Police Officer Poll Confirms that Anti-Gun Legislation in Congress Will Do Nothing to Prevent Gun Crime

The Police Officer Gun Control Survey posted at PoliceOne.com is an amazing confirmation that the Democrat-push gun control legislation will do little to no good in combating gun crime, starting with the Democrat demand of banning high capacity magazines.

Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

- PoliceOne.com

The high capacity ban that the Democrats are pushing is stupid for a number of reasons.

• There are literally millions of them in existence already.
• It takes but a second to change out magazines
• Banning high capacity magazines does nothing to prevent shootings. Are Democrats saying that it is not so bad if a shooter manages to shoot up to ten people as opposed to shooting more?

And let's not forget the idiotic and completely unenforceable law in New York State forbidding you to put more than 7 rounds in your magazine. Of course there is plenty of opportunity for police to catch law-abiding people breaking this law. They can also catch criminals breaking this law, but they will already have them for criminal use of a firearm. A crime they are likely to punish them lightly.

Of course, the cornerstone of current anti-gun legislation is the goal of banning 'assault weapons'. The police polled, logically noted that this is not very useful legislation. One reason of course is that rifles and handguns that are not classified as assault weapons function identically to the targetted weapons and are equally lethal.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.

- PoliceOne.com

The two issues above are the biggest gun control legislative goals of Congressional Democrats. As far as America's police are concerned, these measures are useless at best and worse potentially harmful.

--------------------

Idiot Politician of the Day - Democrat Congressman John Conyers

Here we have a member of Congress not only not upholding the law, but also advocating the destruction of the rule of law. This is simply inexcusable.

Opening the first immigration hearing of the new Congress, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee warned his colleagues not to use the term "illegal immigrant" as the debate goes on.

"I hope no one uses the term illegal immigrants here today. Our citizens are not — the people in this country are not illegal. They are are out of status. They are new Americans that are immigrants," said Rep. John Conyers Jr., Michigan Democrat. - Washington Times

If this is the position of Democrats, then can they please explain why the rest of us, actual documented American citizens and documented residents and immigrants have to be subjected to what used to be considered protecting our borders but now only seems to be harassment, unfair and unequal treatment before the law. We might as well get rid of immigration at the airports and save the expense and hassle.

Everyone arriving by air and sea is pre-checked by immigration prior to starting travel to the US. So why do we have to be poked and prodded once we get here? Illegal aliens are not. Along with that, why are we subjected to a customs inspection? Do you think illegal aliens have to put up with this crap? Hell, legal immigrants are forgiven at the airport for all sorts of violations because they may not understand the law, while Americans are whacked with fines in the hundreds of dollars for simple violations of having with them sandwiches, made in Europe by their mom (As documented on one of the border reality shows. See another example here). You could say that the US Government is discriminating against US Citizens and legal residents compared to how they treat illegal aliens.

Idiot politicians like John Conyers are our immigration problem.

Idiot Politician of the Day - US Senator Robert Menendez

United States Senator for New Jersey is a very bad politician. I dare say that some of his bad behavior borders on the criminal. Just this week comes news that the bad Senator is being investigated for traveling to the Dominican Republic to take advantage of minor aged prostitutes.

Documents published online for the first time Thursday indicate that the FBI opened an inquiry into New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez on August 1, 2012, focusing on repeated trips he took to the Dominican Republic with longtime campaign contributor and Miami eye doctor Salomon Melgen. TheDC reported in November that Menendez purchased the service of prostitutes in that Caribbean nation at a series of alcohol-fueled sex parties. - Daily Caller

Oddly enough, the Senator was on ABC News 'This Week' for a full hour and the host honored the Democrat by ignoring this latest embarrassing news and not bringing it up at all. You can bet that if the Senator was a Republican, that is all that we would have heard. Not surprisingly, this is not the only problem the Democrat-Party Senator is having to deal with. In addition to the underage prostitutes and unreported travel gifts, Senator Menendez also was exposed for having a registered sex offender who also happened to be an illegal alien working in his official office. Worse, the FBI was ordered not to arrest this illegal alien sex offender until after the election so as not to negatively impact his re-election.

Federal immigration agents were prepared to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender days before the November elections but were ordered by Washington to hold off after officials warned of “significant interest” from Congress and news organizations because the suspect was a volunteer intern for Sen. Robert Menendez, according to internal agency documents provided to Congress.

The Homeland Security Department said last month, when The Associated Press first disclosed the delayed arrest of Luis Abrahan Sanchez Zavaleta, that AP’s report was “categorically false. - Daily Caller

How many scandals, rules and laws does this Senator have to break before he is held to account.

