|
Let's take a look at the BATFE data that NYC has and wants more of: First, the BATFE refers to it as 'gun trace data'. Gun grabbers refer to it as 'crime gun trace data'. The implication is that every gun traced is a gun involved in a crime. The BATFE says that noncrime guns are, in fact, traced. So, the assumption / presumption, in generic terms, is that all the studied guns were relate to crime is false. To get real crime gun data, every gun instance would need to be analyzed for its connection to a crime. But, let's make an assumption that every gun traced has been used in a crime. The suit publicity loudly proclaims how many firearms in a small timespan were traced and from some store. The new, unstated assumption is that every gun traced to crime was involved in a straw purchase. Again, this is a false assumption. The gun may have been passed to a prohibitted person by the fourth or fifth owner or been stolen completely absolving the store owner from any culpability. The suit publicity makes no effort to differentiate and the lawyers are probably unaware of how many guns may have been legitimately purchased and stolen from the gun owners or otherwise passed to criminal use by someone who was not the original owner. Both of these situations are not the result of any error on the store's part. What we have shown is: - the guns behind the trace data may or may not have been used in a crime.
- and the guns used in crime may or may not have come from straw purchases.
So, in the end, the qualities of the gun trace data make it worthless to the showing criminal behavior or negligence on the part of any store, at least to thinking people. Other articles on trace data:
Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
