Pirate's Cove

Obviously, just like almost every other idea the anti-gunnites propose, this will primarily effect law abiding citizens, rather than those who intend to use a gun for nefarious purposes. Here’s what Rev. David K. Brawley, the Rev. Otis Moss III, the Rev. David Benke and Rabbi Joel Mosbacher have to say

Here’s a Way to Control Guns

…..

For more than a year, we and fellow religious leaders across the nation have worked to persuade President Obama to use what we believe is the most powerful tool government has in this area: its purchasing power. The federal government is the nation’s top gun buyer. It purchases more than a quarter of the guns and ammunition sold legally in the United States. State and local law enforcement agencies also purchase a large share. Major gun manufacturers depend on these taxpayer-funded purchases. For the government to keep buying guns from these companies — purchases meant to ensure public safety — without making demands for change is to squander its leverage.

Perhaps they should worry more about the use of illegal guns in their own areas of St. Paul, Chicago (especially Chicago), Brooklyn, and Mahwah, NJ.

Some of the leading brands of handguns purchased by the government — Glock, Smith & Wesson, Sig Sauer, Beretta, Colt, Sturm, Ruger & Company — are also leading brands used in crimes. Among the brands of handguns recovered by the Chicago Police Department at crime scenes between January 2012 and October 2013, all six of these companies ranked in the top 11. When police officers carrying Glocks are recovering Glocks at crime scenes on a regular basis, shouldn’t this prompt questions about whether the police department could use its influence to reduce the number of guns that end up in the hands of criminals? When Smith & Wessons turn up frequently in the hands of criminals, shouldn’t questions be asked when Smith & Wesson seeks a contract with the federal government?

None of the companies are responsible for the theft of guns, nor the use of them illegally. Do police question when people are killed by a Chevy, Dodge, or GM vehicle, both of which are purchased in mass quantity by government of all levels? Do they blame the cars, or the people driving them?

What could gun manufacturers do to protect the public?

They could distribute their guns exclusively through dealers that sell guns responsibly, and end their relationships with the small percentage of bad-apple dealers that sell a disproportionate number of the guns used in crimes. They could produce “smart guns” that can be fired only by authorized users, and that therefore are far less likely to be used in accidental or intentional shootings. These measures, over time, would prevent many thousands of deaths.

Seems reasonable, right? Except, most legal gun owners are against so-called “smart guns”.

But companies will innovate in these areas only if their major customers ask them to.

The president can push companies to compete in the area of safer guns and more responsible distribution. Here’s how to start.

First, use federal purchasing power to begin a substantive conversation with gun manufacturers. The Pentagon is in the process of selecting the provider of handguns for the United States Army. It should require all bidders to provide detailed information about their gun safety technologies and distribution practices in the civilian market. No response, no contract.

So, coercion, blackmail even, by the Central Government. They then provide a few more ideas, ending with

Let’s give gun manufacturers an incentive to make more smart guns and to allow fewer guns into the hands of criminals.

At best, this would only effect the illegal use of guns a tiny, tiny bit.

Instead of punishing those who manufacture firearms (do we punish companies that make motor vehicles and alcohol for poor use of their products?), we should be punishing those who use firearms illegally harshly. And we should be dealing with those in the areas which have the most illegal use of firearms harshly. Punishment always seems to be a low priority, and these same people are always against the “broken windows” version of law enforcement. These religious leaders could work to stop the criminal activity in their own areas. Of course, they are constantly holding “take back the streets” marches and demonstrations, preaching, midnight basketball, etc, yet, their neighborhoods, and the people in them, continue to be criminal. I guess if you can’t fix your own people, you fix those who aren’t the bad guys.