A man with a history of mental illness opens fire in a crowded Louisiana theater, killing two and wounding nine. Following the example of their leader, Barack Obama, liberals immediately take to the internet before the facts are known criticizing Louisiana for its weak gun laws. I bet they felt stupid when it was revealed that the shooter legally bought his gun in Alabama in 2014. Louisiana’s “lax” gun laws had nothing to do with the crime.
Once the source of the gun was known and it didn’t fit the narrative, the topic switched to:
- How did someone with a mental illness buy a gun?
- The need for improved background checks.
- Closing the “gunshow loophole” when buying a gun.
- The call for generic “comprehensive gun safety laws to save lives”.
- And the always favorite “assault weapon ban”.
One thing most perpetrators of mass shootings seem to have in common is AFTER the shooting, many people come forward saying the shooter had mental problems. Some, like the Louisiana shooter even spent time in a mental institution. Under the current NICS background check required when buying a gun, this would be a disqualifying factor. But the system only works if the information is reported. Many States do not submit criminal or medical information to the NICS system in a timely manner if at all.
We don’t need a new system or an improved system. We need to make the current system work as designed. States need to be required to submit information in a timely manner. A couple minutes after I receive a package from UPS, I get an email telling me I received a package. Surely the Federal and State governments could pass information just as fast.
The Gunshow loophole is hardly a loophole. Liberals would have you believe that thousands of criminals and lunatics line up at gunshows to buy guns from thousands of unlicensed individuals. First off, a study of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes determined that less than 1% bought their guns at a gunshow or from an individual. Second, a majority of people at gunshows aren’t selling guns, they are selling gun accessories, hunting equipment, ammunition or army surplus items. Many gun collectors attend gun shows to display their collections, not sell guns. Most people selling guns at a gunshow are licensed dealers that perform background checks. There are some unlicensed individuals selling guns at gunshows, but not nearly as many as liberals would have you think.
The call for “comprehensive gun safety laws to save lives” rarely specifies what “comprehensive gun laws” are needed. Their only specifics are usually generic gun registration and storage laws. Gun registration will not prevent crime because criminals won’t register their guns. At best, it will help the police determine who was the original owner of a stolen gun used in a crime. Incidentally, Canada has recently repealed their gun registration law because after 14 years and a cost of $2.7 billion, it has never been credited with solving or preventing a single crime. There is no statistical data showing that gun storage laws reduce crime.
Regardless of the weapon used in a mass shooting, the call for banning “assault weapons” always goes out. The definition of assault weapon varies from State to State as well as the Federal definition. Using the most widely accepted definition of assault weapon, the data maintained by the Mother Jones website indicates assault weapons have been used in 12 of 73 mass shootings (16.4%) since 1982. Considering that estimates of the number of assault weapons in the US varies from 8-20 million, 12 being used in mass shootings in a 33 year period is almost insignificant.
Also, a fact not well advertised by gun control groups, an assault weapon ban only bans the production of new “assault weapons”. The ones already in circulation will remain. How would this change anything?
So what can we do to reduce gun crime? First, accept the fact that criminals do not obey laws. Guns laws are just a hindrance to the law-abiding. Just ask the New Jersey woman who waited 45 days for her permit to buy a gun to be approved by the State. No wait, you can’t ask her. She was killed by her abusive ex-boyfriend with a knife while waiting for her permit to be approved.
For the first time, after the Sandy Hook shooting, a broader look at why it happened occurred. The subjects of mental illness, violent movies, violent video games and safe gun storage were all offered up for examination.
Violent movies and violent video games were quickly dismissed as a possible cause or contributing factor. After all, millions if not billions of people play these games and watch these movies and don’t commit mass murder. Strangely enough, millions of people own guns and never commit a crime but are thought capable of committing the most heinous of crimes and have to be held in check by gun laws that only the law-abiding obey.
Laws requiring safe storage of guns as well as waiting periods to buy a gun are still being considered in some areas. Safe storage laws are more oriented towards preventing accidents. Waiting periods can be disastrous for the person waiting as shown above. Some States with waiting periods can show that when the waiting period was initiated, the number of gun suicides dropped. What they don’t tell you is that the total number of suicides stayed the same. The law didn’t prevent the suicide, it just changed the method.
The mental health of mass shooters is still a subject of discussion. It has to be when it comes out the most recent shooter spent time in a mental institution. Looking again at the Mother Jones database, in 46 of 73 mass shootings, mental health was clearly a factor. In 9 of the 73 cases, mental health could have been a factor. That’s 55 total or 75.3%. The most common thread in these 73 mass murders, besides they used a gun and almost all perpetrators were men is mental health.
But there has been virtually no progress on mental illness detection, treatment or reporting. If the disqualifying factors of mental illness, drug abuse or criminal activity were reported to the National Instant Check System, far fewer disqualified persons would be buying guns legally. But this wouldn’t necessarily prevent the crime. Per Mother Jones, almost 20% of the mass shooters obtained their guns illegally. The Charlotte, NC church shooter bought his gun legally because of a flaw in the system. His mother, concerned with his mental health, took the gun from him. The shooter stole the gun back and committed his crime. Most likely, if he wasn’t able to steal the gun from his mother, he would have stolen a gun from someone else.
If the information in the NICS system was more complete that would help, but that shouldn’t be the end of it. To buy a gun from a dealer, the buyer fills out ATF Form 4473. If the buyer notes on the form that he is a convicted felon, the sale stops. If the buyer fails to note he is a convicted felon, drug abuser or mental defective and the NICS check comes back disapproved, the sale stops. But it shouldn’t stop there.
By lying on this form, the buyer is subject to prosecution, up to ten years in jail and a $250,000 fine. In one year recently, 72,600 gun purchase applications were denied by the background check. Of these, the Justice Department only prosecuted 44 cases! The Justice Department needs to prosecute those that intentionally falsify applications. It should also be setting off warning lights and alarms. Why is a felon, drug abuser or mental defective trying to buy a gun? If they can’t buy one legally, will they resort to illegal means?
No law will prevent gun crimes because criminals don’t obey the law. But improving the NICS database will at least raise a flag that someone who shouldn’t have a gun is trying to get one.