This could be the beginning of a joke: “So Walter and Admiral Ackbar walk into a bar…” 
IMO-What is not a laughing matter is the way they’ll politicize the dead for political points. No solutions, no lessons learned and applied, just complain and blame. That is the sad part.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Prosecute straw purchasers.
Instead they will eventually ban ALL private sales of guns and I suspect at some point ammo as well. They need to stop blaming the gun and go after the person holding it. They don’t blame the car for drunk driving or the knife for a stabbing or the hammer for the sore thumb.
I’ve got a better idea. Get back to Community Oriented Policing. Get LE Officers assigned to a district so that they learn the people in their district and the people learn about them. When you build relationships within the community that you are working many people learn to trust you as an Officer. As an Officer if you are fair and treat people how you would wish to be treated you will earn some of the citizens trust. They will many times tell you who is responsible for any crimes in the community.
Having served for 22 years, much of it on night shift and in areas not so friendly, I must tell you I believe the days of community policing are behind us. People in these communities where crime is rampant are either terrified to come forward with information or part of the problem. It’s impossible to work a CI anymore. In my days of service the rule was you never revealed a source. That is over. It’s also impossible to earn trust when social media and the garbage we see on TV these days is so against anything that helps put criminals in prison. Populations are far too transitory for the district model to matter. Section 8 apartments are everywhere. People take no pride in their neighborhoods and many are part of the problem. Besides, Democrat controlled cities are unlikely to change as long as they continue to get free stuff. It’s all about two things; power and money. That’s it.
You are probably right. My time in LE was 20 years ago. I was heavily involved in the COP Program. I always worked 2nd or 3rd shift in the rougher section of town. I got to know my business owners and most of the elderly people in the community. The elderly people were the ones that would many times tell me everything that was going on in the neighborhood and who was doing what. They were a great resource. I had a good number of CI. We were never asked any more questions once we stated that the info was from a CI other than how reliable the CI had been for us. Times sure have changed. I pray for all my brothers in blue every day. I pray that each and every one of you come home in the same condition that you left home in. You guys will always have a very special place in my heart.
"After the meeting, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement that "during a greet with Mayor Lightfoot on the airport tarmac, President Biden ......................... and conveyed that the Department of Justice would soon be in touch about the strike force announced just a few weeks ago that will be working with cities like Chicago."
Translated: Never let a crisis go to waste.
Democrats (I mean communists) have no interest in lowering crime. They lift up “peaceful protesters” while disarming store owners and de-funding police. THE INCREASE IN CRIME IS INTENTIONAL.
And now … “… Department of Justice would soon be in touch about the strike force announced just a few weeks ago that will be working with cities like Chicago.” The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is going to expand its reach, by “helping” to direct and control local law enforcement agencies.
Second Amendment Sanctuary states won’t allow local or state police to assist ATF in enforcing unconstitutional laws. That’s not a problem (it’s actually a help) to the ATF - they simply have an excuse to get larger, to have enough agents and resources to enforce them all themselves. And Democrat cities will assist in that move.
Seattle and Chicago will be testing grounds. Seattle will disband their police - and use “FREE” federal law enforcement (that we will all pay for in taxes throughout the country). If they get Chicago to do something similar on a larger scale - all large Democrat city mayors and city managers will see the finacial benefit of allowing the FEDS to pay for their law enforcement.
The goal is not to lower crime - the goal is to increase federal control.
"I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Prosecute straw purchasers."
Which infringements on the 2A should we encourage to be continued, and which should we say are wrong to do?
Please tell me how prosecuting someone buying a gun for a person who cannot legally own one is an infringement.
“… shall not be infringed.”
Please tell me how labelling a person as “cannot legally own a gun” is NOT an infringement.
Should you be prosecuted for buying a toaster for someone else?
Because they committed a crime that resulted in them losing their rights. You’re just as bad as the libs that say no one should have guns. You say they don’t want to lower crime, seems like neither do you.
Beto’s 2A reads: “… shall not be infringed, EXCEPT FOR THE GUNS OR PEOPLE THAT THE GOVERNMENT THINKS ARE ‘TOO BAD’.”
Do NOT allow them to draw you into the argument of what guns or people are “too bad”.
The disagreement is that those capitalized parts do not exist. Period. Not for felons, not for bumpstocks, not for full auto, not for pistol braces, not for people with too many parking tickets, not for being black, and not for being a deplorable or for voting for the wrong party.
Felons who want to do you harm - will get guns. Felons who only want a gun to protect their own family will not.
