Why ‘Enforce the Laws’ Is A Perfectly Valid Rebuttal to Gun Control Calls

While the Bruen decision did leave the door open for some gun control laws, it’s one thing about the decision that I don’t like. I can live with it, because the door is only barely open, but it’s still not the ideal decision the Supreme Court could have made. I’ve said before that what I’d like to see is something akin to, “What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ told you this crap was OK?”

But while Bruen may have been less than perfect, it was still pretty good overall.

Unfortunately, anti-gunners don’t care, and as a result, they keep calling for more and more gun control. In response, many on the more pro-gun side call for the current laws to be enforced, and while I might not like those current laws, those saying so have a point.

Debate over reducing firearm crimes often focuses on whether or how much to limit the Second Amendment right to bear arms. After all, some argue, if we make more guns illegal then criminals won’t be able to access as many guns. 

This argument falls short on so many levels. And in a recent article giving several examples, I highlighted that “[e]ven on an island nation like Australia, where presumably government has total control of what comes in and out of the country, the passage of a gun law designed to clamp down on firearms did not deliver in terms of homicide, suicide, number of guns, reduction of mass shootings, or prevalence of gun ownership.” 

But what if, even as anti-gun lawmakers try to impose more and more firearms restrictions, government is failing to follow through on gun laws already on the books?

Unfortunately, that’s exactly the case. And we see it particularly in two areas: prosecuting background check fails and prosecuting straw purchases. 

Federal background checks for gun purchases became law when President Bill Clinton signed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (“Brady Act”) in 1993. The legislation was named after Jim Brady, who suffered a gunshot wound to the head during the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan. Several years later, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was established per Brady Act requirement, creating a “national namecheck system for federal firearms licensees.” 

I mean, it’s fair, right? If you’re a felon and you try to buy a gun, you’re committing a crime. It’s one thing if you didn’t know you were prohibited, but that should still fall to a prosecutor to look into and decide if they believe you or not, which would then lead to you pleading your case in court. 

Of course, if you didn’t know you were a felon, you’re probably too dumb to own a gun in the first place.

Yet despite the illegality of it, the prosecutions are incredibly rare, all things considered. Most of the time, a failed check is simply returned to the dealer, who denies the purchase, and the felon takes his happy butt on, probably to find someone to commit the second area of prosecutorial inaction.

A second area of prosecutorial inaction is straw purchases, which are transactions in which an individual who can legally purchase a firearm does so, claiming the purchase is for himself when in reality it’s for someone else who is often legally prohibited from making the purchase.

Straw purchases, like lying for background checks, are a felony under federal law. In addition, Pennsylvania also has a felony straw purchase statute.

According to the group Everytown for Gun Safety, which favors stricter gun control, 5,600 guns were illegally trafficked in Pennsylvania in 2023. Yet, from 2020-2024, commonwealth courts handed down only 2,030 sentences under our straw purchase law — about 406 sentences per year. As I recently wrote, “Either Everytown’s estimate is inflated, or Pennsylvania is prosecuting at roughly 7% of the rate necessary to address the problem the organization claims to identify.”

Now, this is Everytown, so I question their methodology on, well, everything. I’m not even sure they’re breathing correctly, and won’t assume so without examining even that methodology.

Still, for the sake of argument, let’s assume they mean real straw buys and not “someone bought this gun and it later ended up in a criminal’s hand, but it was faster than we think it should have.” If that’s true, and they know this, why aren’t they prosecuting anyone for this? 

“Oh, it was stolen.”

By your [insert close relation here]? Suuuuuuuure.

Now, I’m pretty sure Everytown’s numbers are inflated, but there are still a lot more straw purchases than are prosecuted. That’s a problem.

Couple that with the fact that so many repeat violent offenders get sweetheart deals that keep them on the streets, including suspended sentences of serious crimes, and we have a problem. The fact that the anti-gun side seems thoroughly unconcerned about any of this is also a problem.

It’s not, however, surprising.

See, the way I look at it, they know these crimes are good for their cause, so they don’t actually want them addressed. Not now, anyway. What they want is as many violent attacks as they can find, all so they can leverage those into gun control.

Maybe it’s just me needing to adjust my tinfoil fedora — just because you’re a conspiracy theorist doesn’t mean you can’t look good while being one — but it’s the only thing I’ve figured out that makes sense.

Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their extreme gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun-grabbing schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.