From: bressler@iftccu.boeing.com (Rick Bressler)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Re: A Coffee-House Conversation with an Imaginary Nadja (Was Re: Eva Clayton bio)
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:55:49 GMT
Organization: Boeing Commercial Airplane Group

/ iftccu:talk.politics.guns / djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns) /  4:06 am  Nov 15, 1992 /

>Just imagine how that would clean up our judicial system.  If simple
>possession of a gun were punishable by 10 years in jail, then we could

Yeah, we could throw most of our cops and judges in jail!

>get all the criminals off the street without having to prove any
>complicated cases.  No expert witnesses, no crime labs, no dueling
>attorneys.

Or hey, make illegal violent use of a firearm an automatic capital
crime.  No muss no fuss, no bother.  Don't bother to throw them in jail,
execute them on the spot.  Mere presence of the weapon is enough to
convict them.  :-)

Seriously, lets examine this idea:

Lets assume for the moment that you are willing accept turning a LARGE
number of otherwise honest citizens into criminals.  Lets assume for the
moment that you have enough prisons to hold a large percentage of our
population.  I mean LARGE.  I think out of 400,000+ 'assault' weapons in
California, only 15% have been registered. 50% or more households have
firearms.  Projecting similar results on a gun ban would put 30% or more
of the adult population behind bars.

>A criminal wouldn't dare carry a gun, because that would identify him
>immediately as a criminal.

Then you are still stuck with the fact that as a rule MOST CRIMINALS DO
NOT CARRY AS A MATTER OF ROUTINE.

First of all, most of them are already prohibited from owning firearms
because of other convictions.  (Most of our violent crime is caused by
repeat offenders.  The first timers are a relatively small part of the
problem) Being caught with a gun is an automatic return to the joint for
them, provided the authorities feel it is worth the effort.  You must
realize that even though on the average criminals aren't real bright,
they aren't completely stupid.  They DON'T carry unless they are on the
'job.'  Hell, many of them don't even have holsters because they are
harder to ditch than just dropping the gun, and an empty holster is
evidence of having been armed!  Most crooks use a Mexican carry when
they carry.  (Gun stuck in pants and no offense intended to Mexican or
Mexican Americans.)

Secondly, how do you plan to implement this?  Are you proposing random
searches of people walking down the street?  Metal detectors on every
corner?  (what about my keys?)  Security guards (unarmed?) at every
doorway?  I'd rather not live in such a place, thank you.  As far as I'm
concerned the solution is worse than the problem.  How else would this
idea work?  Any other situation I can think of would involve the
criminal showing the gun, at this point he/she is already committing a
crime.  Why not just punish the crime?  Most crimes already carry
additional penalties for use of a firearm, although I can't remember the
last time any of these was invoked with any regularity in any place I'm
aware of.

Third, since as I mentioned before, it is already illegal for most of
these people to carry.  Guess which charge gets bargained away first?
Why don't we just enforce existing laws?

Actually you've hit the major argument for carrying all the time, if you
are an honest type and choose to carry at all.  You don't have the
advantage that the criminals do.  They KNOW when whey will strike and
when they will need their gun.  You and I don't.  We are stuck in a
reactive mode.  We need to be prepared all the time.  They don't.  This
is also why the police are unable to protect you.  They don't know when
and where the criminals will strike either.  Criminals are pragmatists.
As a rule they wait for you to be alone and the police not to be there.

Rick.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns