Markell Plans Common Sense, Practical Plan to Reduce Gun Violence
Today Jack Markell joined community leaders and public-safety advocates Monday to release his plan to make Delawareans safer in response to the recent escalation of gun violence.
I have just skimmed it so far, but I really like these practical common sense steps which DON’T INFRINGE ON ANYONE’S 2ND AMMENDMENT RIGHTS.
CLOSE THE ‘GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE’: Delawareans purchasing weapons from a federally licensed gun dealer, such as a store, must undergo background checks. But anyone, including dangerous criminals and the mentally ill, can buy a deadly weapon at a gun show, and no background check is required and no records are kept. It is extremely easy for criminals or juveniles to buy as many guns as they want as these shows, and it is currently almost impossible for police to trace these weapons when they are used in a crime.
LAUNCH A “PARENTAL CONSENT TO SEARCH AND SEIZE PROGRAM”: to help police and parents work together to stop youth firearm possession. Through such an effort, police will seek permission from a homeowner to enter a home in search of illegal firearms belonging to juveniles and, if found, the illegal firearm is confiscated but no gun possession charges are filed. When this was tried in St. Louis, consent was given nearly all the time and half the searches turned up firearms – with 510 weapons seized and taken away from youths during an 18-month period.
LIMIT BULK PURCHASES: Traffickers are legally allowed to purchase as many guns as they want. Those weapons then are resold on the street to criminals. Delaware needs to join other states and outlaw bulk purchases. This law would apply only to handguns, not hunting rifles.
TRACE AND REPORT ANY FIREARM RECOVERED FROM A JUVENILE: To stop youth from carrying and using guns, the police must investigate where juvenile criminals are getting guns illegally and crack down on those sources.
USE STAY-AWAY ORDERS: As a condition of probation, drug dealers and certain violent offenders can be prohibited from returning to the neighborhood where they have committed crimes. The orders can be widely publicized in an effort to try to deter some from violent behavior that may lead to this form of banishment.
(Emphasis added)
We need this kind of “best practices” thinking in Dover.
Does Markell’s campaign staff know that this article will generate 10,000 hits from Mike?
Pre-emptive strike.
Mike claims that there is no factual basis to the ‘gun show loophole’, that private citizens are always free to sell guns to other private citizens, without a background check. Thus when this happens at a gun show, he does not view this as a loophole.
There is a difference, when you go to a venue where you can sell loads of guns to many different people. There is a difference, when you are caught with a joint, versus with two pounds of the stuff. While the person with two pounds is of course an individual, the law views them as a dealer–due to their actions.
Isn’t an individual who brings 20 guns to a gun show to sell not acting as a dealer? Certainly they are an individual, however their actions are those of a dealer. If a person acts as a dealer, shouldn’t they be treated as one?
Would a reasonable person feel that there should be some background procedures (for buyers and sellers) in place at gun shows?
Would Mike?
Guns . . . WTF?
The over/under on Mike W comments in this post is set at 15.5.
I’m taking the over.
At the very first post from mike w the rest of us should abandon this thread.
Even if everyone bailed on this thread, I would still take the over.
Even if everyone bailed on this thread, I would still take the over.
LOL. I’m bailing. I’ll let you and VC handle it.
Mike can’t respond – he shot his computer.
Okay, let me give it a shot (no pun intended) and Mike can correct me if I am wrong.
1. The is no “gun show loophole”.
2. Gun control will only take guns away from law-abiding citizens and not the criminals.
3. It’s in the constitution.
4. You are all lunatics.
I don’t like this “search & seize” program.
1. I don’t like the police promoting the idea that folks should consent to searches of their homes. That said, if people want to sign away their rights I guess they can go right ahead.
2. Why just confiscate the gun and then NOT file charges? If a juvenile is illegally in possession of a firearm he/she needs to be charged. If we want to make an impact on crime we need to be tough on those who illegally own & carry weapons. This is especially true in Wilmington where several of the recent shootings have been committed by juveniles.
Pbaumbach – Clearly you’ve never been to a gun show. Also, gun shows are NOT a major source of guns for criminals, so closing this so-called “loophole” won’t have any impact on gun crime in Delaware. Hell, there are hardly ever any gun shows in Delaware.
