In the growingly tiresome debate by the freedom-hating groups for more gun control, one would assume that organizations advocating for stricter gun laws would also support harsher penalties for violent criminals.
Come on! If you were still that naive, you would be very wrong.
Yet, a recent hearing in the Virginia State Senate reveals a startling contradiction. When faced with a bill proposing longer prison sentences for repeat offenders who commit violent crimes using firearms, several national gun control groups opposed it.
This raises a critical question: Do these groups truly care about public safety, or is their agenda primarily about disarming law-abiding citizens?
The Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) has long argued that gun control advocates use crime as a pretext to push for stricter gun laws, rather than genuinely aiming to reduce crime. The testimony presented by these groups at the hearing seems to support this claim. Representatives from organizations like Mom’s Demand Action and Brady opposed the bill, arguing that mandatory minimum sentences do not effectively reduce crime and disproportionately affect minority communities. While these concerns are not completely without merit, they overlook a fundamental reality:
…repeat violent offenders pose a significant threat to public safety, and keeping them behind bars protects innocent people.
One of the most baffling arguments presented was the notion that the certainty of punishment is more effective than the length of the sentence. Essentially, they suggested that knowing they will be punished, even lightly, is enough to deter criminals. However, this logic is flawed when applied to violent repeat offenders. Individuals who have already committed serious crimes and reoffended are clearly undeterred by existing penalties. For such hardened criminals, the prospect of a mere slap on the wrist is unlikely to discourage further violence.
It’s essential to understand that mandatory minimum sentences for violent crimes committed with firearms serve a dual purpose: deterrence and incapacitation. While the deterrent effect may vary, the incapacitation effect is undeniable. A violent offender who is incarcerated cannot harm the public. This simple fact underscores the necessity of keeping dangerous criminals off the streets for extended periods.
Click the link to read the whole article: Gun Control Groups Say the Bad Part Out Loud
No comments:
Post a Comment