I cannot disagree with your more Brian. Here's why:
Brian D Williams wrote:
> I sent this to the letters page of the Chicago SunTimes Yesterday
> in response to the headline story of the Mayor filing suit against
> suburban gun shops and gun manufacturers.
> In light of the blantant antigun censorship of the SunTimes, I do
> not expect it to be published.
> The Mayor is missing the answer to the gun violence problem in
> Handgun registration in Chicago was terminated in 1983, and it is
> illegal to possess an unregistered handgun, so effectively handguns
> have been banned in Chicago since 1983.
> Yet despite this and the over 20,000 other gun laws in this country
> we see crimes committed daily with illegal handguns, and children
> injured and killed because irresponsible adults have left illegal
> handguns where they could be found and abused. They are rarely
> punished, I believe they should be.
Yes, parental negligence has not been properly prosecuted in any jurisdiction. I also support mandated gun locks. A gun should not be operable when it is not in the owners posession.
> The answer is personal responsibility. To solve the problem pass
> the following law:
> 5 years in prison with no chance of parole for possession of an
> unregistered/illegal handgun.
> 20 years in prison with no chance of parole for the possession of
> a handgun during the committing of a crime.
> Life in prison with no chance of parole if during the committing of
> a crime with a handgun anyone is injured or killed.
> Pass the law, enforce the law......
One of the problems with our overburdened legal system is that whenever a violent crime case goes to court, the prosecutors are almost always happy to plea bargain. When they do, the first charge to be dismissed is always the weapons charge. Pass a law against dismissing weapons charges in plea bargains.
Now, aside from parental negligence charges and mandating weapons charges be immune from plea bargaining, all gun control laws should be repealed. As Prof. John Lotts landmark study proved beyond a reasonable doubt, making it easy for law abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons reduces violent crime. The decreases range from an average of 8% overall decrease in violent crime, to such marked decreases as an 80% decrease in multiple death spree type killings within 5 years of the liberalization of gun laws.
Furthermore, as the GAO Audit of the performance of the Brady Bill's 5 day waiting period shows, criminals do not buy guns from legal sources, so this intrusion into the privacy of law abiding private citizens should end. While Clinton claimed that the Brady Bill prevented 100,000 criminals from buying guns, the GAO report showed that of these, all but 12 were false denials based on clerical or computer errors, or were unjustly refused because of nonrelevant records like traffic tickets, etc. Of the 12 who were actually criminally buying guns, only one was ever prosecuted, even though the Brady Bill mandated prosecution and a minimum charge. So 100,000 law abiding citizens rights are violated for every one criminal prosecuted, at an expense of $500 million. Now thats cost effective law enforcement, don't you think?
Use of a gun in murder should be an automatic death sentence, with restricted numbers of appeals, and a mandated maximum time from sentencing to execution. Prof. Lott's study also showed that the Death Penalty as it exists today, has little to no effect on violent crime rates. Only the death sentences meted out by private citizens lawfully defending themselves seems to have a significant impact on crime, so the more like crime scene justice we can make our justice system the more deterrent it should be against crime.
The Mayor of Chicago should start wondering why it is that the cities and states with the most restrictive gun laws seem to have the highest crime rates.