Also, keep in mind that if an individual were to sell 20 of his personally owned guns face-to-face at a gun show and several were later used in a crime that guy would be getting a visit from the ATF shortly, as would the FFL who originally sold him the weapons prior to him selling them FTF at the gun show.
I’m not sure what Markell means by “limiting bulk purchases?” Is he referring to “1 gun a month laws” that are sooo effective in a few liberal states? If not I know that my FFL is required to file additional report that gets sent to the ATF and the AG’s office if I buy over a certain number of guns in a particular timeframe. This applies only to handguns. IIRC from what we discussed this additional reporting applies if one buys 3 or more handguns in a 5 day period. I wish I had a citation of the actual law right now, but right now all I have to go on is what he and I discussed.
I don’t know what he means when he says we need to “join other states.” Most states DO NOT have purchase limits, so we’re actually in the majority as it stands right now.
3. Stay away orders – How does Markell plan to enforce this? Does he really think criminals will “stay away” just because they’re told to? If someone is willing to engage in criminal activity in violation of their probation they’ll have no problem violating the “stay away order” in the process.
Just wondering, what are the major sources of guns for criminals?
I’d say Smith & Wesson
Stolen weapons and straw purchases.
Nemski – RE: #9.
#’s 1-3 are correct. I would add that for #3 not only do we have the 2nd Amendment we also have the Delaware State Constitution which is more specific than the Federal Constitution.
Delaware State Constitution
Article I.
§ 20. Right to keep and bear arms.
“A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use.”
Jason, what do you mean by this?
“We need this kind of “best practices” thinking in Dover.”
straw purchases at guns shows by any chance?
Best pracitices means we don’t have to have a bunch of committees or reinvent the wheel.
Figure out what is working elsewhere and try that.
Ahhhhh the gun show loophole
Dems, what we have here is a failure to communicate.
Lets start at the beginning. How many of you understand how Federal Firearms Licenses work?
Okay, okay, I’ll bite: gun show purchases.
As I understand it, if I buy a gun from a licensed dealer, I will have the automatic background check.
However, I can buy a gun at a gun show from a “private seller” without an automatic background check.
Did I get that right?
I just want to congratulate Markell. This is the first of his 18,543,201 policy rollouts that doesn’t promise to spend a kajillion dollars that we don’t have.
Good onya, Jack-o!
Oh yeah, most guns used in crimes come from family and friends.
Son: Hey Dad, can I borrow your semi-automatic hunting rifle?
Dad: Sure son, what you going to do?
Son: Rob a liquor store.
I joke, I joke. I’ll be here all week. Please tip your waitress.
“Okay, okay, I’ll bite: gun show purchases…………..Did I get that right?”
Well done nemski, you got that part right
Getting an FFL is rather hard to do and allows you to ship guns through the mail, something that I, a private seller cannot do. In exchange, licensed gun dealers have to run background checks on everyone and keep records of every gun the buy and sell.
Private sellers like Mike and I are not legally required to run background check on everyone we sell guns to because…..well….. we can’t. We have no means to do so. And do you really want everyone and their mother to be able to run background checks at will and peer into the pasts of every American citizen? At the same time, Mike and I can be held legally accountable if we are clearly selling to disreputable people or if one of our guns is used in a crime.
As per the gun show. Thats just a location. Ban private sales at gun shows and we’ll just sell in the parking lot of the gun show.
There are legal mechanisms to ensure that people like Mike and I don’t sell to criminals, so much so that folks I know have gone to the police with the gun, explained what was happening and asked whether or not a sale would be acceptable before handing the gun off.
We in Delaware usually have 2-3 gun shows a year, if you look into it (and I hope someone does because I’d like to have numbers) I don’t think you will find any killings in Delaware committed with firearms purchased from private citizens at gun shows.
Straw purchases by girlfriends and drug addicts are a huge problem and I would love to see some legislation regarding that but in going after the “gun show loophole” your boy Jack is proposing an irresponsible solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
“but in going after the “gun show loophole” your boy Jack is proposing an irresponsible solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.”
You took the words right out of my mouth. it’s a proposed solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.
“Private sellers like Mike and I are not legally required to run background check on everyone we sell guns to because…..well….. we can’t. We have no means to do so.”
