Ventura County Star, CA
BRADY ACT:
Good intentions, lousy legislation
Report shows gun-control law fails to have impact on nation's homicide rate.
Monday August 7, 2000
A study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association notes that the much-touted Brady Act hasn't done boo to lessen gun homicides, and there's an important lesson there, not just for gun-control advocates, but for that portion of the American public that sometimes seems convinced that good legislative intentions necessarily mean good results.
The theory of such as President Clinton and those participating in the Million Mom March is that putting still more gun-control laws on top of the thousands of state, local and federal laws already in existence will somehow cause guns to go poof, or at least to disappear from the hands of criminals, followed by a decline in violent crime.
There is, not a few have pointed out, evidence to the contrary, some of it even suggesting that more guns actually mean less violent crime because muggers and their ilk fear getting shot by their potential victims.
None of that fazes the gun-control advocates, who refuse to be confused by statistics when their intuition insists on different beliefs.
These people are also unlikely to be moved by this latest report, which has received publicity and comment because of its conclusion that the Brady Act had made no significant difference in the overall rates of gun homicides and suicides, although suicide rates for those over 55 did fall.
One person who surely won't change his position is Mr. Clinton, who spoke out the other day in favor of a ballot initiative in Colorado that does the Brady Act one better. Under Brady, licensed gun dealers must check whether people wishing to purchase guns have a criminal record. The Colorado initiative -- like proposals made by Mr. Clinton for the whole nation -- would require similar checks for people buying guns at gun shows.
That may sound wise, but could possibly wreck gun shows to no avail, seeing as how criminals with so many other options hardly ever make their gun purchases at the shows.
Although Attorney General Janet Reno told reporters that the Brady Act makes sense whether it works or not, there are all kinds of problems with ineffective laws in any area.
For instance: Legislators who conscientiously and intelligently oppose such laws can be demagogically tarred as not caring about what the laws are supposed to achieve; instead of spinning their wheels by enacting them, legislative bodies could be doing the kind of research that would result in effective measures; ineffective measures may restrict freedoms needlessly and even make problems worse; and bad laws breed disrespect for law generally.
Ms. Reno should know these things. Mr. Clinton should know these things. And the public should know these things.
BRADY ACT:
Good intentions, lousy legislation
Report shows gun-control law fails to have impact on nation's homicide rate.
Monday August 7, 2000
A study reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association notes that the much-touted Brady Act hasn't done boo to lessen gun homicides, and there's an important lesson there, not just for gun-control advocates, but for that portion of the American public that sometimes seems convinced that good legislative intentions necessarily mean good results.
The theory of such as President Clinton and those participating in the Million Mom March is that putting still more gun-control laws on top of the thousands of state, local and federal laws already in existence will somehow cause guns to go poof, or at least to disappear from the hands of criminals, followed by a decline in violent crime.
There is, not a few have pointed out, evidence to the contrary, some of it even suggesting that more guns actually mean less violent crime because muggers and their ilk fear getting shot by their potential victims.
None of that fazes the gun-control advocates, who refuse to be confused by statistics when their intuition insists on different beliefs.
These people are also unlikely to be moved by this latest report, which has received publicity and comment because of its conclusion that the Brady Act had made no significant difference in the overall rates of gun homicides and suicides, although suicide rates for those over 55 did fall.
One person who surely won't change his position is Mr. Clinton, who spoke out the other day in favor of a ballot initiative in Colorado that does the Brady Act one better. Under Brady, licensed gun dealers must check whether people wishing to purchase guns have a criminal record. The Colorado initiative -- like proposals made by Mr. Clinton for the whole nation -- would require similar checks for people buying guns at gun shows.
That may sound wise, but could possibly wreck gun shows to no avail, seeing as how criminals with so many other options hardly ever make their gun purchases at the shows.
Although Attorney General Janet Reno told reporters that the Brady Act makes sense whether it works or not, there are all kinds of problems with ineffective laws in any area.
For instance: Legislators who conscientiously and intelligently oppose such laws can be demagogically tarred as not caring about what the laws are supposed to achieve; instead of spinning their wheels by enacting them, legislative bodies could be doing the kind of research that would result in effective measures; ineffective measures may restrict freedoms needlessly and even make problems worse; and bad laws breed disrespect for law generally.
Ms. Reno should know these things. Mr. Clinton should know these things. And the public should know these things.