Thanks to ammoland.com and to author Dave Workman of the Second Amendment Foundation for this important read.

14 COMMENTS

  1. Geographic distribution of cases in that federal firearms report is very interesting to me. I am not in law enforcement, but I would not have expected all the hot spots to be where they are. Page 11 in the report.

    • I am not at all surprised by the geographic distribution. I suspect that the key factor in driving prosecutions, for Federal firearm violations, is the ardor of district officials to focus on this type of crime.

      Officials in Blue districts are notoriously soft-on-crime. I expect that, in those areas, firearm offenses are often “plea bargained” away. Officials in Red Federal districts are likely to be more “hard nosed” when it comes to firearm offenses and, as a result, less like to throw them away in a plea bargain.

      Therefore, it is not at all surprising that the Federal Districts that prove to be “hot spots” for Federal firearm prosecutions also tend to be located in Red States.

      You should not assume that this geographic distribution is indicative of the actual rate of occurrence of Federal firearm-law violations. I expect that the rate of occurrence is just as high, probably higher, in some Blue State Districts. However, due to their soft-on-crime attitudes, these types of crimes simply do not get prosecuted to the same extent as in some Red State Districts.

      It shows the hypocrisy of the Left. They continually scream about so-called “Gun Violence”. They continually push for more and more laws to restrict 2nd Amendment Rights. However, when it comes to actually enforcing the Federal firearms laws, that are already on the books, their soft-on-crime ideology floats to the top every time.

      This shows you that their claims to push for such laws so as to fight crime is just a falsehood. Their goal is to disarm the law-abiding American Citizen as a means to enhance their political power and convert us all from citizens into serfs under their control. They care nothing about prosecuting actual crimes or about disarming actual criminals.

      • In theory, I certainly agree. But in this case I’m not sure strict, red/blue politics is the reason. It could very well be that federal prosecutors in these areas defy voter POVs, which isn’t out of the question because it’s federal. I don’t know who appointed prosecutors in these jurisdictions. Middle Tennessee is clearly Nashville. Western NC is the bluest part of that state and includes Raleigh. Northern Indiana and Northern Ohio are blue, Missouri is dominated by STL and KC, the Alabama portion is the only blue part of that state. Only the West Texas district is solidly red. Texas North (where I live) sure isn’t.

      • @ Colonel Travis – “Middle Tennessee is clearly Nashville. Western NC is the bluest part of that state and includes Raleigh.”

        You have a point. Nashville is a Blue stain on Red Tennessee. This point was just driven home to me this morning. I just finished voting in the Republican Primary/General election. It was disheartening to see how many Democrats were unopposed on the ballot. In so many races, the Democrat was the only choice. In one race, I did manage to write-in another option but what chance does he have since the Democrat Nashville machine kept his name off the ballot?

        Still, the officials in the local Federal District are not part of the local Nashville Democrat machine. I suspect that they would tend to reflect the general character of the State rather then the local machine.

        The general character of the State of Tennessee is deep Red. Statewide offices are not dominated by the Democrats. Only local Nashville politics are controlled by the Blues.

        By the way, the local Dem’s had a ballot measure that proposed to reduce physical standards for the Metro Nashville/Davidson County Police. Current standards are based upon Army/Navy military fitness standards. The Dem’s want to weaken these standards so as to be more “inclusive”. Just another way to attack and weaken the Police (in true Democrat fashion).

        Needless to say, I votes AGAINST this ballot measure. However, given the “dumbed-down” nature of Nashville voters, it would not surprise me if it passes. The local Democrat machine usually gets what it wants on such local ballot measures.

      • Just a follow-up to my comment (above) regarding police fitness standards. As I expected, the local machine got what it wanted. This ballot measure passed with 67% of the vote. Note that 64.5% of Nashvillians voted Democrat in the last Presidential Election. So that explains that!

        Metro-Nashville/Davidson County Police officers will no longer be required to follow military fitness standards. Instead, police officers will now follow standards set by the “Civil Service Commission” (dominated by the local Democrat machine) instead.

        God only knows what standards the Civil Service Commission will set.

        Mas, what do you think about this? Do you think that fitness standards for police officers should be changed (lowered) from those set by the U.S. Military? Are you aware of any other cities or jurisdictions where police fitness standards are being changed for political reasons?

        Is this becoming anther gambit to attack the police? To “defund” and “weaken” them? Or is this kind of thing still fairly rare in your experience?

      • Without seeing the standards in question, I can’t comment. However, the recent “hate the cops” epidemic has so greatly reduced the number of qualified candidates, lowered standards should not come as a surprise to anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

  2. William Kirk of Bellevue, WA brought this up yesterday. Very enlightening, not that I didn’t know the theme already. If those in power do not recognize clear empirical data before they make broad decisions affecting our Constitutional rights, they are no longer qualified to hold office.

    • You are missing the real point. Crime, shootings, and dead kids are just an excuse to disarm the public. It doesn’t have to make sense, or be rational. It just has to be “slightly rational” for them to use it as an excuse to attack the second amendment.