Correct. That said, we can only sell guns in face-to-face transactions if the buyer is not a prohibited person and is a Delaware resident. Were I to sell one of my guns to Tom S. I would likely write up a dated bill of sale which contained language stating that Tom and I were conducting a legal sale. I’d have him sign this and would also record his name, phone & DL number. I know I’m not required by law to do so, but I wouldn’t sell to anyone unwilling to abide by such terms, for no reason other than to cover my own ass.
If, god forbid a gun I sold privately were to end up being used in a crime I’d want to be able to prove that it was no longer in my possession and that I sold it legally.
Tom – My FFL runs his business out of his basement. It is not his main profession. The regulations imposed upon him (and the level to which he opens up his home to the Feds) by having his FFL license is incredible. The Feds are VERY strict about how FFL’s operate.
“As I understand it, if I buy a gun from a licensed dealer, I will have the automatic background check.”
Nemski – Yes. Any dealer sale requires that you be run through the Federal NICS background check system which is done through the FBI. I’m not sure about other states, but in DE you also fill out a separate form for a state level background check through the State Police & AG’s office. I think most other state’s conduct state-level background checks in addition to NICS but I can’t say with 100% certainty.
“Figure out what is working elsewhere and try that.”
Shouldn’t those who are pushing for new laws have to show that existing laws aren’t working?
Show me that there’s a problem with DE criminals getting guns at gun shows and we can talk about enacting some new laws. If you can’t show me tangible evidence of a problem then there’s no reason to be discussing any solutions.
This is exactly what I said to Nemski regarding CCW laws and training. As I showed Nemski, with data directly from the state agencies that issue CCW’s, CCW holders aren’t committing crimes and don’t constitute a “problem.” If you can show me evidence of a problem and propose narrowly tailored solutions towards fixing it we can get somewhere. However, if there’s no factual evidence of a problem there’s no reason to support certain proposed “solutions.”
Sorry, here’s the above referenced discussion with Nemski.
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/school-carry-in-texas.html
These best pratices have been tried in many cities and none has been very effective.
The “Shot Spotter”technology we support has reduced violent crime by 35% in other locales.
Also, 50 more police officers.
Fraud Protack: “I can spend more than Jack. Really, I can.”
Shotspotter’s been exposed as a fraud.
Oh. NOW I see…
vis a vis the “voluntary” search for juvenile weapons, jason’s quite right.
It doesn’t violate the 2nd Amendment.
It just eliminates most of the protections in the 4th Amendment.
For a detailed explanation see
http://delawarelibertarian.blogspot.com/2008/08/explaining-difference-between-2nd-and.html
But, what the hell, who needs the Bill of Rights anyway?
When I read something like this,
“If found, the illegal firearm is confiscated but no gun possession charges are filed”
my 1st thought is “bullshit.” Other than the “word” of the police what assurances would you have that charges would not be filed? Just letting them into your home you’d open yourself up to all kinds of possible charges. Once inside the cops can change their minds, and anything incriminating that’s in plain view is fair game once you’ve let them inside.
And really, it’s impossible to say there’s not a serious coercive element to the cops knocking on residents’ doors asking about illegal guns. Yes, I know it’s technically “voluntary” but it raises serious red-flags for me. I said the same thing when they decided to start doing this in DC.
It’s really just a shifty, barely legal way around the 4th Amendment. If someone is suspected of a gun-related crime and the cops have enough to go on, they’ll get a warrant. If they’re asking for consent your answer should be no.
His solutions do not address the problems. Gun show loophole is a false statement. What they are suggesting is to make illegal the private sale of firearms between people. Many criminals actually do just this on the street corners whether it is illegal or not. So this is to prevent lawful decent folks from selling or trading guns among themselves. Police officers do this quite regularly and they are not the source of the criminal’s guns.
Search and Seizure is a worse violation of the rights of some of our poorer citizens. It implies that the poor inner city families do not warrant the same rights as the suburbs about search and seizure. These searches take advantage of poor citizens. If a parent fears their child has a gun that they did not provide for legal shooting then they can take the gun way and destroy it or toss it in a lake or ocean.
Parents do not need the police to remove guns from their children.
Bulk purchases usually are for organizations or for a gun dealer. He purchases or orders a large shipment for retail sale later. Bulk purchases are not done by individuals for their personal collections. Most individuals do not have the money to make a bulk buy and if they did they would be considered a dealer and BATF would ask him to get a FFL.
Most guns used by criminals are those that are stolen from homes or gun stores. Guns have a long life span and can go through May owners so they have long life span in criminals groups and are sold or traded between criminals.
