Posts

Chicago: A Hellhole for Parole, Free Bail, and Jailbreak for Violent Gun Felons

/0 Comments/in , /by

Why aren’t Republicans pounding the lectern with righteous indignation about violent gun felons being let off easy by the judicial system the same way Democrats engage in cerebral gyrations over guns? Democrats have sob stories for their gun control agenda. Republicans need to look no farther than Chicago as the poster child for criminal control.

On June 23, 2017, Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson stood beside then-Gov. Bruce Rauner and celebrated the passage of a bill stiffening sentences on gun felons. “1,400 individuals, who are repeat gun offenders, just imagine if we took 50 percent of them off the street where our gun violence would go in the city of Chicago,” declared Johnson at the signing ceremony. “Gun offenders get slaps on the wrist in this city — and it has to stop. I need our judicial partners and our state legislators to help me close this gap.”

Well, thanks to the goal among both parties to reduce the prison population at all costs, things have only gotten worse over the past two years. You see, while politicians tell the public they want to keep people safe, Gov. Rauner also made it his goal to cut the prison population by 25 percent.

According to CWB Chicago, a local crime watchdog, a Cook County judge granted a repeat violent gun felon a special deal on bail that allowed him to walk straight out of the courthouse without posting a dime of bond. Joaquin Urcino is a career criminal with a record dating back to 1991 for everything from homicide and drugs to stolen vehicles, aggravated battery with a firearm, and assault. On July 12, police arrested Urcino, a Two Six gang member, for firing four shots out of his apartment window. He was charged with felony use of a firearm by a felon while on parole, felony reckless discharge of a firearm, and felony possession of a controlled substance.

One would expect someone like this, who served (brief) time for homicide and for shooting another person, to be locked up without bail when caught illegally possessing and discharging a firearm, right? This is especially true given that he was out on parole at the time of his arrest and such an egregious violation should have triggered an automatic re-incarceration. Well, on August 22, Judge Carol Howard let him walk on $100,000 bail, but rather than making him give the customary $10,000 deposit, she let him go for free.

This is all the result of the aggressive and obsessive bipartisan push to let people out without bond and replace incarceration with probation, then avoid enforcing violations of probations so as not to increase the prison population. The goal is 100 percent focused on reducing the prison population without reducing crime with a stronger deterrent, all the while lying to the public that these are just first-time, low-level offenders.

According to data from the Illinois Department of Corrections, the prison population has declined by almost 20 percent since 2013. The Crime Report chronicles how some counties began working with judges to consider jail capacity as a factor in determining whether to give jail time or probation to a new offender. Judges would then allow the criminal offenders to develop a “pretrial” record by their behavior while out with little or no bond to determine their ultimate sentencing at the end of the trial. For example, in McLean County in 2011, “42 percent went to prison and 57 percent were put on probation.” By 2016, “29 percent of convicted felons were sent to prison and 70 percent went on probation.”

That is the power of jailbreak. Now the effects are reverberating across the state. The number of murders statewide jumped 54 percent from 2014 to 2016, while the number of aggravated assaults climbed 16.7 percent.

Last week, the Chicago Tribune reported on a missing woman who police believe was murdered by someone who is out on parole and remains a fugitive. Several years ago, the suspect “was convicted of hitting his girlfriend with a pipe and hammer, pouring a caustic substance on her and setting her on fire.” In addition, he had a domestic battery conviction in 2011 and “felony convictions for armed robbery, aggravated battery and burglary” in the preceding decade. One would expect someone like that to be put away for life, but he was placed on parole in November 2018, barely serving any time.

This past weekend, another eight people were killed and over 40 wounded in Chicago in shootings. While we don’t yet know definitively who committed these crimes, in June, Anthony Guglielmi, spokesman for the Chicago police, gave a description of the perpetrators in a similar shooting spree:

As you can see, many of them had previous convictions, including gun felonies, yet were let out on the streets again. It often takes years to get a court date while these people remain free. This is why the jail population is plummeting in addition to the prison population. Many offenders don’t even have to post bail.