Finally, Nice work New Jersey. You really sent one of your finest to represent you in Congress! He is a shining example of the best that the Democrats have to offer.

Idiot Politician of the Day - Virginia Democratic State Delegate Joseph Morrissey

This idiot, Democratic Delegate Joseph Morrissey, thought it would be great to pull out a rifle in the Virginia Legislature. As the picture below shows, he fails gun safety 101 by having a finger, his thumb, on the trigger of his rifle. All this stunt does is prove that he should not be in possession of a rifle.

However, like many good Democrat stunts, this one too backfires, in that it now seems that all Democrat Delegate Morrissey managed to do was highlight his criminal past.

A Virginia lawmaker who drew gasps from his colleagues when he brandished a borrowed AK-47 during an anti-gun speech Thursday was found guilty in 2002 of committing a vicious 1999 assault, was sanctioned for legal misconduct while prosecuting a rape case, spent six months in jail for contempt of a federal court, and saw his law license revoked in 2003. - Daily Caller

He represents an area just north of Richmond including a part of the city. He is a perfect example of part of the problem the US has with its Government. We have too many people who have no business being in politics representing us. How did such a person get to be a state delegate? Perhaps it is because he was not good at anything else.

Delegate Morrissey's stunt was part of an attempt to push gun control in Virginia. If anything, Virginia needs to ensure that the names of all persons who are ineligible to obtain a firearm are in the FBI background check database as well as ensuring that criminals (using guns or not) are sent to jail for their 'fair share' of prison time. Virginia executed the DC sniper. Maryland could not even bring itself to try the DC sniper with a possibility of him facing the death penalty. This despite their plea to try the sniper first that they would push for the death penalty. A promise that was later proven to be a lie.

Idiot Politician of the Day - New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck)

Today New York State pass new laws against lawful gun owners, pretending that they will prevent some kind of mass shooting. Idiot Politician of the Day, New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck) made this bold statement:

“Make no mistake about it, everyone. I repeat, make no mistake about it, the number of gun deaths in New York State will decrease because of the bold actions we take today," - CBS News

Lets see about that. It's not like New York State outlawed murder with this law. The last time I checked, it was already illegal for criminals to even touch a gun. But as I noted before, the Government has been looking the other way when they actually have evidence of a criminal violating existing gun laws, leaving them out loose on the streets, until they get caught committing other crimes. It seems that Assemblywoman Schimel has nothing to say about that unfortunate statistic. 

Assemblywoman Schimel however, had no problem in voting into law something that will turn tens of thousands of up to now law abiding New York State residents into criminals. Among other things, this law bans all magazines capable of holding more than 7 rounds of ammunition. That is basically all of them outside of those for the 1911 45 pistol.Personally I'm shocked they didn't pick 6 to F them as well. That will probably come next year after they pick up a criminal with one.

Restrict ammunition magazines to seven bullets, from the current national standard of 10. Current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. Someone caught with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge. - CBS News

I suspect that this single part of the law will be the most widely ignored. Unfortunately, if the police want to get you for anything, they now have an easy excuse to arrest you.It is pretty convenient really to have all of the citizens criminals. Anyone can be arrested for anything.

Thank goodness that the Democrats taught us how to ignore laws. Laws against illegal drugs. Immigration laws. Tax evasion, campaign funding laws, and even enforcement of existing gun laws.

Too bad it is not supposed to work this way. And it is all thanks to crap politicians like New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck). Don't expect her to eat her words when her statement is proven wrong. It is not her fault. It's never their fault. Just like communism. There was nothing wrong with communism itself a supporter once told me. It was the people who failed to make it work...

congratulations to New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck) on earning her useful idiot points for today.

P.S.

I am all for reforming our laws to improve them to keep weapons out of the hands of those who should not have them as well as punishing criminals who break our gun laws. This law will actually hurt the chances of any real reform as it is being pushed as such. As I covered in a previous post, Democrats are our Gun Crime Problem, Democrats in the New York Assembly actually opposed increasing penalties for real gun criminals.

Assembly Democrats back the most severe restrictions but, sources said, have repeatedly refused to agree to sharp increases in penalties for illegal gun possession or for the use of guns in violent crimes. - NY Post

Democrats are our Gun Crime Problem

Democrats are very quick to call for more gun control. But these calls are always aimed at reducing the availability of guns to law-abiding Americans. Personally, I think that Democrat politicians intentionally resist going after actual gun crime and criminals simply because without gun crime they lose one of their campaign rallying cries.

