Blame the Victim, Redux

Reader Steve sends one in that really gets the ol' blood pressure skyrocketing.

Warning:

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

---

I covered an infuriating story back in January about a MA gunowner who had his guns stolen while he was out of town and promptly lost his license. Rather than do, you know, actual police work (they later caught the responsible parties FWIW), they simply revoked the gunowner's permit to own firearms. I mean, he only had a metal safe bolted to the floor of his basement, in full compliance with MA's "Safe Storage" law *and* reported the theft immediately. He was asking for it!

Just wait, it gets better - here's how the city of Lowell proposes to handle these events in the future:

Proposed Lowell law would tighten rules for gun owners

In order to prevent similar incidents in Lowell and the movement of guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens to lawbreakers, Lavallee, Middlesex District Attorney Gerard Leone and Rep. Kevin Murphy helped city officials craft a home-rule petition seeking the power to require owners of 10 or more firearms to notify police of the weapons' location within 24 hours of possessing them.

The proposed law would also require owners of more than 10 firearms to secure them in a locked safe or vault and install an alarm system with central monitoring that would notify police when the alarm is activated.

[shakes head]

What's next? Is Lowell going to require that all women wear chastity belts to prevent rape? Are all cars registered in Lowell going to need mandatory Lo-Jack? At some point, you have to admit that you have a criminal problem, not a gunowner problem. The victim - the man who had his property stolen and his Second Amendment rights abridged - did everything in his power to keep his firearms safe. He locked them up. He took steps to keep the safe hidden (basement) and secure (bolted). And this isn't good enough.

Gaze upon what the antis consider "reasonable" gun control here, folks. Alarm systems. Automatic alerts. Notification to the police when you buy more than [X] number of guns (and if you think they'll be happy stopping at 10, I've got a bridge to sell in NY...) All because they have a criminal problem and it's just plain easier to harass gun owners than to actually go after - and incarcerate - the criminals responsible.

I am reminded of the smoking laws in Boston. They required restaurants that wanted to allow smoking to have separate areas. Then separate areas weren't good enough - they wanted separate ventilation systems and completely enclosed smoking rooms. Then that wasn't good enough, and smoking was banned outright. What's going to happen when the fancy alarms and instant notifications don't stop criminals from stealing guns?

Here's a better idea - start throwing the bad guys in jail and keeping them there. Start pulling the worst of the worst out of the running, watch crime fall. Enforce the existing laws. Stop plea-bargaining away most of the crimes - the guys that performed the initial B&E that started this could be charged with multiple Federal crimes if they have previous records (which I would fall over dead of shock if they didn't). Make use of that. Haul them off to a Federal prison for 25 years and leave that as a lesson to the rest.

Stop throwing the law abiding under the bus here - we are not the problem.

That is all.