      They know how dangerous armed innocents are to evil people who want to impose their will on the people.

  3. Nearly one-quarter (23.6%) of the offenders prohibited from possessing a firearm committed an offense involving a prohibited weapon (such as a sawedoff shotgun or machine gun). [emphasis in original]

    That phrase — “prohibited weapon (such as a sawed-off shotgun or machine gun)” — appears several times, with and without the bold typeface and parentheses.

    I’d like to know how many of those “prohibited weapons” were bona fide machine guns (actual automatic weapons, not bump stocks or shoe strings), as opposed to sawed-off shotguns and rifles or silencers/suppressors (both commercial and home-brew). It’s an important clarification because ALL of those fall under the “prohibited weapons” umbrella, and anti-gun folks like to falsely imply that “prohibited weapon” and “NFA item” are synonymous with “machine gun” (it helps with the fear-mongering), but AFAIK criminal use of actual “machine guns” is extremely rare.

    Another interesting point, on page 12, when discussing sentencing “enhancements”, they list “stolen firearms or firearms with altered or obliterated serial numbers” the most common enhancement, with “connection to another felony” coming in second. But “stolen firearms” and “altered/obliterated serial numbers” are two distinct classifications, and the numbers break down as: stolen firearm (25.4%), altered/obliterated serial number (5.4%), connection to another felony (28.1%). “Connection to another felony” comes in second ONLY if they combine stolen guns and altered/obliterated serial numbers, and I can’t think of a reason for those two distinct factors to be combined except that the authors don’t want “connection to another felony” to come in first. Perhaps someone else here could enlighten me on why the authors chose to do this?

    The rest seems to contain few surprises. Criminals don’t obey laws, multiple-conviction and career criminals even less so. Sentences below the guidelines have increased dramatically over the past 15 years (10.6% in 2007 to 36.3% in 2021), but that likely tracks with lower sentencing across the board. And “straw purchases” (false statements) are either very rare or very rarely prosecuted and sentenced — a paltry 0.7% have it as “aggravating conduct” on a “prohibited person” conviction, and only 4.9% of sentences overall (43.7% of the 11.2% non-“prohibited person” convictions) — either way, probably not the end-of-the-world problem the anti-gunners make it seem.

    Finally, I agree with Colonel Travis’ comment above: I would not have expected the “hot spots” to be where they are. And so I also wonder: Do districts like New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, etc., really have fewer firearms offenders than, say, Eastern Missouri? Or do prosecutors in those areas try to plead away or avoid charging for firearms offenses that result in this sentencing guideline?

  4. as i stated before, we are in a silent war and many don’t know it. while it isn’t legal to buy gun stuff online, it alerts the banks to what you are doing. bad enough to have the gubment know ye stuff, but then the banks too? not good!!!

  5. In order to give those of you in free states something to laugh about, I will tell you about my experience applying for the brand new New Jersey concealed carry license. On June 25th, 2022, one of the excellent pro-gun lawyers here sent out an email with steps on how to do it. Pick up paperwork at the local police station, which was also very helpful. Get 4 passport photos, get fingerprinted by IdentoGO, even though the police already have my fingerprints from when I applied for my Firearms ID card here twenty-one years ago. Fill out three identical NJ application forms (triplicate), get them signed by three references and a Notary Public. Shoot a qualifying score at a gun range, show pistol purchase documents and REPORT THE SERIAL NUMBERS OF EACH GUN YOU INTEND TO CARRY. I believe registering guns is illegal, but I did give them one serial number. (It’s hard to fight the government).

    Money order made out to state treasurer = $50
    Fingerprints = $57
    Passport photos = $20
    Fee to shooting gun range qualification = $150

    Here’s the worst part. This license is good for two years. Guess what has to be done to renew? REPEAT THE ENTIRE PROCESS.

    Hopefully, the law will change. We all know we don’t need permission slips to exercise rights, but NJ doesn’t believe that. I have to be honest and admit that crime is so low in my county that I really don’t need to carry a gun. But, I’m an American and a Patriot. Guns protect me from criminals, licenses protect me from Big Government. I never thought NJ would have “shall issue,” but here we are, thanks to Trump and the Supreme Court, and excellent lawyers.

    • no, we don’t need to have permission slips to exercise our rights, but we do need to adhere to the Second Amendment in that “…a well trained militia…” means “we” have to be well trained to safely exercise our Second Amendment right.

      personally i have attended the MAG 20, MAG 40 2Xs and THE MAG 80. why, because “a well trained militia…” additionally i shoot IDPA, why, to keep the skills somewhat sharp (plus it’s fun). people bitch and moan they have to repeat the process every so often. hmm, if truckers bitched about learning safety and keeping the skills less than sharp, would YOU feel safe?

      Epstein didn’t kill himself!

      • Epstein did kill himself, because the poor guy knew he will never get to hold the drop dead gorgeous Hillary Clinton in his arms again and kiss those luscious lips, and that horrible realization would cause any man (except Bill) to commit suicide.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here