Even when they are finally sentenced, many of them get off with parole. Given that they know the system is reluctant to put them back in prison, there is no deterrent against re-offending. Moreover, as Chicago Tribune editorial board member John Kass recently noted, the monitoring system for those on parole is weak because “there are only 100 deputies monitoring the system to watch over more than 2,000 alleged criminals, many of them violent.” Proponents of the jailbreak agenda want to have it both ways – reduce the prison population but then spend no additional funds on building a post-incarceration security apparatus because they want to talk about saving money.

Sadly, even phony conservative groups, along with liberal ones, are pushing for even more “bail reform” in their effort to avoid incarceration at all costs. These groups refuse to be honest that what was sold to the public as a movement to loosen laws on “first-time, low-level” offenders has been used as a vehicle for releasing the worst repeat violent offenders.

What Eddie Johnson said about Chicago is true of almost every city. It’s a relatively small number of people committing most of the murder and robbery in any given area. Liberals claim an urgent need to “do something” about gun violence just to save one life. Well, actually enforcing our laws against violent gun felons and ending all of the liberal “criminal justice reform” loopholes would save thousands of lives every year. How any national discussion over gun violence can ignore the 800-pound gorilla of repeat gun offenders being let out on the streets is a testament to the dishonest foundation of this entire debate. (For more from the author of “Chicago: A Hellhole for Parole, Free Bail, and Jailbreak for Violent Gun Felons” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

7 Ways for Conservatives to Counter Gun Control with Criminal Control

/0 Comments/in , /by

This past weekend, another 8 people were killed and over 40 wounded in Chicago in shootings, more than the casualties in the West Texas shooting over this weekend. As the Democrats seek a relentless war on guns by focusing on the relatively small number of people killed in mass shootings, Republicans should have a bold counter-agenda to deal with the vast majority of other homicides in this country – committed with handguns or other objects – who are almost always known career criminals. Senate Republicans should counter the coming gun control agenda with a criminal control agenda.

Rather than joining with Democrats to cast a wide net on broad constitutional rights while groping in the darkness to solve the vexing problem of first-time murderers, how about working to deter and punish those who are actually knows to be violent? Also, how about dealing with the ultimate avoidable deaths caused by criminal aliens who would never have been in the country if we actually enforced our immigration laws?

Here are seven ideas that Republicans should push to broaden this discussion over safety and security that will actually deter and prevent murders and mayhem in this country.

Increase mandatory sentencing for gun felons: Rather than violate the Constitution and needlessly strip peaceful citizens of the ability to protect themselves, how about we swiftly punish gun felons? The very same people who push gun control are the ones seeking to avoid locking up gun felons at all costs. What if Republicans brought a bill to the Senate floor to increase mandatory sentencing on gun felons for those engaging in a violent crime with guns or those caught possessing guns after being convicted for aggravated felonies? There are so many stories of violent felons violating their probation by owning firearms, yet they aren’t sent back to prison.

Actually make the mandatory minimums mandatory: Homicide in this country plummeted by over 60 percent precisely over the same period that gun ownership soared. Why? Thanks to Reagan’s Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), we actually deterred violent criminals with stiff mandatory sentencing. Yet for all the hand-wringing over “draconian” mandatory sentences, they were only mandatory from 1987 to 2005. Following the Booker decision of the Supreme Court, they have just been advisory. This has created a huge amount of disparity in the system, and in recent years, the lack of mandatory sentencing has decreased the successes of the Reagan-era laws. Take bad guys who use guns (or other weapons) off the streets, not guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.

