After all, pork is more important
The Bush Administration credited Project Safe Neighborhoods for the recent reduction in gun crime. The program was designed to go after black market guns by allowing local, state and federal agencies to coordinate and prosecute crimes committed with guns. This is a worthy goal in my opinion. But, thanks to an email from Lobbygow, we learn that with $15B in pork to pay for, the program lost funding:
Key Antigun Program Loses Direct Financing
Actually, it’s not an antigun program. It’s an anti-gun-crime program. Continuing:
Congress has eliminated direct financing for a Justice Department program that has been the centerpiece of the Bush administration’s efforts to prosecute black-market gun crimes.
The move, which Congressional officials attributed to competing budget priorities, cuts federal grants to local and state law enforcement agencies in investigating and prosecuting crimes committed with guns. It also raises questions about the administration’s ability to persuade the Republican-controlled Congress to support its legislative priorities, after Republicans last month blocked an intelligence overhaul backed by the White House.
The administration had sought $45 million for local grants under the gun prosecution program, Project Safe Neighborhoods. That would have represented a sharp increase in grants for a program that President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft have hailed as a critical way to crack down on gun trafficking and gun-related crimes.
This program was not a magic pill, as overall gun crime prosecutions are low relatively speaking but, maybe because of this program, such prosecutions had been increasing.
December 27th, 2004 at 2:47 pm
[…] cle|
I’m guessing the Knoxville Police Department didn’t get the memo that Project Safe Neighborhoods is unfunded. I’ve seen a variety […]
December 2nd, 2004 at 5:32 pm
The program & it’s derivitives (project safe streets, safe kitchens, safe whatever) call for a strict enforcement of federal gun control laws. The majority of federal gun control laws enforced through such programs are prior restraint based laws – laws that deal with mere possession.
Look, this ain’t about the feds & sheriffs getting together & going after bank robbers – this is about the sheriffs calling the friggin feds every time they find a gun. Every time someone makes a sale that the feds wouldn’t approve of the sick their lawyers on the person. If they confined themselves to going after people who maliciously used firearms that’d be one thing, but they’re pushing for ten year terms cause a guy sold a joint & had a pistol under his shirt.
& aside from the practical implications, what it does is reinforce the idea that the federal prior restraint based gun laws are a good thing. It complete ignores the fact that the bulk of those laws conflict with the constitution.
It is an anti-gun program, since most of the gun “crimes” it seeks to prosecute wouldn’t be crimes if someone honestly read the constitution.
So if it loses funding, that’s a good thing no matter the reason for it. Sure, it’d be ideal if it lost its financial support cause congress realized that the bulk of the prosecutions it increased were for “crimes” that shouldn’t be crimes according to the constitution, but just knowing that its going to diminish to some extent is a good thing no matter the reason.