EDITORIAL: Guns decrease murder rates

More guns in law-abiding hands mean less crime. The District of Columbia proves the point.

Reading most press accounts, one would be forgiven for thinking Armageddon had arrived after the Supreme Court struck down the District's handgun ban in 2008. Predictions sprung forth from all directions that allowing more citizens to own guns and not forcing them to keep them locked up was going to threaten public safety. According to D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, more guns in homes would cause more violent crime.

This has never been the case. Local politicians enthusiastically embraced the 1977 handgun ban predicting it would make Washington a safe place by dramatically reducing murder rates. But they were as wrong three decades ago as they are now

“The Washington Times continues to be a bright light in the darkness of the leftist dominated print media. My kudos go out to that fine paper’s editorial staff.”

Oh, you’ll appreciate this one that NAFBPO just sent to me.

Social Security rarely uses E-Verify
By Stephen Dinan

The Washington Times, January 18, 2010

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/18/social-security-often-fails-to-use-e-verify-tool-i/

[snips]Despite helping run the government’s electronic database designed to weed out illegal-immigrant workers, Social Security failed to run E-Verify
checks on its own employees nearly 20 percent of the time.

An audit by the Social Security Administration’s inspector general says the agency outright failed to check 19 percent of its hires in 2008 and 2009, and of the checks it did run, nearly half of them weren’t performed
in a timely manner.

It’s all the more embarrassing because the agency, along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, runs E-Verify, the tool the government expects to become mandatory for all U.S. businesses.

The audit said Social Security hired 9,311 people in 2008 and 2009 but failed to run E-Verify checks on 1,767 of them.

Of the others, the agency ran E-Verify checks on 1,874 people too early, in violation of the terms of use. Those terms also specify that employers must begin the E-Verify check within three days of the date they hire
someone. Social Security ran checks on another 1,784 hires after three days.

Of the 19 percent of names that were never checked at all, the audit said, 44 of them should have been flagged as potential problems.

The Obama and Bush administrations pushed E-Verify as a key component to helping businesses hire legal workers.

All federal agencies are required to check their new hires against the system. As of September, federal contractors also are required to check new employees. Some states have gone so far as to require all businesses
to check new employees.

A mandatory verification system is almost certain to be a part of any immigration bill enacted in Congress, and the penalties for failure to use the system are likely to be severe.

‘When this happens in the government sector, well, the upshot is an IG report. But in the private sector, you’re talking about investigations and penalties,’ Mr. Harper said.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The IG report is available online at:
http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/A-03-09-29154.pdf

"On the contrary, they LOVE it. It justifies more unionized police, more clerks, more prison guards, more invasive laws, more ruined families, more dependents..."

"Thus they gain two permanent indentured constituencies: one a claque of armed bureaucrats to do their bidding and the other to inflict a crime spree upon their enemy, an independent the middle class."

We have another winner!!!!!

Good job, Carry_Okie

Short and Sweet!!!

:-)

"On the contrary, they LOVE it. It justifies more unionized police, more clerks, more prison guards, more invasive laws, more ruined families, more dependents..."

We have another winner!!!!!

Good job, Carry_Okie

Short and Sweet!!!

:-)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.