The other biggest source is women buying guns for their criminal boyfriend as straw purchase. This is difficult to detect by the dealer.
The best way is to prosecute the woman when her boyfriend is caught in a crime to check where the gun came from ad if purchased by his girlfriend then prosecute her also.
IF this became common less girlfriends would buy guns for their boyfriends to be used in a crime because they know he will be caught sooner or later and that she will be in jail also for the straw purchase.
I am glad FSP is showing himself to be unstable and uninformed. What else is new?
Shot Spotter is so good it was actively pursued by Colonel Mitchell as a valuable tool for Delaware. In fact he wanted the system for Wilmington and Dover at a cost of $1.5 million. He was smart to look at DHS dollars as a source.
Fraud? That would be FSP. North Charleston SC (same size as Wilmnington) had a 35% reduction in violent crime the year after the first year it was implemented.
At the Urban League Debate, you know the one of seven Lee has ducked because he is unprepared to speak on the issues the issue came up and Shot Spotter was well received.
If you are not doing subpoenas or investigations for the FBI read this link, http://www.shotspotter.com/
What is Lee’s approach to gun violence? Will he go to National Center for Policy Analysis to get his answer?
I give Markell credit for speaking up, something Lee won’t do.
Yeah, the shotspotter website is a real unbiased source of info……….
Why not focus on stopping the shootings rather than spending millions on technology like this?
Where did this quote come from? Oh, just a five-year study by the FBI into people who shoot police officers.
Of course, so did this quote:
Regarding the search-of-homes aspect, the police have always had the capability to knock on your door and request permission to enter in order to perform a search. However, unless they have a warrant in hand, you would be a bleeding moron to give them permission. The same clause applies to this “new” idea – only idiots would let them in. But, then, I like my civil and personal rights… I guess I am one of those outliers. Either way, this is nothing new or different from what they could already do.
And why should I, as a law-abiding gun owner, and a person who would never resale a firearm to a criminal, be limited as to how many firearms I am able to purchase in a month? What if I am a collector and want to buy a matched brace of pistols? What if I am getting them as gifts for friends (I know of at least one wedding where the groomsmen gifts were pistols.)? As usual, this is a “gun control” law that only detrimentally affects law-abiding folks, not criminals (see above second quote).
If the police do not perform a full ATF search on firearms recovered from illegal activities already, they are falling down on the job enormously. That a law would have to be passed telling the police to do their job might possibly explain why Delaware has what crime it does.
And, honestly, stay-away orders are laughable, just as restraining orders are. I have a piece of paper and a pencil. Imagine the pencil is a gun. I give you the piece of paper, and imagine that is a restaining/stay-away order. Now, using that piece of paper, how are you going to stop me from using my pencil? Oh right, you cannot. Restraining/stay-away orders are nothing more than redundant laws, making doubly-illegal what is already illegal. As always (at least when it comes to “gun control”), the problem is not the crime, but the judicial system.
So, any more stupid-assed ideas, or is that it?
“So, any more stupid-assed ideas, or is that it?”
I’d actually be interested to hear what ideas some of the DE liberal folks have for combating crime and violence in Delaware and the city of Wilmington.
“Figure out what is working elsewhere and try that.”
Well it looks like a lack of gun control works pretty damn well. Would you support trying that. The majority of the U.S. now has “shall-issue” CCW permitting. Would you support Delaware getting with the times and going shall issue?
“It implies that the poor inner city families do not warrant the same rights as the suburbs about search and seizure. These searches take advantage of poor citizens.”
RAH – The Democratic party doesn’t feel that poor inner-city American’s should have the same 2nd Amendment rights as other Americans. It’s no surprise then that they take a similarly bigoted approach to 4th Amendment rights.
Jason – How does limiting the number of guns I can buy not infringe upon my rights?
How does making it illegal to buy/sell a firearm to my brother or neighbor not infringe upon my rights?
I know you dont’ understand this, but if you ban private sales you can then effectively eliminate gun ownership by increasing regulations & licensing fees on FFL’s, driving them out of business.
And don’t forget. In 1999 Obama proposed banning gun shops/dealers within 5 miles of any school or park. Ban private sales and then adopt Obama’s proposal and you’ll have prevented pretty much anyone from legally buying a gun unless they live in extremely rural areas of the U.S.
http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/53/35/
Has Protack paid the folks who worked for him yet?