Take this example as highlighted at the Ace of Spades blog, noting that out of the 4,000 firearm purchase background checks per year that are deemed a violation of Federal and/or state law and referred for prosecution, that under 200 of them are actually prosecuted. These are the very people who the Government has decided should not have a gun and one would think that 'gun control' Democrats would be in favor of ensuring don't get a gun. But for some reason, the Government has no interest in punishing for violating existing gun laws. From a 2009 Government-funded Brady Gun Law report:

ATF and U.S. Attorneys have developed referral criteria for all 94 judicial districts that reflect the types of cases most likely to merit prosecution. Cases involving restraining orders, domestic violence misdemeanors, non-immigrant aliens, violent felonies, warrants, and indictments are most often included in referral criteria. - Report link in PDF 2009 report here

So here we have actual gun crime where the main response from the US Government is to look the other way. (And just how many illegal aliens do you think the Government goes after for trying to purchase a gun.....)

And what about those Democrat calls for increasing gun control? Just as long as you don't try to punish the actual gun criminals. Take for instance the New York Democrat politician calls to simply confiscate guns from New York. Take them from the law-abiding citizens, but don't you dare increase sentences for actual gun criminals:

Efforts by Cuomo to reach an agreement with the Legislature on a package of gun-control laws has, so far, gone nowhere.

Senate Republicans, who will retain enormous power in January, have made it clear they don’t support confiscation of assault weapons or any new severe restrictions on their ownership.

Assembly Democrats back the most severe restrictions but, sources said, have repeatedly refused to agree to sharp increases in penalties for illegal gun possession or for the use of guns in violent crimes. - NY Post

Democrats do not want tougher penalties for gun crime and criminals simply because they depend on this as a wedge issue. After all, if they let the Republicans put the criminals behind bars, then what use are they? Take Senator Diane Feinstein's new attempt to bring back the assault weapon ban. The original ban was so useless that is did nothing to remove assault weapons or even high capacity magazines from the market. Not for anything, but it is still legal to purchase and own currently registered fully automatic weapons. A new assault weapons ban will not change availability either. Although I have to admit that the threat of regulations has managed to enact one form of gun control, by selling out the market as a result of panic buying.

Back to the proposed assault weapons ban, here are some comments via Forbes's article titled ''Assault Weapon' Is Just A PR Stunt Meant To Fool The Gullible':

Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) has announced that she will be introducing legislation to reenact the ban on so-called assault weapons that she authored in 1994. The evidence is in on the effect of her previous assault weapons ban: zero, zilch, nada, as the saying goes. The ban made no perceptible difference in the gun violence statistics when it went into effect, and no perceptible difference when it was allowed to expire 10 years later, in 2003.

That is because the term “assault weapon” is just a PR stunt that fools the gullible and easily deluded. It is defined in legislation by cosmetic features that frighten white bread suburbanites, but do not involve any functionality of any gun. We tried it, conservatives said it wouldn’t work, and it didn’t work. Yet, it is the liberal answer to the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Conn.

Why do the hard work of actually making a difference, when with no work at all you can perform a meaningless and irrelevant gesture that won’t make any difference? A Connecticut state law already banned assault weapons. The difference that made in stopping the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary: zero, zilch, nada, as the saying goes. - Forbes

Deciding that some guns are more dangerous than others is ridiculous. Take the Walther P22. It is a 22 target pistol and as far as I know would not be effected under any sort of assault weapons ban, unless some variations get banned simply due to how they are colored. The gun comes with a 10 round magazine, which is not considered a high capacity magazine. Despite this, a Finnish mass murderer used one of these pistols to kill ten people, in the process shooting over 200 rounds, 10 at a time.

The trick here is to deny access to guns from those who would misuse them, prosecute those who illegally try to purchase them, jail those who use them in a crime, regardless of whether legally obtained of not. If you do these things, you should still be able to guarantee access to those who legally are entitled to them as recognized in our Bill of Rights.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Lies: 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.'

So the latest story concerning the fiscal cliff the US is facing is news that some Republicans in Congress are thinking of being flexible when it comes to their 'Grover Norquist' no tax increase pledge. However, I think this issue brought out a huge lie pushed by Democrats in general but said by Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin. He said that

 'Social Security does not add one penny to the debt. Not one penny.' 

His statement was in response to Republican demands that entitlement spending reform be on the table . Basically Senator Durbin is claiming that there is no need to reform Social Security Entitlements because Social Security is not a part of this nation's spending/deficit crisis. Unfortunately, this is not the case and Senator Durbin for sure knows that this is a lie. Zero Hedge explains:

This statement is a lie that is covered over by a dopy accounting system called the Unified Budget. In this magical world, the deficits driven by entitlements are hidden. The reliance on this accounting fiction is a dangerous path for liberals to take. The fact is, SS (and the other government retirement programs for Federal workers and the Military) are running billion dollar cash deficits today and will run Mega-Trillion dollar cash deficits for the next seventy-five years. Every penny of those deficits will result in more borrowing from the public.

