Is this statement accurate: "Helmke said that 1.3 million people who tried to buy handguns since the Brady Bill was enacted have been rejected after background checks."
Note the comment of reader LE. "Actually, the 1.3 million figure is correct, and furthermore, from a 2004 DOJ report, we know that 7,000 individuals who were PROHIBITED from buying a gun in 2002 and 2003 were able to do so. ATF used to retrieve those guns to ensure public safety, but since former-Attorney General John Ashcroft codified the destruction of background check records after 24 hours, that is now impossible. That means that criminals now get to keep their guns after faulty background checks. Thank you NRA for pushing for that 'reform.' http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16265-2004Jul26.html"; http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/local/061208guns.html Handgun control advocate speaks out E-mail this page Reader Comments (below) By EDWARD D. MURPHY, Staff Writer Friday, December 8, 2006 The country doesn't necessarily need new laws to limit handguns, but it should enforce the laws it has and resist efforts to weaken them, one of the nation's top handgun control advocates said Thursday. Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, was in Portland to speak at the annual meeting of Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence, which presented its top annual award for efforts to reduce gun violence to Chellie Pingree. The Buzz Fitzgerald Public Service Award was given to Pingree, the founding co-chairwoman of Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence, for the gun control bills she sponsored while a state senator. Pingree is now president and chief executive officer of Common Cause, a nonpartisan activist group. Helmke took over as head of the Brady Campaign just five months ago, but he said that as mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind. for 12 years, he saw how handguns contributed to raising the level of violence. He said there have been some improvements in the level of violence in his hometown because of laws such as the Brady Bill, which requires background checks on prospective gun buyers, the hiring of more police and working on problems with neighborhood groups. Helmke said that 1.3 million people who tried to buy handguns since the Brady Bill was enacted have been rejected after background checks. But he said that there are ways around the measure, such as allowing qualified buyers to buy multiple guns, in some cases so many that common sense would suggest they are not intended for personal use. Tightening controls and putting bulk sales under greater scrutiny could help limit the number of guns getting into criminals' hands, he said. At the same time, Helmke said a goal of his is to show that those who want greater control on handguns are not against legitimate use of weapons. "I'm not anti-gun," he said. "It's a question of what can we do to make our neighborhoods safer. I absolutely don't want to do anything to make it harder for the legitimate hunters or gun collectors or anybody who even wants it for personal protection." Staff Writer Edward D. Murphy can be contacted at 791-6465 or at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reader comments LE of Washington, DC Dec 11, 2006 4:54 PM "What I discovered was that Handgun Control, now the Brady Campaign, regularly lie in layers. An example of the latter is Mr. Helmke's claim that 1.3 million firearms purchases have been halted by Brady. Note that he doesn't say that any of those would be purchasers was prosecuted for attempting to illegally purchase a gun, something they would be liable for if truly prohibited from that purchase. Since there were few, if any, such prosecutions we are left with the conclusion that he is crowing about nearly 1.3 million LEGAL purchases being prevented by the bureaucratic nightmare that is the law he's praising." Amazing that someone who accuses Brady of lying does such a nice job of misrepresenting the truth himself. Actually, the 1.3 million figure is correct, and furthermore, from a 2004 DOJ report, we know that 7,000 individuals who were PROHIBITED from buying a gun in 2002 and 2003 were able to do so. ATF used to retrieve those guns to ensure public safety, but since former-Attorney General John Ashcroft codified the destruction of background check records after 24 hours, that is now impossible. That means that criminals now get to keep their guns after faulty background checks. Thank you NRA for pushing for that "reform." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16265-2004Jul26.html Your argument that because these people are not being prosecuted means they were legal purchasers is ridiculous. They are not being prosecuted for several reasons, including: a) state and local agencies that perform the checks often do not notify police about the crime; b) federal prosecutors have limited resources and higher priorities and believe that the law accomplishes it purpose when a sale is blocked. What's interesting though is that the NRA-sponsored Bush administration, for all its crowing about "enforcing gun laws on the books" has made no progress in that direction and through bills like HR 5092 is trying to dismantle gun laws already on the books. Chris Meissen of West Plains, MO Dec 9, 2006 11:35 AM While in college during the 1980's, I did several Comp & Rhet papers on gun control. What I discovered was that Handgun Control, now the Brady Campaign, regularly lie in layers. Not only is the overt statement generally either a distortion or outright lie (such as "I'm not anti-gun") but generally it is buttressed by claims or "facts" which are themselves false or misleading. An example of the latter is Mr. Helmke's claim that 1.3 million firearms purchases have been halted by Brady. Note that he doesn't say that any of those would be purchasers was prosecuted for attempting to illegally purchase a gun, something they would be liable for if truly prohibited from that purchase. Since there were few, if any, such prosecutions we are left with the conclusion that he is crowing about nearly 1.3 million LEGAL purchases being prevented by the bureaucratic nightmare that is the law he's praising. PD of Pensacola, FL Dec 8, 2006 11:14 PM Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them. Earwicker of Biddeford, ME Dec 8, 2006 9:47 PM Too late...DC has already introduced legislation barring possession by all non-military personnel. The argument runs that the 2nd Amendment only guarantees the right to an armed militia, not armed citizens. The Courts have supported this argument every time the 2nd Amendment is raised to defend non-Brady possession, and will likely do so again. And there is customary precedent of towns requiring everyone to turn in their firearms to the Sheriff until they leave. On the flip side, a few towns have enacted legislation requiring all able bodied citizens to carry. What doesn't ever get said is that all the restrictive laws have their roots in the Jim Crow laws enacted to keep recently freed black slaves unarmed and afraid. Nobody cited the 2nd Amendment then, and so now it has come home to roost where you live. Enjoy! Show all 26 comments ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