So DE Liberal folks have no ideas / suggestions on how to combat the violence in wilmington?
It isn’t by making more guns available, Mikey.
Yup. Your alternative (reducing availability as much as possible) seems to be working wonderfully. Just look at the low violent crime rates in DC, Chicago, NYC, Philly. What wonderful success stories for the gun-control movement.
Really though. I’d love to hear input from Delaware Liberal folks.
Actually, Mikey, if you’d care to compare violent crime in NYC, DC, Chicago and Philly–you’d find them better than places where there is little or no restrictions to gun access.
Look at New Orleans. Look at Miami. Houston. Memphis. St. Louis. Birmingham. Richmond. If making guns more accessible reduces crime–why are these cities among the nation’s most crime-ridden?
hmmm. 2001 Detroit was the murder capital of the US. 2002 was DC, 2003 was Chicago, 2004 was Baltimore and 2005 was Philly.
MD, Philly, and Illinois all have very strict gun control. The only city in that list that resides in a state without strict gun control is Detroit Michigan, but Detroit has long been a violent cesspool.
If gun control works so well then why doesn’t #1 Brady ranked CA have the lowest violent crime rate in the U.S.? (CA is #1 because Brady Campaign doesn’t include D.C in their rankings)
Why is D.C.’s rate more than double that of most states? D.C has the most strict gun control in the country, so how could the crime rate possibly be so astronomically high?
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/US_States_Rate_Ranking.html
So DE Liberal is silent eh? Any ideas? Any at all besides more gun control?
Really guys, what are your ideas for combating the violence in Wilmington? I was actually hoping I’d hear some thoughts, but I guess not.
I thought Democrats and Obama supporters were all about “Change” and “new ideas.” Was I wrong? It certainly appears as if they don’t have any, or if they do they don’t want to discuss them.
Any Ideas? Jason, DTB, Pandora, DD? After all, that is what this post was about right? Plans for reducing violence in Wilmington.
no comments for a week….and some asshat makes a comment on it. what a loser
I am beggining to think you are a special ed student
Hardly, I just find it funny that you folks scream about how more gun control is the solution. Then when asked to offer substantive input you fall silent. I guess all you can do is parrot the Dem. Party’s talking point?
Typical. You’ve got absolutely no new ideas, just like Markell and Obama. Sure sounds like “change” to me.
Nope, I’m just an asshole (at least according to Pandora, who is little miss pissy most of the time)
delaware’s most underappreciated writer ,
Sounds like what you do not like, is to hear some opposition to your opinion.
In the last few postings, I see a question that went unanswered. If it is an important topic, surely we all go back to check for responses. Looks like this time Mike W. waited for a response for a week. Seeing none, he sent out a reminder.
Personal insults to you posters, only show your own weakness to opinions that challenges your opinions.
Using the Special ed label on someone, shows your own prejudice and non-compassion to the needs of special ed students.
——-
I am a Wilmington resident. We now have 18 murders. Last year the total for the year was 14. What are your suggestions for reducing crime violence in Wilmington?
—-
Mike W. Thanks for prompting a continued response.
“Mike W. Thanks for prompting a continued response.”
You’re welcome Paul – I’ll bet won’t see anything rational or substantive. DTB and others have proven they don’t want debate. Furthermore they’ve proven they have no ideas for combating violence in Wilmington. (If they have any they refuse to discuss them)
Mike w,
Elsewhere I posted that Wilmington police bragged that they Confiscated 714 guns. When asked, what was the source of the weapons, after doing background checks and serial numbers, ..
The response was, there was no diagnostic done.
No response from the ATF. And no request from WPD to do a study.
It is incomprehensible that anyone can propose to cure the problem without studying the causes.
BUT that does not seem to be a problem here at DL. Opinions based on pure enlightenment and NOT on facts, studies and those pesky details.
And in failing to discuss, this site is famous for it’s plethora of insults. It is like repeating Sophmore year in HS.
“And in failing to discuss, this site is famous for it’s plethora of insults. ”
Quoted for truth. Rather than address my question which dealt with the topic of this post DTB thought it more appropriate to call me an “asshat” and a “special-ed student.”
And at the end of the day he still hasn’t answered any questions, offered solutions, or added to the discussion.