It is grotesque when some tragedy occurs and politicians and advocates immediately seek to exploit the tragedy in pursuit of some favored agenda. Unseemly as it might be and discourteous to the family and friends of the victims, there is, sometimes, at least a rationale. The tragedy draws attention to the proposal.
What especially galls me is when politicians, ideologues and advocates seek to exploit a tragedy when there is no cause and effect relationship between their proposals and the tragedy.
For example, when a tragedy occurs with handguns and the politician advances a gun control that is solely focused on long guns. At least make your proposal relevant to the crime!
Such a tragedy happened once again this past weekend with a shootout in Sacramento, California with six dead and a dozen wounded.
Before the victims were cold, Senator Feinstein was on the news seeking to exploit the tragedy, calling for the US to implement California's strict gun laws in order to avert further tragedies.
It is at times like these that you wonder what is wrong with these people. Not only unseemly but illogical.
Ignoring the unconstitutionality of the proposed laws, there is a more fundamental question. If the laws did not work in California, why would they work at the federal level?
Feinstein did not wait for facts before seeking to exploit the tragedy. It now appears that the facts support an entirely different set of policies. Policies which she would likely not approve.
It is still early days in the investigation and further information may change the analysis, but with what we know now, Feinstein's solution of nationalizing California's strict gun laws would have made zero difference.
There seem to be three suspects, two of them brothers who are under arrest. The deaths seem to have been a product of a gang dispute. One of the two brothers was in 2018 sentenced to ten years for violent acts against his then girlfriend. He was released in 2021 over the objections of the District Attorney who at the parole review forecast further violence from the prisoner.
In addition, the perpetrator used a stolen gun which was illegally converted to an automatic. Automatic guns are already outlawed at the federal level.
So Feinstein's proposed laws would not have averted the tragedy at all. Why is she pushing legislation that would not have made a difference?
What the actual facts suggest is that the tragedy would have been averted had California had a more successful set of policies against gangs or, even more usefully, refused to release prisoners before they had served their time. Especially a prisoner whom the DA had identified as violent and likely to reoffend.
If Feinstein wanted to make a difference, that is where her legislative focus would make a beneficial difference - improving policing of gangs and fighting against release of violent criminals.
But that is not how she, or so many other politicians, ideologues, and advocates are built. They don't care about practical outcomes. They care about abstract ideas. Even if they come at the expense of real people.
UPDATE: Additional information and links at Visualizing the State of US Gun Law by Handwaving Freakoutery
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment