The Daily Ledger: President of Crime Prevention Research Center, Dr. John R. Lott Jr., discusses President Obama’s Executive Actions on Gun Control and how it will have a negative impact on law-abiding citizens. The full video can be viewed here.
“Police said the death toll would have undoubtedly been higher without the quick-thinking actions of Salinas and the off-duty cop”
Three people were killed and seven others were wounded in the In-N-Out shooting, but police said the death toll would have undoubtedly been higher without the quick-thinking actions of Salinas and the off-duty cop “These people are true heroes in our community,” [Twin...
To a degree, I get the feeling we are rehashing the same points made already many times. One thing missing is to show anti-gun policy by anti-gun policy that none of these ideas can be shown to result in reductions in violent crimes, especially murders. Causing reductions in crimes must be the sine qua non of any gun-control idea. If it doesn’t do that, it doesn’t bear consideration. And there are hundreds of experiments, more than 51 of them in the USA when one counts city laws, and the world’s countries.
The answers must lie in 1) dealing with inner city minority-on-minority shootings and 2) mass shootings by crazies or terrorists, and the effective solutions here may be different.
Inner city crime may be most quickly reduced by federal and local prosecutors going after gun crimes to the fullest extent of current law, which is very extensive. Encouraging local law-abiding citizens to step up, buy firearms, and train to carry is another factor. (I do not favor carry laws lacking a requirement to train on gun law and basic gun handling.) Encourage law enforcement in those areas to support citizens’ carrying.
Mass shootings can be deterred by officers at sites and by citizen carry. Fewer Gun-Free Zones also reduces the number of target sites.
It never ceases to amaze me how much O’B yaps about gun murders, but federal gun prosecutions have plummeted during his administration. Is that some misplaced compassion based on the decidedly disparate aspect of who is doing the crimes, or some other ideological goal?