Fix court loophole allowing violent felons back on the streets: Four years ago, in Johnson v. U.S, the Supreme Court ruled that the “crime of violence” provision in the ACCA is unconstitutionally vague. That has allowed thousands of the worst career gun felons and other violent individuals to get out of jail early or escape reasonable sentencing to begin with. Just this year, in S. v. Davis, Justice Gorsuch joined with the four liberals in expanding the assault on the ACCA, this time by saying that 924(c)(3), the statute that prohibits using or carrying a firearm during a federal “crime of violence,” is unconstitutional and therefore vetoed out of existence. It is simply astounding that the GOP-controlled Senate has not tried to fix this law, especially in light of Democrats supporting gun control. Now, armed robbers pointing short-barreled shotguns at store clerks avoid tougher sentencing at the same time liberals claim they want to “do something!” about gun violence.

Allow good guys to carry everywhere: While we seek to deter bad guys with guns, why not allow peaceful citizens who undergo a background check and licensing to be able to carry in all 50 states with such a license, just as with driver’s licenses? Republicans in the Senate refuse to go on offense and hold a vote expanding the right to carry universally in all 50 states. Recently, there has been a rash of anti-Semitic attacks on Jews in Brooklyn, NY. Some have been attacked with concrete and rocks, which again demonstrates that violence is not just from guns. Shouldn’t Jews in New York be allowed to carry if they obtain a license from another state? No state has the right to deny an unambiguous constitutional right, and one of the reasons we have a federal government is to protect those rights when states infringe on them. A smart Republican Party would aggressively put Democrats on defense and openly discuss what is happening to Jews in New York as in impetus to flip the tables on the Democrats’ gun agenda and their obsession with white supremacism at the expense of focusing on career criminals of all types.

Fast-track death penalty for mass murderers: While mass murderers with no criminal record account for just a small fraction of murders, roughly 001 percent of the 928,093 homicide victimsfrom 1966 to 2017, they are the most confounding criminal justice problem to solve. The best way to deal with those who have no criminal record is to have the swift deterrent of the death penalty. The problem is that it now takes over 20 years to execute someone, essentially rendering capital punishment worthless as a deterrent. Moreover, as I’ve shown, white supremacist attackers, in particular, don’t seem to kill themselves as they attack, which means they would be more deterred by a swift death penalty. There is news that the Justice Department is working on such legislation. McConnell would be wise to make it a priority and dare Democrats to vote against it.

Why are we keeping other countries’ criminals? The only thing worse than letting career criminals back on the streets is letting other countries’ career criminals remain in the country. Yet thanks to the Dimaya court decision, a number of violent legal immigrants are now shielded from deportation. There are numerous other loopholes and lax enforcement that allow people like Billy Chemirmir, who is now accused of smothering 19 seniors to death with nothing more than a pillow in Texas, to remain in the country.

Declare war on sanctuary cities: Nearly every day at CR, we cover the endless murders, sex assaults, and drunk driving incidents by illegal aliens who are allowed to remain in this country, often after committing other crimes, thanks to sanctuary cities. By definition, these are the most avoidable deaths imaginable. If Democrats are demanding to do something!, we should begin with getting rid of other countries’ criminals by immediately punishing sanctuary cities and by allowing citizens to sue sanctuary officials who release criminal aliens. Congress should also create a fund for victims of illegal aliens out of the money saved from denying grant programs to sanctuaries.

The bottom line is that inanimate objects don’t kill. Bad people kill. Most of the murders every day in places like Chicago are the result of career criminals not being locked up and are committed with handguns or knives, not AR-15s. Even the latest mass shooter in West Texas, Seth Ator, appears to have had a criminal record for which he never went to prison. While Democrats declare war on a handful of rifles in an effort that will not save a single life, Republicans should have a counter-agenda that will focus on the bad people in a way that will absolutely save countless lives. (For more from the author of “7 Ways for Conservatives to Counter Gun Control with Criminal Control” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Walmart Announces That It Will No Longer Sell Ammunition for ‘Military-Style’ Rifles or Allow Open Carry in Its Stores

/0 Comments/in , /by

One of the nation’s largest retailers is making some drastic changes to its policies on guns and ammunition following high-profile shootings over the summer, one of which occurred at its stores.

