NYT: Gun Control That Actually Works
In the pages of the New York Times, Alan Berlow writes that he has found the perfect gun control legislation – the 1934 National firearms Act. In the days of Bonnie and Clyde and Machinegun Kelly, the Federal government decided that they needed to clamp down on fully automatic weapons, short-barrelled rifles and silencers so they required that owners of those items should be registered with the Feds, that they’re photographed, fingerprinted and pay a tax. Since then, very few guns with those features have been used in crimes. Berlow extrapolates that to ownership of most other firearms.
N.F.A.-classified weapons do show up at crime scenes. But nearly all of them were unregistered, so the simple act of possession was a crime. According to A.T.F. analysis, among N.F.A. weapon owners there were only 12 felony convictions between 2006 and 2014, and those crimes did not involve an N.F.A. weapon. If that conviction rate were applied to the owners of the other privately owned firearms in the United States, gun crime would virtually disappear.
That’s unlikely to happen, of course, because a majority of our lawmakers are so cowed by the N.R.A. that gun control advocates rarely even consider registration as part of their agenda.
First of all, let me remind Mr Berlow that the NRA’s interests are my interests, too. They lobby for me and the other millions of members. So, if lawmakers are cowed by the NRA, I fully support that condition. Secondly, if you were to check the guns used in crimes, guns that aren’t subjected to NFA restrictions, you’d find that those guns, used in crimes, were probably purchased in contradiction to existing laws in back alleys and vacant parking lots. That trade would probably continue if you required that legal gun owners present themselves for photographing and fingerprinting. The Bonnies and Clydes of the 1930s didn’t bother to register their fully automatic firearms. The supply of those guns has just dried up.
The reason that fully automatic firearms aren’t used in crimes is because no one is selling them to criminals these days. Legal gun owners don’t generally commit crimes, because we like that we can buy firearms – it’s not that we won’t commit crimes because we’re registered with the feds. We don’t commit crimes because we’d really rather not commit crimes. My face, my fingerprints, my DNA are already in some federal database because of my military service, but that doesn’t keep me honest – I’m just not a criminal. I have never been a criminal, it’s my own conscience that keeps me honest, not the threat of being caught because of the federal registration of my guns.
But, that’s the difference between me and the New York Times – they think that government keeps us all in line, we’re not capable of governing ourselves without the government watching everything we do. I wouldn’t think that the New York Times would be just as eager to photograph and fingerprints of other constitutionally-protected rights – you know like voting registration, or the freedom of the press.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
How about y’all jump over here to this link, and read about the latest idiocy from the gun grabbers, and the great rebuttal that Jonn has written about the article. These people refuse to believe that we legal, law abiding citizens are not the ones committing gun crimes. It is those that have chosen a path of criminal acts, and the mentally challenged, (that the liberals denied “safe asylum”, i.e. mental institutions where they could be cared for and kept safe from themselves.), who are committing these crimes.
Not everyone wants to live in a place like West Virginia that now allow anyone at least 21 years old to walk around with a gun.
With violent gun crime about to skyrocket in WV, places like NY will become a welcomed safe haven.
Who wants to walk into a Biscuit World knowing the Hatfields and McCoys are about to erupt into a gun crazed feud over the sausage gravy.
The good people of NY want to live in peace and safety knowing they can enter a Starbucks for a latte and muffin without being gunned down.
Dave,
You just HAVE to remember to put that (/sarc) tag at the end of your rants. Some people that read this just aren’t bright enough to realize that you’re being sarcastic.
Other than that, brilliant writing. Thank you for sharing.
I’ll get right on that.
/sarc
He was being sarcastic? Latte and muffin…sounds pure Gunny Hardin to me.
Heh…
Would you care to offer a factual evidence of “Violent gun crime about to skyrocket in WV?” Or is your supposition that legal possession of a firearm must lead to an illegal act?
One socially responsible act leads to one socially irresponsible act? My I do hope that they have outlawed automobiles and liquor where ever you live,
Might wanna get your sarcasm meter calibrated.
Or update his Sarcasm Recognition Software.
Unlike Jonn, I do not live in a bunker that I am having fortified. Sure, people like him can dig into the mountain and hoard massive amounts of ammo for their assault weapons.
The rest of us peace loving Americans have to wade the amber waves of grain in fear of our lives from Gun Nutz.
Hillbillies are expected to tote guns and ammo but are easily tracked by the knuckle dragging.
If we build a wall around WV dem dar hillbillies won’t be bringin all da guns into places like Maryland and our nations capitol to make a quick buck in the back alleys.
I will just stay right here in Neverland thank you.
I have seen the deep woods around Jonn’s bunker. There be ginseng in dem woods just dying of old age.
Help the needy who are willing to dig for money by getting the word out.
That WV Ginseng is worth more than gold these days.
“. . . to make a quick buck in the back alleys.”
“. . . to SHOOT a SLOW buck in the back alleys.”
There. Fixed it for ya. Yer welcome.
I see you haven’t met Mr. Hardin before.
Among the things that it is perfectly acceptable (honorable even) to come to violent firearms related confrontation over, sausage gravy is near the top of the list-as anyone who has ever eaten the Army’s bastardized version will attest. If New Yorkers are not willing to settle this grave matter in such a manner, my already low opinion of them will fall much further.
Good day Sir!
It has skyrocketed. In Martinsburg, a virtual metropolis, a woman shot her boyfriend a few days ago, the first murder of the year there.
Brothers and sisters often fight like that in WV.
That’s a bullshyt comment! Arizona has freedom of gun carry, both open and concealed, we do NOT have a major crime scene here…EVERYONE packing merely means the rest better learn manners and be polite!!!
All the NYTs rambling and ranting show a clear case of projection. What they are afraid that everyone else might do, is what they either wish or are afraid that they might do themselves.
Bad men do what good men dream.
I’ve found that to be the core issue for most of the die hard anti-gunners that I’ve come across. Once pressed with the “whys” behind their beliefs, it comes down to the fact that they don’t trust themselves with a firearm.
Liberals are seldom honest about their real motives, even with themselves. The best example of that is how some of the 60’s draft-dodgers, at this late stage in their lives, are coming clean that it was personal cowardice, not high-flown opposition to the Vietnam War, that motivated them to evade service.
I read an interesting analysis of the Heller Decision yesterday that part of that judgement indicated that the NFA itself might be unconstitutional. The reason stated that the people had the right to access the same automatic weapons as a measure against tyranny.
Now, my paraphrasing might be a little off, but that was the general gist of it. I know you can get a stamp or whatever from the government to own silencers and machine guns. My understanding was this would eliminate even that.
Thoughts?
An interesting thought…
Hmmmm. . .
http://freebeacon.com/issues/australia-sees-spike-in-gun-crime-despite-outright-ban/
Yep. And eminently predictable, too.
“In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”
I love that the “expert” thinks that because semi-auto handguns are banned that made them the choice of criminals to use in crimes.
not the higher bullet count, ease of use, or that it is the most common type of handgun out there now. (as well as most displayed by “stars”) Or all the reasons police departments have gone to semi-auto hand guns.
Nope, has to be because they were banned.
The opinionator’s (yes, I just made that word up) article contains a link to the 1934 act. I rode the link where I found not the act but info about the act. It contained a refernce to the Haynes case of 1968. I never heard of it so off I went. Get this. Haynes was a felon in possession of a firearm that was to be registered under the federal law. He was charged with failing to register to it. His legal response invoked the 5th A’s prohibition against self incrimination. His argument was that by registering his firearm he was being compelled to incriminate himself b/c he knew, as a felon, it was a crime merely to possess the firearm to be registered. He won at the Supreme Court (7-1.) As a direct result of that decision, Congress amended the law to make it applicable only to those who could LEGALLY possess one of the types of firearms identified in the law. In the 1971 case of US v. Freed, the Supremes revisited the law as cured of its constitutional defect and concluded that “Congress amended the Act so that only a possessor who lawfully makes, manufactures, or imports firearms can and must register them.” So, what does this mean? It means that the law is screwed up. Let’s keep it that way.
BUMP!!!
I remember reading that. “The law will only be followed by the law-abiding” is, um, good government ‘logic’.
I wonder if this idiot at the Slimes has seen the crime stats for gun owners. I’d bet it’s lower than; teachers, priests, lawyers, journalists, presidents, pampered Berkeley students, etc.
And that’s why I call them the New Yuck Slimes.
HOw about The New Cuck Slimes?
I love it when the press goes on and on about politicians being “cowed” by the big powerful lobbying group The National Rifle Association, but have no problem with politicians being cowered by the big powerful lobbying group Planned Parenthood.
The only gun control that works is a proper grip, good breathing and trigger control, and careful target selection. All else is secondary.
All this talk about GUNNNzzzz and nobody cares about Wednesday.
It’s Wednesday. Don’t you know what that means?
Ummmm. … that it’s two more days until Friday?
I do, at least on the range. It’s roundup time in cat country!
https://youtu.be/eGijMlFirIg
Y’know, I’m almost tempted to give them a complete list of my guns, ammo, and edged weapons just to see the self-righteous limp-dick skittleshit fascist cocksuckers of NYT piss their footie pajamas in horror. It would almost be worth it.
As Jonn said, the fact that I’m not a criminal has nothing to do with government regulation, but rather because I’m not a predatory scumbag. I don’t need to prove that I’m not, in court or otherwise. Innocent until proven guilty, remember–kinda seperates us from the beasts and leftists.
By the way, Clide Barrow never purchased an automatic weapon. He stole them (specifically M1918 Browning Automatic Rifles) from unsecured National Guard armories.
He used V-8 Fords, too.
Clearly we need to ban 8 cylinder engines. What do you need those extra cylinders for, anyway?
That would be high-capacity 8 cylinder engines. Who really needs more than 4?
“But nearly all of them [NFA’s] were unregistered, so the simple act of possession was a crime.”
Wait, so a criminal was willing to break a law before breaking another law by committing the crime where the weapon was recovered?
Color me shocked…
So … in the latter half of the 20th century, there were a lot more restrictions on gun ownership than now — the situation that the “opinionator” says that he wants to achieve.
In the early 1990s, restrictions on gun ownership started to relax and the crime rate started to drop. Perhaps the “opinionator” could use his registration theory to explain why the crime rate has been decreasing at the same time that the restrictions on gun possession and ownership have been decreasing.
We could return to those days with lots of restrictions. But if history teaches us anything we would watch the crime rate increase. I’m sure that would be a relief to everyone. /sarc
It appears to me that the opinionator has confused legal gun owners with criminals and machine guns with revolvers. I wonder if he could find Albany or West Virginia on a map.
The crime rate will drop substantially as the cretans that commit the crimes are killed off!