These deficits may be “Off Budget” in the magical world of Unified Accounting, but they do add to the publicly held debt on a dollar-for-dollar basis. The Rating Agencies are part of the Cliff discussion (like it or not); those folks are no dopes and they fully understand that Senator Durbin is all wet with his talk of Off Balance sheet debt. - Zero Hedge

If a publicly traded company did this sort of accounting gimmickry, shareholders would eventually lose their investments and people would go to jail. Ironically, Democrat politicians would then be crowing to every TV camera how we need even more laws to prevent this kind of criminal behavior, all the time committing a much larger theft right out in the open.

Worse, the Social Security Trustee report notes that Social Security will run out of money around 2033, unless Social Security taxes are raised (or benefit rules reformed).

Finally, the Trillions of dollars in assets that the Social Security Trust fund has are currently held in the form of US Treasury Bonds. In short, the money was given to the Government and spent. The Government will then have to redeem the bonds as the money is needed to pay Social Security recipients. This means that they will have to get the money from somewhere. Given that the Government plans to run a deficit into the sunset, that means that they will either have to print or borrow the money.

Graphs pictured above were taken from the US Government's own Government Accountability Office. The article is titled 'Federal Debt Basics'. Clearly, this is a topic Senator Durbin and many of his follow Democrats would fail if a grade was given. Unfortunately, it is we who suffer as a result of their incompetence and criminal behavior if they had to be judged the same way that they demand businesses be held to account.

Congressman Connolly: 'Sadly, the Congress reflects the polarization of the electorate.'

In October 2012, before the election, my Congressman, Democrat Gerry Connolly gave an interview to Patch. One of his comments concerned the polarization of the country - and Congress:

Patch: Can you describe the political environment in Washington?

Connolly: Toxic. Congress is polarized. The country is polarized. Sadly, the Congress reflects the polarization of the electorate. - Patch

So, the composition of Congress reflects the polarization of the country and that is a bad thing? I find this encouraging.

I can only think that this is bad for Democrats given that they do not have control of the House of Representatives any longer. I'm sure that Gerry would have thought it a great thing when his party was in control. We can thank Nancy Pelosi's extreme liberal agenda to thank for handing the House back to Republican control.

You can find Congressman Connolly's interview here.

Jesse Jackson Jr. - Wins Re-Election - in plea deal talks with feds

Here is a perfect example of the crap that stupid people send to represent them. I am not sure why they do this, other than out of some bizarre notion that it either will upset white people or that these bad politicians will somehow reward them with free stuff. Really, how good can the guy be when he is sitting in a clinic and not in Congress:

Sneed has learned U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., who handily won re-election Tuesday despite a lengthy stay at Mayo Clinic for depression and bipolar disorder, is in the midst of plea discussions with the feds probing his alleged misuse of campaign funds. “No one has pled guilty, but plea discussions are ongoing,” said a top Sneed source, who said Jackson is still undergoing treatment at Mayo Clinic. - Sun Times

This kind of behavior in Democrat-majority parts is nothing new. Take DC's embrace of embarrassment Marion Barry, who continues to serve as a DC Councilmen despite problems with: 

• Failure to file tax returns
• Ongoing Drug problems
• Insulting his constituents based on race - "We've got to do something about these Asians coming in, opening up businesses, those dirty shops. They ought to go, I'll just say that right now, you know. But we need African-American businesspeople to be able to take their places, too."'

 Democrats do not punish such behavior. It almost appears that they reward it. It's not like they are replacing this flawed politicians with clean cut Democrats. Surely they are out there...

(Marion Barry smoking crack - 1990)

But instead we get losers like the ones above and others like fake Indian Elizabeth Warren.

Despite Jackson's problems, he still got 64% of the vote from his district.

UPDATE 10 November

Well sometimes the saying 'the higher you get the harder you fall' really fits. Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. appears to be a step away from resigning from Congress because he has a date with jail.

Webb, the chairman of Winston & Strawn LLP in Chicago, has been the point person for Jackson in talks with the U.S. Justice Department in Washington.

The tentative deal includes:–Jackson resigning for health reasons.

• His pleading guilty to charges involving misuse of campaign funds.
• The congressman’s repayment of any contributions that were converted to personal use, such as home furnishings, improper travel or gifts.

At least some jail time would appear to be inevitable for Jackson, the son of civil-rights icon Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. and spouse of Chicago 7th Ward Ald. Sandi Jackson. - CBS Local

What do you call one corrupt Congressman headed to jail? A good start!