Lansdale Letter to the Editor: Before We Make New Gun Laws, Let's Enforcing Existing Laws

The following letter to the editor was submitted by Tom Bohner of Lansdale. Letters do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Patch or its employees. Want to weigh in on an issue important to you? Email justin.heinze@patch.com to submit a letter.

Dear Editor,

In a recent letter to this paper, Matt Helfrich of Harleysville compared Hillary Clinton’s view on gun control with that of Donald Trump’s position on the same issue. Matt went a bit further to propose policies that he considered common sense.

So first, let me challenge Matt’s analysis of the two candidates’ positions. I do agree that Mr. Trump’s position on guns is less clear than you would like. But I disagree with Matt’s assessment of the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary and where they stand. First, the assault weapon ban that has since expired has been proven by federal studies to have had no statistical effect on gun violence. So I am not sure why we would want to reenact a law that will have no positive effect. Secondly, Mr. Clinton is on record for suggesting that we should take a long look at the Australian model. By any measure this approach is gun confiscation, and therefore would fall outside of what I would call “common sense”. (It appears that she has been running away from this position now that we are in the common election cycle).

As for Mrs. Clinton’s position on banning sales of guns to persons on the no-fly list and suspected terrorists, if one agrees with these proposed restrictions, you then would agree with the legislation that the Republicans tried to pass a few months ago. In that legislation, a citizen that was denied a gun purchase due to being on the no-fly list would be granted a prompt hearing where the government would need to provide to a judge evidence that the person denied their second amendment rights truly was a danger to society and not just on the list due to a bureaucratic error (Teddy Kennedy was on the no-fly list for some time as was Steve Hayes).

For some reason, this law failed to pass based on democratic opposition. Mr. Trump’s change in position on this topic may have been based on a better understanding he now has on how indiscriminate the no-fly list is in many cases.

Matt also raised the issue of gun sales through the internet loophole. I don’t want to put words in Matt’s mouth but I am guessing he may also want to include the sale of guns through the gun show loophole. Mrs. Clinton has raised this issue frequently as a common sense issue. The problem is that both of these so-called loopholes don’t exist. What exists is the right for an individual to sell a gun to another person without going through the federal background check. If you attempt to buy a gun from a dealer, either at a gun sale, or over the internet, that sale occurs only after the federal background check occurs through an FFL (Federal Licensed Firearms Dealer). This is the same review that occurs in the store of a gun dealer. Again a sale between two individuals, whether in the parking lot of a gun show, a random listing on Craig’s list, or between a father and a son are exempt from these rules.

Matt also suggested that the sale of guns to convicted felons should be illegal. I am not sure why Matt raised this as an election issue. Sale of guns to felons has been illegal forever.

Finally, what is more common sense than enforcing existing laws? It appears that Mrs. Clinton supports the current administration’s policy of 1) releasing felons that have used guns in their crimes prior to serving their full sentence (Dwyane Wade’s cousin), and 2) not investigating incidents where people apply for guns by falsifying legal documents. Why would we not enforce existing laws before we place more restrictions on law abiding citizens?

Tom Bohner

Lansdale, PA

Photo by R0Ng via Flickr Creative Commons.