By Stephen J. Aldstadt, former President of S.C.O.P.E.
One of the chief and most poignant criticisms of the NY (UN) SAFE Act is the fact that experts in law enforcement were not consulted in the drafting of the law. Most County Sheriffs and Police Unions have criticized the law.
PoliceOne conducted a Gun Policy & Law Enforcement survey in March of 2013, two full months after the passage of the (UN) SAFE Act (www.PoliceOne.com). More than 15,000 officers completed the survey. The results of this survey give a pretty good snapshot of the opinion of rank and file law enforcement personnel. These are the men and women who are out there on the front line fighting violent crime and working to make our communities safer. Let's take a look at how police officers view just a few of the major provisions of the (UN) SAFE Act. Survey questions in bold print:
What effect do you think a federal ban on manufacture of some semiautomatic firearms, termed by some as “assault weapons” would have on reducing violent crime?
71% indicated None. No effect. Interestingly 20.5% chose Negative, meaning they believe that a ban would actually have the effect of causing an increase in violent crime.
Do you think a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would reduce violent crime?
An overwhelming 95.7% answered NO! Do you think that a federal law prohibiting private, non-dealer transfers of firearms between individuals would reduce violent crime? 79.7% answered No. This is the holy grail of the anti-Second Amendment crowd. We hear a constant cry for “Universal Background Checks” and yet overwhelmingly, professional law enforcement personal do not believe it would reduce violent crime.
Clearly Police officers do not think laws like the (UN) SAFE Act will reduce violent crimes. What do they think would be effective?
Do you think increasing the severity of punishments for gun trafficking, particularly by unlicensed dealers or “straw purchasers” who buy arms for persons ineligible to own them, would reduce instances of gun crime?
A majority of 58.8% said yes.
Do you believe that that use of a firearm while perpetrating a crime should result in stiff, mandatory sentences with no plea bargains?
YES 91.4%!
Overwhelmingly, police officers feel that prosecuting people who commit crimes with guns will be productive in making our communities safer, not passing more and more restrictive laws on ordinary citizens. Why then do our politicians ignore the law enforcement professionals and continue to support laws like the (UN) SAFE Act? What if the law enforcement professionals decided to ignore the politicians and their restrictive gun laws?
They were asked....
What is your opinion of some law enforcement leaders' public statement that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions?
22.2% said Favorable, and another 48.8% said Very Favorable
If you were a Sheriff or Chief, how would you respond to more restrictive gun laws?
44.9% answered "not enforce and join in the public, vocal opposition effort".
17.2% answered "not enforce and quietly lead agency in opposite direction.
10.0% answered "unsure"
Less than one in five indicated they would enforce the law!
The (UN) SAFE Act primarily effects the average law abiding gun owners and its most restrictive provisions specifically target licensed pistol owners. What do rank and file feel about civilian gun owners?
Do you support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable?
YES, without question and without further restrictions – 91.3% !
On a scale of one to five – one being low and five being high – how important do you think legally -armed citizens are to reducing crime rates overall?
1 - 4.7%
2 - 4.9%
3 - 14.0%
4 - 21.7%
5 - 54.7%
We hear a constant drum beat for “Common Sense” gun control measures, always calling for more and more restrictions on the average citizen. How about this for common sense, how about we listen to the men and women who are out there every day putting their life on the line to keep us safe?
Those who support laws like the (UN) SAFE Act want us all to believe that gun violence is an ever increasing problem in America. The truth is just the opposite. By using government data, the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics show we have had a steady decrease in gun crime for decades.
There are notable exceptions to this: violent crime has shown an alarming increase in Baltimore and New York City, two cities where the rank and file police feel that they no longer have the backing and support of their political leaders. At a recent high profile event NYPD officers all turned their backs on Mayor DeBlasio because they feel the mayor does not have their backs. Morale among the police in Baltimore may be at an all time low.
The recent MOU, or Memorandum of Understanding, is an admission that the (UN) SAFE Act is unworkable. The fact that less than 4.5% of gun owners have complied with the “Assault Weapon” registration shows that it is un-enforceable. The fact that it is so widely criticized and ignored by our Sheriffs and Police officers demonstrates how ill-informed and ill-conceived the law is.
It is time our elected leaders started paying more attention to our police officers. Law enforcement needs to be consulted before politicians pass ill-informed, unworkable, and unenforceable gun laws. The (UN) SAFE Act must be repealed or over-tuned.
