Gun Crime Prosecutions Plummet Under Obama

[Ben]

Interesting story on how prosecution of violent gun crimes has plummeted under Obama, while regulatory enforcement has increased. This quote caught my attention:

“We have this irony. The Obama administration, which is asking for more in the way of gun regulations — in terms of increased background checks for private sales and at gun shows — is actually prosecuting less of the gun laws already on the books,” said Robert Cottrol, a gun control historian at George Washington University. “For a lot of people, there’s more ideological cache harassing Bubba at the gun show than getting a handle on gun crime.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/23/despite-rhetoric-gun-prosecutions-plummet-under-ob/#ixzz38OaWegZs
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

[Monkeyleg]

What's new? Has there ever been an administration more interested in prosecuting under existing gun laws rather than creating more?

[Ben]

One of the other things that caught my interest, mentioned in the video at the link, is something that I was seeing increasing in my part of the .gov before I got out - concentrating on enforcing "fineable" laws. Rather than working the simple formula of criminal activity, concentrating on regulatory enforcement that results in large fines paid to the government. In the example of firearms enforcement, the cartel thug murdering people doesn't bring in money. The gun store owner that made a paperwork mistake does.

[brimic]

In the example of firearms enforcement, the cartel thug murdering people doesn't bring in money. The gun store owner that made a paperwork mistake does.

The gun store owner doesn't shoot back either- easy low hanging fruit where they can persecute prosecute gun shop owners and gun owners under picayunish laws CREATED MAINLY BY UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS and pad their 'crime fighting statistics' without having to risk any skin going after real criminals who are committing real crimes (if you distill it down to robbery, murder, rape- you know, the big ones) causing real harm to the populace.

[Nick1911]

The gun store owner doesn't shoot back either- easy low hanging fruit where they can persecute prosecute gun shop owners and gun owners under picayunish laws CREATED MAINLY BY UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS and pad their 'crime fighting statistics' without having to risk any skin going after real criminals who are committing real crimes (if you distill it down to robbery, murder, rape- you know, the big ones) causing real harm to the populace.

Seems to me this kind of breaks down into victimless vs victim crimes.  Would you agree?

[fifth_column]

One of the other things that caught my interest, mentioned in the video at the link, is something that I was seeing increasing in my part of the .gov before I got out - concentrating on enforcing "fineable" laws. Rather than working the simple formula of criminal activity, concentrating on regulatory enforcement that results in large fines paid to the government. In the example of firearms enforcement, the cartel thug murdering people doesn't bring in money. The gun store owner that made a paperwork mistake does.

It seems others have noticed this as well:

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/the_stealing_of_america_by_the_cops_the_courts_the_corporations_and_co

[brimic]

Seems to me this kind of breaks down into victimless vs victim crimes.  Would you agree?

More like non-crimes vs crimes.

[wmenorr67]

Reminds me of under Clinton when the NICS was put into place and it was mention x number of people were flagged.  Questions were raised as to how many of them were prosecuted since it is a crime to lie on the form and to attempt to purchase firearms.  They basically said that wasn't the point.

[Ben]

Reminds me of under Clinton when the NICS was put into place and it was mention x number of people were flagged.  Questions were raised as to how many of them were prosecuted since it is a crime to lie on the form and to attempt to purchase firearms.  They basically said that wasn't the point.

Well, yeah, the Wesley Munch philosophy - make everything a crime, then just prosecute when you feel like it or when you don't like a person or group.

[230RN]

Had some trouble with that.  Apparently, you meant Wesley Mouch.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Wesley_Mouch

Been 5-6 decades since I read Rand, had to dig around a bit for enlightenment.

Terry

[Ben]

Had some trouble with that.  Apparently, you meant Wesley Mouch.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Wesley_Mouch

Had to dig around a bit for enlightenment.

Terry

Damn that auto-correct! 

[230RN]

'Tsokay,  the search turned up a new and interesting site I'd like to browse around in.

Lemons/lemonade.

[Perd Hapley]

Well, at least they're investigating the White Hispanic who they already know is innocent, and they already know is non-racist. Priorities, people.