Democrats want gun control for civilians, defunded police, and wrist-slaps for criminals | Washington Examiner
Category: News & Politics
Via: texan1211 • 2 years ago • 11 commentsBy: Frank James (Washington Examiner)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) said that New York "will take every action possible to end this senseless cycle of gun violence" in the aftermath of the shooting in Uvalde, Texas. Perhaps she can start by telling her own party it needs to try to keep criminals in jail.
In the last two months, New York City saw two high-profile subway shootings. The first was perpetrated by Frank James, who had a criminal history stretching from the 1990s to 2007 in New York and New Jersey. That history included making terroristic threats, but James was never charged with a felony and was able to legally purchase a gun four years after being arrested in New Jersey for trespassing, larceny, and disorderly conduct. He went on to kill 10 and injure 29.
More recently, Andrew Abdullah randomly, brazenly shot and killed Daniel Enriquez in the middle of the day. Abdullah then gave his firearm to a homeless man to try and get rid of it. He was a "known gang offender," according to police, with at least eight prior arrests. His criminal history includes felony assault, robbery, attempted murder, and an open gun charge from two years ago.
Abdullah had been arrested one month before the murder for "allegedly being in possession of a stolen motorcycle." Despite his criminal record, the judge gave him a nominal bail of $1, which left him free to commit the alleged murder.
The Democratic Party's core problem when it comes to gun control is its refusal to enforce laws. Democrats want gun control policies that will restrict law-abiding citizens. Meanwhile, many Democratic lawmakers and prosecutors go out of their way to make sure criminals get off easy for gun crimes and crimes that would prevent them from being able to own or purchase a firearm legally.
Woke district attorneys in Philadelphia and Los Angeles made it their goal to lessen prison time for criminals who used guns in their crimes. While campaigning, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg promised the same, saying he wouldn't prosecute people for possession unless they committed a violent crime, a position he has begun walking back. The brothers in the Sacramento shooting both had a history of violent crimes and gang affiliations, but both were treated with child's gloves by California's parole board and soft-on-crime attitude.
Add in those Democratic politicians that have actually moved to defund their cities' police departments, and — well, what's a law-abiding person to do?
Democrats are not serious about gun control because they don't enforce gun laws against criminals. Moreover, none of their proposals are responsive to the shootings that prompt them. For example, universal background checks could not have prevented a shooting by someone who passed a background check because of some Democratic prosecutor's refusal to pursue felony charges.
Meanwhile, they fight "mass incarceration" by making sure criminals avoid as much jail time as possible, even for crimes in which guns are used.
If Hochul and Democrats want to start acting serious about gun violence, they will have to begin with some self-reflection.
Tags
Who is online
82 visitors
Enforcement of existing laws would be a great thing to start, Democrats!
Which existing law would have prevented the latest school tragedy?
If one actually READS what I wrote, one sees I didn't claim it would.
Perhaps you would like to address what I DID write next time?
You understand I asked a question, don't you? That is a query requesting additional information you failed to provide initially.
So you can either answer my question, or I will continue to attempt to educate you on the intricacies of the English language that you continue to misunderstand.
Duh. Of course, if one understands what I wrote and doesn't project, one sees I never claimed it would stop the events. I clearly and quite obviously said it would be a good start.
Here, I will cut and paste my prior comment for you to read again:
I'll even go through the trouble of highlighting it for your reading enjoyment.
Sounds like a clear-cut example of the old saw:
Thanks for participating.
Part of this is setting bail far too low which allowed Darrell Brooks Jr to drive through a Christmas Parade last December.
Yep, your title sez it all.
Those folks are crazier than a shithouse rat.
Far too many Democratic DAs are just coddling criminals.
No or low bail for those charged with serious, violent crimes?
How did they think THAT would work out?
The "woke" crowd needs to stay far away from law enforcement and the law in general.
Maybe some Democrats want all those things.
There are certainly some embarrassing Democrats who are getting out over their skis.
But most of us just want less guns, less crime, less people in jail for mere marijuana offenses, and no more George Floyd snuff films. Give us the cops we pay for and deserve.
I mostly like NYC cops. Philly cops? I've seen some shit. Also been mugged in Philly. Life is complicated.
There is no real divide on these issues. It’s only nuances and narratives being pushed by the fundamentalists on both sides.
We all do but in my case just for the criminals. No more serious restrictions are needed for law abiding citizens. For the most part they aren’t the problem.
Really? Everyone wants that. Who wants more crime?
No problem, it’s already headed in that direction countrywide.
By and large most cops are already good and honorable but if you want to get rid of the bad ones fix the police unions that protect them. Unions like that are the scourge of the earth. They protect defectives that shouldn’t be on the job in the first place.
The government saying they don't want people to have something makes people want it more