Progress vs. illegal gun owners
Attorney General Kamala Harris has released a report on how she is spending $24 million on a program aimed at taking guns away from people who aren’t allowed to have them. Despite its successes, the result provided fodder for people who have decided they must criticize legitimate gun-control efforts.
In 2012, California legislators reacted to the Sandy Hook massacre of 26 children and educators by seeking to tighten gun laws. Congress failed to take action, but California, like several other states, approved several measures, including the spending of $24 million to speed the investigations of people who illegally possess firearms.
That money was used to hire more agents to whittle down the backlog of individuals who are in a database of people who are registered gun owners but who are banned from possessing them because they were subsequently convicted of crimes, were detained for mental illness or became targets of restraining orders.
At the start of 2014, there were 21,249 individuals on the list to be investigated. By the end of March, that number had fallen to 16,511. That’s progress by any measure, for which agents deserve praise.
But responding to Harris’ report, Senate Republicans called on Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León to convene an oversight hearing into what they called a “lack of significant progress in clearing the APPS (Armed and Prohibited Persons System) backlog.” A budget hearing is set for later this month.
It’d be great if there were no backlog. But that’s not realistic. New names are added to the list constantly, including 7,000 more individuals in 2014 alone. Counting the new additions to the list, it means agents have cut the list by 55 percent. We’re impressed.
Even at that, state Department of Justice agents increased the number of investigations to 7,573 in 2014, up from 2,148 in 2012, Harris’ report said. They investigate cases at no small risk to themselves. They must knock on the doors of illegal gun owners and ask them to hand over their weapons – not a job for the weak of knee.
In an rare moment of clarity, the National Rifle Association supported the original program when the Legislature approved it in 2001, understanding that mentally ill people and criminals should not be allowed to have guns.
But the NRA has since backtracked, filing a lawsuit claiming that no portion of a $24 state fee collected as firearms are purchased should be used to fund the program. U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill of Fresno sided with the state last month, ruling the fee didn’t violate gun owners’ Second Amendment rights. An appeal is pending, and we hope it, too, is rejected.
We support the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns. But we refuse to accept any rationale that would allow deadly weapons to remain in the hands of those judged unacceptable to have them.
Responsible gun owners should not support an organization that does its best to get between society and those who should not have guns.
This story was originally published April 7, 2015 at 7:33 PM with the headline "Progress vs. illegal gun owners."