Will Gun Licensing Be the Next Push in Virginia

 For years, we have been told that we needed background checks on firearm purchases to reduce criminal misuse, even though even Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health determined they had no effect on crime in California.  The researchers involved in that study admitted they were "puzzled" at the outcome.  I guess they set out to find out why because they have come out with a new study that says background checks must be coupled with gun licensing to be effective.  From the Crime Report:

For the study, the researchers compared four statistics—firearm homicide, non-firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and nonfirearm suicide rates.

What they found was striking, the authors wrote.

“Connecticut’s purchaser licensing law, enacted in 1995, was associated with a 28 percent decrease in firearm homicide rates and a 33 percent decrease in firearm suicides from 1996 to 2017,” the researchers found.

The researchers also found that Connecticut’s suicide rates fell 23 percent from 1996 to 2006, and even more drastically — 40.5 percent — following Connecticut’s law that allows law enforcement to temporarily remorse firearms from individual’s possession if they threaten to harm themselves or others.

For the study, the researchers compared four statistics—firearm homicide, non-firearm homicide, firearm suicide, and nonfirearm suicide rates.

What they found was striking, the authors wrote.

“Connecticut’s purchaser licensing law, enacted in 1995, was associated with a 28 percent decrease in firearm homicide rates and a 33 percent decrease in firearm suicides from 1996 to 2017,” the researchers found.

The researchers also found that Connecticut’s suicide rates fell 23 percent from 1996 to 2006, and even more drastically — 40.5 percent — following Connecticut’s law that allows law enforcement to temporarily remorse firearms from individual’s possession if they threaten to harm themselves or others.

Then they looked at Maryland and Pennslyvania:

But Maryland and Pennsylvania’s data doesn’t reflect this positive outcome, mainly because their states don’t have purchaser licensing laws — they only operate with CBC laws.

Maryland’s 1996 implementation of background check laws have been associated with a 17.5 percent increase in firearm homicide rates from 1997 to 2013, and Pennsylvania’s 1996 CBC implementation is associated with a 21.5 percent increase in homicide rates.

On the other hand, the state of Missouri once had purchaser licensing laws, but repealed them in 2007, creating a spike in gun violence.

After the 2007 repeal, the researchers found that there was an estimated increase in firearm homicide (47.3 percent), nonfirearm homicides (18.1 percent), and firearm suicides (23.5 percent).

Put another way, the estimated percentage increase of firearm homicides occurring after the purchaser licensing laws were repealed translates to between 55 and 63 untimely deaths per year in Missouri, CBS News reported.

Despite the states that have CBC law implementation, the authors write these spikes in gun violence deaths are consistent with a growing body of evidence that shows CBC laws are not effective in curbing firearm deaths — unless they’re coupled with purchaser licensing laws.

The next line in the story tells you all you need to know about this study because it betrays the fact that the researchers were not disinterested individuals looking to find out what happens in certain circumstances. No, they have an agenda.

The authors recommend that other states across America should look into implementing purchaser licensing laws, which they deem “necessary.”

I added the emphasis on "necessary".  Don't be surprised if you see a licensing bill pop up at the General Assembly in 2021.

Cory Booker Becomes Second Democrat That Wants to Use Executive Action for Gun Restrictions

The 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary is becoming known as the "Disarmament Primary."  Kamala Harris has already said she will give congress 100 days after she takes office to pass restrictions on gun owners or she will do it by "Executive Action".  Cory Booker has joined her and has a list of things he wants to do with Executive Action:

Sen. Cory Booker, the New Jersey senator who’s running for president, is proposing a slate of sweeping executive actions and policy changes to implement gun control measures that have long hit roadblocks in Congress.

Booker’s plan centers around implementing a federal licensing program for gun ownership, requiring gun owners to submit fingerprints and pass a gun safety course to legally possess a firearm

The plan would also mandate universal background checks on all gun sales, closing the “Charleston loophole” which allows people buying guns from private sellers to bypass background checks in 1 of 5 gun sales across the country, and another loophole that allows people convicted of domestic violence or who are under a restraining order to purchase a gun if they are not married to their partner.

“My plan to address gun violence is simple, we will make it harder for people who should not have a gun to get one,” Booker said.

Booker likely could not do most of what he wants to do by "Executive Action" otherwise former President Obama would have done it.  He also should know that nothing he is proposing would stop a criminal from getting a gun.

But that doesn't matter to the Democrats running for President.

UPDATE:  Cam Edwards of NRATV asks a great question about Booker's proposal:

Will he attempt to jail Americans who refuse to get a federal license to own a firearm?

Keep in mind, there are around 90-million legal gun owners. Right now the federal prison population is a little more than 200,000, of which about 30,000 are in for weapons offenses. https://t.co/FJ2PaVLZS9

— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) May 6, 2019

Gun Ban Advocates Use Faulty Research to Push Gun Licensing

Representative Chris Van Hollen (D - MD) has introduced a new bill in Congress that would require states to enact handgun licensing schemes or face the loss of federal funding.  Van Hollen is using a new study by Daniel Webster and others from the Bloomberg funded Johns Hopkins "Center for Gun Policy and Research" as proof that such laws reduce crime committed with firearms.   From The Hill:

The Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act would zero in on handgun purchases, but exempt rifles and other types of firearms.

It is backed by a study from the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research that found handgun licenses dramatically reduce homicide rates.

“Of the thousands of Americans murdered every single year by firearms, nearly 90 percent of those deaths occur with a handgun,” Van Hollen said. “With mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, and friends dying every day because of guns, there is no question that gun violence is tearing at the fabric of our communities."

In addition to Van Hollen, who is running for the Senate, three Connecticut Democrats back the handgun bill: Rep. Elizabeth Esty, Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Sen. Chris Murphy. Connecticut was the site of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in 2012.

Their bill would provide states with an incentive to strengthen their guns laws. States that follow through with the handgun regulations would receive federal funding to carry them out, while those that refused would risk losing money.

To qualify, states would have to implement laws that require prospective gun owners to apply for a firearms license from a local police station. They would be required to pass a background check, including submitting fingerprints and photographs.

Those who pass the background check would receive a firearms license that they must provide to purchase a handgun.

The Democrats say the handgun bill would help law enforcement officials weed out criminals and other people who are not allowed to purchase guns.

But Dr. John Lott points out Webster has cherry picked the data to support his conclusion:

Their results are also extremely sensitive to the last year that they pick.  While it is true that Connecticut’s firearm homicide rate fell by 40% from 1995 to 2005, it only fell by 16% between 1995 and 2006 and 12.5% between 1995 and 2010.  Meanwhile the drops for the US and the rest of the Northeast are much greater.  From 1995 and 2006, the firearm homicide rates for the US and the rest of the Northeast fell respectively by 27% and 22%.  From 1995 and 2010, the drops were 39% and 31%.  The longer samples show a relative increase in Connecticut’s firearm homicide rate whether Rudolph et al. had looked at one additional year or five additional years.

This is not the first time Webster has "cherry picked" data to support his preconceived conclusions.  He did the same thing in the Missouri study that was used with the Connecticut study to push the licensing scheme.

This is one more example that congress did the right thing prohibiting tax payer money to pay for research that pushes gun control.  Webster is a gun ban advocate and each of his studies start at the end he wants to achieve and then he finds the data to support those conclusions.