In a memo circulated to employees on Tuesday, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon announced that the company would no longer sell handgun ammunition or “short-barrel rifle ammunition” like .223 and 5.56 NATO caliber “that, while commonly used in some hunting rifles, can also be used in large capacity clips on military-style weapons.”

Now the Arkansas-based company will focus on long-barrel hunting rifles and their corresponding ammunition, its CEO added.

“We have a long heritage as a company of serving responsible hunters and sportsmen and women, and we’re going to continue doing so,” McMillon said.

“We’ve also been listening to a lot of people inside and outside our company as we think about the role we can play in helping to make the country safer,” McMillon added. “It’s clear to us that the status quo is unacceptable.”

In addition to the inventory changes, the company will also ask that customers no longer openly carry their guns in its stores unless they are members of law enforcement.

“We believe the opportunity for someone to misinterpret a situation, even in open carry states, could lead to tragic results,” CEO Doug McMillon said in a memo distributed to employees on Tuesday. “We hope that everyone will understand the circumstances that led to this new policy and will respect the concerns of their fellow shoppers and our associates.”

However, the executive explained, “As it relates to concealed carry by customers with permits, there is no change to our policy or approach.”

The company will also stop selling handguns in Alaska, the only state where it still does so, “marking our complete exit from handguns.”

Walmart has previously said that its share of the national ammunition sales market was around 20 percent. Tuesday’s memo estimated that the change will bring the company’s share to somewhere between 6 and 9 percent.

As the reason for the changes, the memo cites the early August shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, as well as another incident at a Walmart store in Southaven, Mississippi, where authorities say one employee fatally shot two coworkers. It also mentions shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and this past weekend’s attack in Midland and Odessa, Texas.

“We know these decisions will inconvenience some of our customers, and we hope they will understand,” McMillon wrote. “As a company, we experienced two horrific events in one week, and we will never be the same.”

Walmart has made decisions to scale back its gun and ammunition offerings before. The company began its exit from the handgun business in 1993 and stopped selling AR-style modern sporting rifles in 2015. (For more from the author of “Walmart Announces That It Will No Longer Sell Ammunition for ‘Military-Style’ Rifles or Allow Open Carry in Its Stores” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Alyssa Milano Complains About Second Amendment Rights: ‘Which Passage of the Bible’ Says It’s a ‘God-Given Right to Own a Gun?’ Ted Cruz Demolishes Her Argument.

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In a pointed tweet, [Alyssa] Milano wrote, “Can someone cite which passage of the Bible God states it is a god-given right to own a gun? This guy is unbelievable and is clearly owned by the gun lobby.”

She was responding to a tweet from Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Texas), who promised that he would not allow the mass killer’s acts put a damper on the Second Amendment rights of Texans. . .

[Ted Cruz] wrote, “An excellent Q, worth considering carefully w/o the snark of Twitter. It is of course not the right to a modern-day firearm that is God-give [sic] but rather the right to Life & the right to Liberty. Essential to that right to life is the right to DEFEND your life & your family.”

The Texas lawmaker continued, “The right to self-defense is recognized repeatedly in the Bible, eg Exodus 22:2: ‘If a thief is caught breaking in at night & is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed.’ (Note, though, verse 3 says it IS murder if during daylight (ie, not self-defense).” . . .

“The Declaration of Independence acknowledges our rights thusly: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,'” he quoted. “And, for that reason, the Second Amendment provides ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT be infringed.’ It wasn’t to protect people’s ability to hunt, or to shoot target practice, but to defend their lives, their homes & their families.” (Read more from “Alyssa Milano Complains About Second Amendment Rights: ‘Which Passage of the Bible’ Says It’s a ‘God-Given Right to Own a Gun?’ Ted Cruz Demolishes Her Argument.” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Beto O’Rourke Reaffirms Dark Gun Control Plan — and Says It Won’t Be Voluntary

/0 Comments/in , /by

Democratic presidential contender Beto O’Rourke reaffirmed his vision for gun control Sunday in the wake of another shooting tragedy in Texas that left seven people murdered and nearly two dozen others injured.

