4 ms·

> It really puzzles me why existing gun laws that everyone agrees on aren't enforced. Ask people if they want gun laws enforced, and they say yes. Ask people

> It really puzzles me why existing gun laws that everyone agrees on aren't enforced. Ask people if they want gun laws enforced, and they say yes. Ask people if they like it when prosecutors charge a guy with 30 crimes for committing one act of armed robbery, and many start singing a different tune.

parineum 4y ago
This conversation started from straw purchases though. I think what people get annoyed with is that, when someone is charged with a crime, the most serious crime involved often _requires_ other crimes to be committed in process so, by charging for necessary precursors to crime, you're effectively just increasing the penalty for the main crime. In this case though, straw purchases _are_ the main crime and there is a real lack of enforcement for that particular crime.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > I think what people get annoyed with is that, when someone is charged with a crime, the most serious crime involved often _requires_ other crimes to be committed in process so, by charging for necessary precursors to crime, you're effectively just increasing the penalty for the main crime. Such a subcrime would be a "lesser included offense"; you can charge for both offenses, but you can't get a conviction on both of them at once.
  - torstenvl 4y ago
    That's not quite correct. A lesser included offense (LIO) must have a strict subset of elements of the greater offense and/or a less culpable mens rea. For example, possession of cocaine is an LIO of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute; homicide by reckless and wanton disregard of human life (felony murder/third degree murder) is an LIO of homicide by malice aforethought (premeditated murder/capital murder/first degree murder). In other words, LIOs are those offenses which are logically necessary to commit the larger offense. Charging both an offense and its LIOs is what, in our jurisdiction, we call multiplicity. What this discussion touches on is not multiplicity but unreasonable multiplication of charges (at least in my jurisdiction we call it that). The test here is not the logical question of whether one necessitates the other by definition; it's the factual question of whether the offenses are part of substantially the same transaction. For example, a prosecutor might charge perjury, fraud, and larceny, wrt someone swearing to some materially false fact and fraudulently obtaining someone else's property with intent to permanently deprive them of it. These three offenses are not subsets of one another, but are closely related; it isn't logically necessary to commit perjury to commit fraud, in the abstract, but in a particular case that might be the mechanism by which one commits fraud. In my jurisdiction, UMC charges can stay on the charge sheet (perhaps the jury finds guilt on one but not all?) but, if convicted of more than one, they are merged for sentencing.
- fsckboy 4y ago
  if a straw purchased gun is not used in a crime, how would it come to anybody's attention? if a straw purchased gun is used in a crime, I'd be surprised if it didn't get investigated.
  - dfxm12 4y ago
    if a straw purchased gun is not used in a crime, how would it come to anybody's attention? Well, let's say the original purchaser happens to be suspected of a crime (completely unrelated to a straw purchase, let's say bank robbery) and during a search of that purchaser's house, federal agents find a receipt for a check with "Glock 19" written on the memo line, it'll get their attention [0]. Very likely scenario :) Other than that, good old fashioned surveillance plus a getting a confession [1]. I've also heard ads on the radio for a tipline to tell cops about straw purchases. No idea how well that works, though. 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramski_v._United_States#Factual_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramski_v._United_States#Fact... 1 - https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/philadelphia-woman-convicted-trial-straw-purchasing-firearms-bucks-county-her-boyfriend https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/philadelphia-woman-conv...
- robonerd 4y ago
  People get annoyed when gun laws are less likely to be enforced against somebody who committed numerous other crimes, than against somebody who didn't commit any other crimes.
jedmeyers 4y ago
> Ask people if they like it when prosecutors charge a guy with 30 crimes for committing one act of armed robbery This is usually resolved by not adding the jail times for the crimes, but by doing MAX(a, b, ...) on them. Prosecutors will suddenly only care about the most important ones.
more_corn 4y ago
Yeah but I see no problem with prospecting the guy who bought it for him. If you illegally buy a felon a gun and it’s used in a crime maybe that should be prosecuted.

parineum 4y ago

This conversation started from straw purchases though. I think what people get annoyed with is that, when someone is charged with a crime, the most serious crime involved often _requires_ other crimes to be committed in process so, by charging for necessary precursors to crime, you're effectively just increasing the penalty for the main crime. In this case though, straw purchases _are_ the main crime and there is a real lack of enforcement for that particular crime.

thaumasiotes 4y ago
> I think what people get annoyed with is that, when someone is charged with a crime, the most serious crime involved often _requires_ other crimes to be committed in process so, by charging for necessary precursors to crime, you're effectively just increasing the penalty for the main crime. Such a subcrime would be a "lesser included offense"; you can charge for both offenses, but you can't get a conviction on both of them at once.
- torstenvl 4y ago
  That's not quite correct. A lesser included offense (LIO) must have a strict subset of elements of the greater offense and/or a less culpable mens rea. For example, possession of cocaine is an LIO of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute; homicide by reckless and wanton disregard of human life (felony murder/third degree murder) is an LIO of homicide by malice aforethought (premeditated murder/capital murder/first degree murder). In other words, LIOs are those offenses which are logically necessary to commit the larger offense. Charging both an offense and its LIOs is what, in our jurisdiction, we call multiplicity. What this discussion touches on is not multiplicity but unreasonable multiplication of charges (at least in my jurisdiction we call it that). The test here is not the logical question of whether one necessitates the other by definition; it's the factual question of whether the offenses are part of substantially the same transaction. For example, a prosecutor might charge perjury, fraud, and larceny, wrt someone swearing to some materially false fact and fraudulently obtaining someone else's property with intent to permanently deprive them of it. These three offenses are not subsets of one another, but are closely related; it isn't logically necessary to commit perjury to commit fraud, in the abstract, but in a particular case that might be the mechanism by which one commits fraud. In my jurisdiction, UMC charges can stay on the charge sheet (perhaps the jury finds guilt on one but not all?) but, if convicted of more than one, they are merged for sentencing.
fsckboy 4y ago
if a straw purchased gun is not used in a crime, how would it come to anybody's attention? if a straw purchased gun is used in a crime, I'd be surprised if it didn't get investigated.
- dfxm12 4y ago
  if a straw purchased gun is not used in a crime, how would it come to anybody's attention? Well, let's say the original purchaser happens to be suspected of a crime (completely unrelated to a straw purchase, let's say bank robbery) and during a search of that purchaser's house, federal agents find a receipt for a check with "Glock 19" written on the memo line, it'll get their attention [0]. Very likely scenario :) Other than that, good old fashioned surveillance plus a getting a confession [1]. I've also heard ads on the radio for a tipline to tell cops about straw purchases. No idea how well that works, though. 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramski_v._United_States#Factual_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramski_v._United_States#Fact... 1 - https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/philadelphia-woman-convicted-trial-straw-purchasing-firearms-bucks-county-her-boyfriend https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/philadelphia-woman-conv...
robonerd 4y ago
People get annoyed when gun laws are less likely to be enforced against somebody who committed numerous other crimes, than against somebody who didn't commit any other crimes.

jedmeyers 4y ago

> Ask people if they like it when prosecutors charge a guy with 30 crimes for committing one act of armed robbery This is usually resolved by not adding the jail times for the crimes, but by doing MAX(a, b, ...) on them. Prosecutors will suddenly only care about the most important ones.

more_corn 4y ago

Yeah but I see no problem with prospecting the guy who bought it for him. If you illegally buy a felon a gun and it’s used in a crime maybe that should be prosecuted.