California, Other States Not Doing Enough to Take Guns From Felons, New Study Finds
So various states fail to follow up on felony convictions. How can they miss such an obvious source of likely violent crime? It’s a damn dangerous oversight for all of us from single women at home to police that have to respond. And yet in that atmosphere we are asked to pass more gun control laws. Why would I expect better enforcement of that law? Why must I as a person with a clear record bear extra responsibilities like endure a background check to buy a bullet when the state blows it like that?
Some could just sit back and say this is just “well played” by our legislature. Use the existing criminal stats & circumstance to justify more intrusive laws. All while ignoring convicted felons barely being asked to turn them in? Not a great management style in any case.
I trust it’s clear I support the proposition. Because the closer to real crime and the real criminal gun control is, the better it works.
The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence helped draft Proposition 63 on the Nov. 8 ballot in California, a measure that would create a new system for making sure firearms are relinquished once the owner is disqualified because he or she is convicted of a felony, is found to suffer from severe mental illness or is the target of a restraining order for domestic violence.
“A startling gap in state law continues to undermine California’s work to keep deadly weapons out of the hands of those most likely to perpetrate violence,” said the report, which found 45 states lack an effective process to make sure guns are surrendered.
When someone buys a gun and then is later disqualified, state law requires that person to relinquish possession of any firearms, but the law includes few mechanisms to ensure that such dangerous individuals actually give up their guns.