“What we’ve been saying, the rhetoric we’ve been using, the policies and practices and politics of this country has not been as urgent enough as needed. Doesn’t meet this crisis,” O’Rourke said on MSNBC.

“So let’s speak clearly and bluntly and then take decisive action: Universal background checks, red flag laws, ending the sales of weapons of war, but also importantly, and politically difficult to say, buy those weapons of war back. Mandate that. Not voluntarily,” O’Rourke continued. . .

[Warning: video contains explicit language.]

O’Rourke began advocating mandatory gun buybacks last month, which critics argue is essentially gun confiscation veiled in softer rhetoric. O’Rourke would force owners of firearms like the AR-15 to turn over their rifle to the government or face a fine.

(Read more from “Beto O’Rourke Reaffirms Dark Gun Control Plan — and Says It Won’t Be Voluntary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

President Trump: Stronger Background Checks Would Not Stop Attacks

/0 Comments/in , /by

While speaking to reporters Sunday morning President Trump said stronger background checks would not have stopped the mass public attacks our nation has witnessed over the past six or seven years.

Trump said, “I will say that for the most part, sadly if you look at the last four or five going back even five or six or seven years, for the most part, as strong as you make your background checks, they would not have stopped any of it.” . . .

On August 20, Breitbart News reported Trump saying, “We have very, very strong background checks right now. But we have, sort of, missing areas and areas that don’t complete the whole circle. And we’re looking at different things.”

On August 19, Politico quoted Trump saying, “Congress is going to be reporting back to me with ideas. And they’ll come in from Democrats and Republicans. And I’ll look at it very strongly. But just remember, we already have a lot of background checks.”

NBC reports Trump saying the shooting incidents in the Midland-Odessa area do not change discussions about guns. Trump said, “We are in the process of dealing with Democrats and Republicans, and there’s a big package of things that’s going to be put before them by a lot of different people I’ve been speaking to a lot of senators, a lot of house members, Republicans, Democrats — this really hasn’t changed anything, we’re doing a package and we’ll see how it comes about.” (Read more from “President Trump: Stronger Background Checks Would Not Stop Attacks” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Texas Lawmaker Delivers Blistering Rebuke to Anti-Gun Democrats, Media

/0 Comments/in , /by

Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler) delivered a blistering rebuke to Second Amendment-hating forces in the media and Democratic Party on Saturday in response to the tragedy in Odessa, Texas, saying that he will not cave and surrender the rights of law-abiding Americans. . .

Schaefer’s tweets came in response to the usual choir of voices from the far-left who demand action in the wake of tragedies, yet never have any solutions to address the problem.

Texas loosened restrictions on firearms on Sunday, which was planned long before this weekend’s tragedy. (Read more from “Texas Lawmaker Delivers Blistering Rebuke to Anti-Gun Democrats, Media” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

GOP Senators Respond To Dems’ Threat Against The Supreme Court

/0 Comments/in , /by

Earlier this month, a group of Democratic senators signed an amicus curae brief in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York, defending New York City’s blatant attack on the Second Amendment. For years, those who live in NYC could transport handguns, as long as it was to a few select gun ranges in the area. If you were a gun owner in NYC and wanted to take your firearm outside of city limits to a different gun range, that wasn’t allowed.

New York State and City have since changed their statutes and now allow gun owners to transport firearms throughout the city. NYC is now arguing that the Supreme Court does not need to hear the case because it’s “moot.”

According to the group of Democratic senators, the Supreme Court should turn down the case because it’s political in nature. At the end of their letter, the Democratic senators essentially told SCOTUS to dismiss the case or they would move to pack the High Court.

A group of 56 Republican senators, lead by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), sent their own letter to the Supreme Court, urging the justices not to be impacted by Democrats’ empty-handed threat.

