International Association of Police Chiefs issues pile of garbage

The latest report from the International Association of Police Chiefs can be found here.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police issued a report Wednesday that calls for stronger gun laws and urges law enforcement agencies to better educate the public about gun violence and to form more partnerships with public health officials in preventing firearms-related deaths.

The organization, which includes police executives from around the country, made 39 recommendations in the report, intended as a guide in countering a rise nationwide in gun violence over the past two years.

If you take a look at the numbers provided by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, you will see two trends: 1) violent crime committed with firearms fluctuates from year to year. Its numbers peaked in 1991, and have generally been on the decline since 1992, with fluctuations here and there. 2) these fluctuations show no corellation to new gun laws.

But Police Chiefs are politicians, after all, and are prone to authoritarian overreactions to fluctuations in violent crime, prompting them to justify their jobs and salaries and look like they're actually doing something.

The report also implores states to consider enacting legislation that would close the "gun show loophole," a term referring to transactions between private sellers, which allow buyers to avoid mandatory background screenings required by federally licensed gun dealers.

I find this instructive. The Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted another study trying to find out where criminals got guns used in crime. They found that "in 1997 among State inmates
possessing a gun, fewer than 2% bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show..."

The Police Chiefs report stated the following:

The federal Gun Control Act of 1968 stipulates that individuals “engaged in the business” of selling firearms must possess a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Holders of FFLs are required to conduct background checks and maintain a record of all their firearm sales. Certain gun sales and transfers between private individuals, however, are exempt from this requirement. This unregulated secondary market includes private sales, classified ads, flea markets, Internet sales and gun shows. Approximately 40 percent of all gun transfers currently fall into these categories.

Those who would fail a background check can access firearms through these sources. As a result, guns are far too easily acquired by prohibited possessors, and too often end up being used in gun crime and gun violence.

Guns that are not sold or transferred through FFLs become more difficult to trace if lost, stolen or criminally misused, making crimes involving them more difficult to solve. These private sales and transfers also contribute to illegal gun trafficking because, unlike an FFL, the seller is not required to conduct a background check to
determine whether the purchaser is prohibited from purchasing and possessing a gun.
Federal, state, local and tribal laws should be enacted to close these loopholes. If all gun sales proceed through an FFL, a single, consistent system for conducting gun sales, including background checks, will be established.

Of course, the 18th Annual Survey by the National Association of Chiefs of Police showed that 94.9 percent of Police Chiefs and Sheriffs surveyed believe that "criminals currently are able to obtain basically any type of firearm by illegal means."

This suggests Police Chiefs and Sheriffs actualy don't believe gun control laws are effective in stopping criminals from obtaining guns.

A report entitled "On the Front Line: Making Gun Interdiction Work" reveals that only five percent of metropolitan police departments believe gun shows are even an issue.

Therefore, I see this report as just another way for some to justify their existence. It's filled with recommendations for more funding and more power to the ATF, which, as far as I'm concerned, has quite enough power already, but mostly more funding...

You see where this is leading, don't you?