So the law that says “No Felons Allowed” works as well as the Walmart sign that says “No Guns Allowed”.
AND if you think it’s OK for “bad people” to have their 2A rights removed - then push to get the 2A amended. It still says, today - “…shall not be infringed.” (period)
The “shall not be infringed” crowd is just as extreme as the “ban all guns” crowd. You just repeat the same thing over and over in your little echo chamber and are ignored by people trying to get something done or preventing overreach.
This type of attitude is how the Republicans lost the presidency, house, and senate.
In your previous post you said the increase in crime by the democrats is intentional. What do you think making it easier for violent felons to get guns will do?
“What do you think making it easier for violent felons to get guns will do?”
It will lower crime. - EXACTLY as removing ANY gun control law will lower crime.
ALL gun control - controls people who would not do any harm to someone else. It does NOTHING to stop the people who want to do you harm.
If there were 50 armed criminals in Walmart before they put up the No Guns Allowed signs, there were still 50 armed criminals after they put them up - and there will still be 50 if they take the signs down. Disarming people who will obey - raises crime.
Your logic makes absolutely no sense. I’m not talking about disarming people who obey. You are talking about arming those who disobey. Straw purchases are the exact reason violent crimes are so high in places like Chicago. Its involves a person committing a crime for someone who has already committed a crime. It’s the one actual enforceable law not restricting any legal gun owners. Yet you want it to be legal for people to perform straw purchases or even allow violent criminals to purchase guns on their own. All statistics and research shows more guns in the hands of criminals equals more crime.
Also stop bringing up no guns signs, there is a difference between a private business enforcing their own policies and a government enforcing laws. A private business can put up a sign, a government enforces laws and help ensure those 50 criminals remain unarmed criminals.
The belief that some people in our country have, that we should have some “Common Sense Infringements” is part of our problem. This is for two reasons:
1 - The 2A does not allow for ANY infringements.
2 - Those infringements only increase crime.
You say that there is research showing a correlation between guns in the hands of criminals and crime rates. That might be factually correct - (I have not seen nor heard of such research, and will look for it.) - but in my opinion, it is misleading. THE actual correlation between gun laws and crime is really “The more gun control there is (which disarms victims), the more crime there is.”
Playing into the Left’s agenda of “there are some good gun control laws we can all agree upon” is how we ended up with Red Flag Laws. Instead of recognizing (and firmly standing upon) the reality that gun control disarms victims, and THAT is why we have school shootings - the “pro-gun” people saying that we have a mental problem to deal with - resulted in the Left having all the ammunition they needed to enact Red Flag (“act upon mental health information to prevent crime”) infringements.
The comparison of gun laws (government pretending to restrict criminals, while actually restricting only people who would do you no harm with a gun, and probably protect you with their gun) and No Guns Allowed signs (stores pretending to restrict criminals, while actually restricting only people who would do you no harm with a gun, and probably protect you with their gun) - is a perfectly logical comparison.
I’m not speculating by the way. My degree is in Criminology, and I was a probation officer in Lake County, Indiana for ten years before moving to Texas.
“Felons cannot buy guns” - ONLY effects the people with a felony conviction, who have no intention of harming you, and obey that law that says they cannot have guns. The felons who want a gun to harm you with will have it whether there is a law against it, or a sign at walmart against it. (so it disarms only the obedient people)
I’ve said what I wanted to - you may have the last word on this topic if you wish.
None of that addresses my point in prosecuting straw purchasers. I’m not talking about new laws, I’m talking about the one law in place that could make change and not affect law abiding citizens.
“The felons who want a gun to harm you with will have it whether there is a law against it.” So because people break laws means we shouldn’t have any laws?
It’s not about if there’s a law against it, it’s about ENFORCING that law to deter people. You should know that if you were a probation officer. I worked at a gunstore during and after college, also have a degree in criminology, and we had blatant straw purchases happen daily. I can count on one finger the number of times any law enforcement agency followed up on a reported straw purchase.
I agree guns in the hands of law abiding citizens reduces crime, but so does keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals. Which is exactly what enforcing straw purchases would do.
You also never addressed how prosecuting straw purchases affect law abiding citizens. Saying “shall not be infringed” doesn’t suffice because it’s equivalent to “it infringes because it infringes,” or on the opposite spectrum “pot needs to stay illegal because it’s illegal” without saying why it’s actually illegal.
No offense to anyone but these kind of back and forth are not beneficial, and usually devolve into the kind of arguing seen of facebook.