“The Democrats’ threat to pack the Court if it doesn’t rule the way they want is synonymous in American history with the idea of an unprincipled power grab. Instead of improving their arguments, our colleagues seem determined to undermine our constitutional structure,” McConnell said in a statement. “Senate Republicans reject this dangerous and opportunistic assault on our independent judiciary and will continue to uphold our oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” (Read more from “GOP Senators Respond To Dems’ Threat Against The Supreme Court” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

NASCAR Begins to Inject Left-Wing Politics into Racing

/0 Comments/in , /by

The National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, otherwise known as NASCAR, has reportedly started to take a “gradual shift” on its stances surrounding the Second Amendment.

The revelation comes after multiple gun companies have said that NASCAR, which has a primarily Republican base, banned them from running advertisements that feature guns.

“Dark Storm Industries said an ad it submitted featuring one of the company’s AR-15s was rejected and online retailer K-Var Corp. said an ad featuring an AK-47 and 9mm handgun was also rejected,” The Washington Free Beacon reported. “Both said a NASCAR advertising agency solicited ads from them for NASCAR publications. They submitted ads but were told NASCAR would not accept them.”

In a statement, Dark Storm industries wrote on Instagram:

NASCAR decided to turn their back on their customer base, joining the likes of Yeti, Dick’s and Under Armour. We were approached by a NASCAR publication eager to earn our business, but after submitting our ad it was immediately rejected, stating that we cannot depict “assault weapons”… whatever those are. We resubmitted the ad after adding a large ‘CENSORED’ bar over the rifle, with a tag reading “This publication rejected our ad.” This too was rejected by NASCAR. They said they did not like that we called them out. We resubmitted a third time, with a tag line reading “Visit www.Dark-Storm.com to find out why!” This was again rejected. They did not like the words “FIND OUT WHY.” As we have learned, NASCAR has made a “gradual shift” but this doesn’t seem very gradual to us. It seems as though NASCAR has turned their back on the overwhelming majority of their fan base in the most embarrassing way possible. #nascar

View this post on Instagram

NASCAR decided to turn their back on their customer base, joining the likes of Yeti, Dick’s and Under Armour. We were approached by a NASCAR publication eager to earn our business, but after submitting our ad it was immediately rejected, stating that we cannot depict “assault weapons”… whatever those are. We resubmitted the ad after adding a large ‘CENSORED’ bar over the rifle, with a tag reading “This publication rejected our ad”. This too was rejected by NASCAR. They said they did not like that we called them out. We resubmitted a third time, with a tag line reading “Visit www.Dark-Storm.com to find out why!”. This was again rejected. They did not like the words “FIND OUT WHY”. As we have learned, NASCAR has made a “gradual shift” but this doesn’t seem very gradual to us. It seems as though NASCAR has turned their back on the overwhelming majority of their fan base in the most embarrassing way possible. #nascar

A post shared by Dark Storm Industries (@darkstormindustries) on

(Read more from “NASCAR Begins to Inject Left-Wing Politics into Racing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Mormons Ban Guns

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has just updated its policy on firearms, moving from a recommendation that lethal weapons, including guns, were considered “inappropriate” on church property to an outright prohibition of them.

The new policy clarifies that “churches are dedicated for the worship of God and as havens from the cares and concerns of the world. With the exception of current law enforcement officers, the carrying of lethal weapons on Church property, concealed or otherwise, is prohibited.”

This marks the latest in a series of small steps the church has taken away from the Republican Party, either by tweaking its own policies or by simply upholding its usual position to the right of center, while members of the GOP swing ever further to the right.

Consider the new firearms policy. Latter-day Saints have long had an understanding that guns were fine outside of worship. I’ve been in a ward where boys were taken to a shooting range as a youth activity. I’ve heard church members talk about using their guns to protect their food storage in the event of a cataclysmic event. And I’ve known plenty of Mormons who like to hunt.

The difference is that all these things happened outside of the consecrated property of the church itself. Then, in July 2018, a church member in Nevada entered his ward’s chapel with a gun, sat quietly through sacrament meeting and then killed a fellow member. (Read more from “Mormons Ban Guns” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE