NYC registry of gun offenders upheld by state's top court ...

[spin]

NYC gun registry upheld by state's top court
DECEMBER 16, 2010, 12:39 P.M. ET

ALBANY, N.Y. — The state's top court rejected a convict's challenge to being listed in the New York City registry of gun offenders, concluding Thursday it's an administrative matter like sex offender registration and not subject to sentencing appeals.

***snip***

Under the city ordinance that took effect in early 2007, the NYPD is required to monitor all city residents convicted of gun possession, who must report within 48 hours of conviction or their release from prison, whichever comes later, and notify authorities within days if they move. The City Council said gun offenders pose "unique dangers" to New Yorkers and are re-arrested more often than other felons.

"This is the high risk group," John Feinblatt, adviser to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, has said. "And you want to make sure that you are watching them, and you want to make sure they know you are watching them."

Through early November, the registry listed 362 eligible offenders, including 202 still jailed and 160 released and subject to monitoring, NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said. Nine had been arrested for not complying and charged with failure to register. That misdemeanor carries penalties up to $1,000 and a year in prison.

It's a registry for use by police, unlike the public state sex offender registry.
http://online.wsj.com/article/AP3fb5252855bc41cf9d49a9f8050d9e46.html

The future of gun control should focus on taking guns away from criminals who illegally carry firearms rather than pass further regulations, restrictions and bans on manufacturers and honest citizens.

[SteveM]

1. Seems like an effective criminal-control (not gun-control) measure.

[Kennah]

2. Am I the only one nervous about registries?

First they came for the sex offenders, and I did not speak up ...

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. ... ...

... ? and ?

[Kennah]

14. Registration Path

First we register sex offenders after serving time.

Now we register gun offenders after serving time.

How long before we get to the sedition registry?

[Euromutt]

19. That's a pretty decent comparison to make

I don't care for "sex offender" registries myself, not least because they generally cast a net that's much wider than is justified by their rationale. According to various studies, maybe 10-20% of convicted sex offenders are at risk of re-offending, not necessarily for another sex offense. A 2003 DoJ report indicated that, of sex offenders released in 1994, 5.3% had been rearrested for another sex offense within 3 years after being released; of offenders convicted of a sex offense against a child, 3.3% had been rearrested for another sex offense against a child. Of the 17,000+ sex offenders registered in the state of Georgia, ~100 are considered "predators" (i.e. compulsive reoffenders), about 0.6% of the total. Thus, "Megan's Laws" affect not only offenders like Jesse Timmendequas, but five to a hundred times as many offenders, the overwhelming majority of whom are at low to no risk of reoffending and really don't deserve to be treated as if they're "predators."

Regarding the idea of a firearm offender registry, I'd have far fewer misgivings if the jurisdiction in question weren't New York City, where you have to jump through some ridiculous hoops to acquire and possess a firearm legally. Moreover, the registry seems to be focused exclusively on those convicted of illegal possession of a firearm, not necessarily of using it to commit a violent offense. Plus, the statements on the part of the City Council and Feinblatt (Bloomberg's adviser) claiming that gun offenders have notably high recidivism rates sound less than entirely credible to me. As far I'm aware, if you want to see high recidivism rates, motor vehicle thieves, burglars and robbers score more highly than persons in illegal possession of a firearm. Actually, BJS data indicates that firearm offenders do have a fairly high reoffense rate, but that's for illegal possession, use and trafficking lumped together.

Then there's this, from the WSJ article:

The state's top court rejected a convict's challenge to being listed in the New York City registry of gun offenders, concluding Thursday it's an administrative matter like sex offender registration and not subject to sentencing appeals.

The unanimous Court of Appeals ruling concluded the registration of Sean Smith was not part of his criminal sentence. Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote that Smith would have been obligated to register regardless of whether or not he was told to in court.

If registration is "an administrative matter" not imposed by judicial order, how does that square with the right to due process? Let's not pretend that the requirements imposed on registrants aren't a deprivation of liberty.

[safeinOhio]

4. So, I take it you are for

this common sense law?
"The future of gun control should focus on taking guns away from criminals who illegally carry firearms rather than pass further regulations, restrictions and bans on manufacturers and honest citizens."

These are not law abiding citizens and there is a high number of repeat violent gun offenders. I would hope that the law is worded so minor infractions are not included. If not, it could be amended.

[spin]

12. Today many areas of our country treat illegal carry of a firearm as a ...

minor infraction even if you are a violent criminal. Often the charge is plea bargained away.

But each case should be carefully considered. In cases where the person has no history of committing crime, especially violent crime, and the incident was the first time he/she had been found carrying, the level of punishment could be reduced to be appropriate for a minor infraction.

[safeinOhio]

26. Like I said

"I would hope that the law is worded so minor infractions are not included. If not, it could be amended."

[krispos42]

17. Who's next? n/t

[bluerum]

5. Hard to call convicted gun felons honest citizens. Unfortunately the recidivism rate is very

high for this group. In general I think that once you do your time you should have your rights restored. In this case the data seems to indicate these folks might need a hand going straight.

[spin]

13. I would tend to believe that if you were convicted of a nonviolent crime ...

for example, writing a bad check or embezzlement, fraud, laundering, drug distribution/possession, your rights could be restored.

In cases where an individual had been convicted of a violent felony or even crimes such as home robbery when no one was present, I personally fear that restoring a person's rights might be foolish.

[safeinOhio]

27. Brady and NRA agree with you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Exile. All other gun rights groups don't.

[spin]

33. If Brady and the NRA were to work together ...

to tweak our current law and to develop new approaches to dealing with criminal guns, straw purchases and private sales, we could drop the violent crime rate in our country even further than we have. Unfortunately much of their revenue is generated by contributions caused by fear of the goals of the other organization. Both organizations also depend on a certain level of violence to continue their current existence. Perhaps that's why the Brady Campaign is having financial problems. The level of violent crime has dropped to the point where it is no longer considered as major a problem to garner support for the Brady Campaign.



The Brady Campaign peaked during the 90s with the passage of the Assault Weapons Ban. The NRA also came on strong in the same time frame as they successfully pushed "shall issue" concealed carry law, castle doctrine and "stand your ground" laws that swept across our country.

Of course, the Assault Weapons Ban proved a total failure while the laws promoted by the NRA have proven to be extremely successful and popular, despite the constant worry promoted by the Brady Campaign that our country would return to the "Wild West".

One of the biggest problems we face today is organized drug gangs and turf wars. The solution to this problem may require proactive police work and legalization of certain drugs such as marijuana. The biggest threat we may face in the future is the Mexican drug cartels gaining power in the United States. Gun control has little effect on organizations who are able to obtain large quantities of fully automatic firearms, rocket launchers, anti-tank weapons, and grenades.

[safeinOhio]

36. Yep, both far ends of the argument

are crazy. I have never been a supporter of Brady, yet most pro-gunners put me with them because I'm in the middle. As you move toward the middle and sensible laws, prepare for the personal attacks and accusations.

[Euromutt]

20. Define "very high"

According to BJS data (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/press/rpr94pr.cfm), persons convicted of motor vehicle theft, possessing or selling stolen property, larceny and burglary all had higher rearrest rates over the three-year period following release than those convicted for firearms offenses. And "firearm offenses" lumped together illegal possession, use and selling. On the basis of reoffense data, there's a better case to be made for car thief and burglar registries than a registry of persons convicted of illegal possession.

[damntexdem]

6. What about dishonest citizens like those at gun shows who sell to anyone, including criminals?

Or big dealers in the U.S. who sell big quantities to Mexican drug cartels?

[X_Digger]

7. The salient clause, missing from your post is..

"knowingly or would have reason to believe"

[safeinOhio]

8. Another missing clause

Not asking, not wanting to know and only worried about a quick buck.

[X_Digger]

11. Why is California the 3rd largest exporter of 'crime guns', eh?

I mean, after all, they have your precious, 'all sales must go through the state' bullshit on the books....

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. Now now, you shouldn't ask awkward questions of our resident gun control advocates.

They are delicate flowers, unused to dealing with such harsh subjects as "verifiable facts" and "reliable sources".

Be kind....

[safeinOhio]

22. I hate to be rude to

you, but it is pretty easy for that large population of crooks in Cali to cross the eastern and northern boarders for easy buys to bring back home. Better to look to Hawaii for exports of guns. 1. Not one of the most populated states like Cali and 2. A little more difficult to go next door for an easy, no questions asked buy. Perhaps you can find one of your verifiable facts and reliable sources to post the stats on guns exported in relationship to numbers of populations. Of course you can discount those facts when proving your own point. Higher numbers of people=more criminal acts, duh. Even though Alaska has a high murder rate, it has way less murders than, say California, NY or Texas. How many guns are illegally exported out of, say, Canada? Our resident "make it as easy for crooks to get guns" advocates are very selective with facts.

[Euromutt]

31. "EXport" means the guns *leave* the state, not *enter* the state

X_Digger states that California is the "3rd largest exporter of 'crime guns'" (emphasis mine), i.e. in terms of numbers of firearms recovered in criminal investigations in other states that could be traced back as having originally been sold by an FFL to a private buyer in the state in question, California came third. We're not talking about guns originally sold by FFLs in Arizona, Nevada or Oregon turning up in California; we're talking about guns sold by FFLs in California turning up as far away as Florida, New York, and (in a very small number of cases) Maine.

I'm not sure that ranking is actually correct, but the fact remains that California is a substantial exporter of crime guns.

Sure, you can point out that California is the most populous state in the Union (~11% of the total population, I believe), but given the stringency of California's gun laws, that only goes so far; if the primary causal factor is the stringency of gun laws, then why isn't in the bottom ten?

Interestingly, by the way, according to MAIG, Hawaii is a net exporter of crime guns; in 2009, 13 guns were trafficked into the state, while 30 were trafficked out, with the primary recipients being California (10), New York (3), Florida (3), Texas (2) and D.C. (2), with a handful of other states getting one each.

[safeinOhio]

23. typical "Begging the question" fallacy

Assuming an answer in the way the quesion is phrased. If anyone should know better..............

[X_Digger]

30. I assumed you actually had done the research.. my bad.

Next time I won't assume that you're actually up on a subject..

Check the ATF report on crime guns.. purchased in CA (traced via 4473)

Inside the US, only 30% of crime guns are traced to another state. Of those 30%, California is fifth. (My apologies, fifth, not third.)

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/trace_report_final.pdf

From Mexico (since that was one of the points that damntexas asserted):

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/mexican-crime-american-guns/story?id=11574583&page=1

"The top ten source states for supplying crime guns to Mexico in 2009 were Texas (2076 guns), California (1011), Arizona (690), New Mexico (173)"

That's based on trace data, which means someone filed a 4473 in that state.

[friendly_iconoclast]

35. What? *Bloomie's* group says that criminals get guns from states with private sale bans?

Unpossible! Hasn't one of our resident gun control experts repeatedly assured us that making private sales illegal would

prevent this sort of thing?



Looks like yet another failure in the endless quest for the One True Gun Control Law- you know, the one that really, truly,

most definitely will stop criminals from getting guns if only we could just enact it....

[oneshooter]

9. If you have any evidence of this then please cite it. n/t

[safeinOhio]

25. Appeal to ignorance fallacy

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Euromutt]

28. Shifting the burden of proof fallacy

damntexdem made the claim these events occur, so oneshooter is entitled to ask damntexdem for evidence to support that claim.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence," while true in the abstract, runs into trouble when claims are made regarding the existence of an entity or event that should reasonably leave evidence of its existence; if such the evidence that such an entity or event should have left proves lacking, it is reasonable to infer that the entity does not exist or the event did not take place. I forget who said it first, but non-detectability and non-existence look suspiciously similar.

And ffs, please don't cite the fact that American criminals and Mexican DTOs get hold of their guns from somewhere as "evidence," because that's circular reasoning.

[safeinOhio]

29. Straw man fallacy as

I never quoted, defended or brought up oneshooter. Also, where did I ever use the Mexican argument. 2 for 1 on the straw man fallacy. The problem with lumping a bunch of people together is, you have lumped a bunch of people together. You have done that quite often lately. If you wish to argue with me, argue with me and not others you mistakenly have linked to me. You have linked me to Brady and I have never been a supporter of that group. Even though Brady and the NRA have agreed on some issues, I won't link you to them.

[X_Digger]

32. You'll notice that Euromutt never said that you said any such thing.

Euromutt specified who said what, then explained how your comment was rather asinine.

You're using the right terms, but you need to learn how to apply them.

[Euromutt]

37. You replied to oneshooter's post #9

There's this chart below the OP and above the responses, right, that shows by means of dotted lines who responded to whom.

In post #6, damntexdem wrote:

What about dishonest citizens like those at gun shows who sell to anyone, including criminals?

Or big dealers in the U.S. who sell big quantities to Mexican drug cartels?

In post #9, oneshooter responded to damntexdem's post #6:

If you have any evidence of this then please cite it. n/t

In post #25, you responded to oneshooter's post #9:

Appeal to ignorance fallacy

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I think I may be forgiven, given the progression of events, for interpreting your post as criticizing oneshooter for supposedly committing a logical fallacy by demanding evidence for the existence of the "dishonest citizens" and "big dealers" to whom damntexdem referred. Did you inadvertently respond to the wrong post? Because otherwise I don't see how my reaction didn't actually pertain to yours.

And I didn't claim you used "the Mexican argument"; I was cautioning you ahead of time against possibly using it in future.

X_Digger's right: you can whip out the terminology, but you don't what the terms actually mean. I recommend this page http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html as a primer.

[spin]

16. I believe anyone who sells firearms knowingly to a criminal ...

or anyone who is a straw purchaser of firearms which end up in criminal hands should be severely punished.

It should not matter weather the sale occurred at a gun show, was a private sale or was a straw purchase at a gun store.

I doubt if this could be done, but if it could be proved that if a firearm was involved in a crime and it was possible to trace the sale, the person who knowingly sold the firearm realizing that it would end up on the black market should be an accessory to whatever crime the firearm was used in.

If I were a straw purchaser and realized that I could end up charged as an accessory to murder, I might decide to stop dealing guns.

[RSillsbee]

21. Other than the US Government

which big dealer in the U.S.is selling large quantities of weapons to Mexico?

[oneshooter]

10. Ya got a somewhat misleading topic header. n/t

[spin]

15. I tried to make the header clearer than the title of the newspaper article ...

"NYC gun registry upheld by state's top court" which would have led people to believe the article was about gun registration rather than the registration of gun offenders.

Perhaps I didn't succeed.

[safeinOhio]

24. I think you did

to reasonable people that aren't looking for any argument.
Welcome to the reasonable side, good luck.

[spin]

34. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree ...

makes life interesting.

Note that I don't always pander to the views of the NRA.