivated passage of yet more useless gun laws, the Connecticut State Police have requested 29 (yep, twenty-nine……two niner)additional non-trooper clerical positions to manage the paperwork caused by this.

    This means that these new “state workers” will be covered by all the rights of collective bargaining, all in a state who recently was announced as having the worst economy in the nation due to lack of business growth, based on a stiling tax code.

  7. Joe Williams says:

    Strengten the background checks? How legally ? Joe

  8. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    Wow a common sense approach to prosecuting criminal sparked by overt criticism of the p1ss poor job prior to a tragedy….

    Nicely done folks, nicely done…I hope these prosecutors continue to pay attention and lock up these guys before they advance to a more violent criminal outcome.

  9. OWB says:

    Prosecuting criminals? What a novel idea.

  10. UpNorth says:

    @9. Yeah, a novel idea, indeed.
    Although, apparently, the ATF would rather confiscate airsoft guns and hassle legal gun owners.
    As Jonn said, I have yet to attend a gun show, where anyone could buy a gun without going through a NICS background check. And, one criminal certainly isn’t going to call up NICS so he can sell a gun out of the trunk of his car to another banned individual.

  11. ExHack says:

    Yeah, I’m always at a loss as to how the “loopholes” work. I have a 03 C&R FFL, meaning (most of you probably already know, but for the rest of the room) if it’s over 50 years old and/or enumerated on the BATFE list of Curios & Relics, I don’t need the NICS – I’ve already been “vetted” by BATFE to buy this category of weapon without further checks. (Hint: they cost $35 to get, and the application takes about an hour at most to complete. Every law-abiding gun owner that appreciates more than Scary Black Guns should have one.) I’ve bought, or tried to buy, 2 or 3 C&R-eligible weapons at local gun shows, and either had to do (or would’ve had to do) an NICS anyway. Half the dealers don’t understand how a C&R FFL works, or know what they’ve got on their tables, and the other half are too scared to “risk” it. Which I can understand, and which is why I don’t push the issue with them. But bottom line, I’ve yet to see the gun-show dealer who’s willing to risk a felony for the mythical “gun show loophole.”