|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
WA: What It Takes To Get Guns Out Of The Wrong Hands
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
“The system is reactive,” says Chris Anderson, a prosecutor in the City Attorney Office in Seattle, Wash. “The court says you’re prohibited from possessing firearms, and if you’re later arrested with a firearm, then you’re guilty … but there’s never been a mechanism in place to go get those firearms.”
For the last couple of years, Anderson has been part of a collaboration between the city and King County to curb gun violence. One of the first things the group did was measure the compliance rate for orders to surrender weapons. It turned out to be shockingly low. In 2016, 56 percent of the people who received the orders simply ignored them. And of those who did respond, a suspiciously small number actually surrendered any guns. |
| Comment by:
jac
(1/27/2018)
|
| Sounds like a solution in search of a problem. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(1/28/2018)
|
The system works adequately.
You offend, you become a prohibited person, whether or not your offense has anything to do with your trustworthiness with weapons.
If, after you become prohibited, you and your arms become a problem to society, then you go to prison for felon in possession, and the problem you present has been temporarily solved. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
