Reuters is whining "How immigration swallowed up federal gun crime efforts." The article relates:
Detectives in Baltimore watched on security video last summer as an argument inside a convenience store spilled into the parking lot and gunshots erupted at a sedan speeding away. They quickly recognized one of the shooters: He had been shot himself two days earlier.
Officers soon found a handgun under his bed, one of them wrote in a court filing. Because the man was a felon, merely having the weapon could be a serious federal crime – precisely the sort of case federal authorities long made a staple in their efforts to combat violent crime in one of the United States’ most dangerous cities.
But federal authorities did not charge him. The U.S. Attorney's Office in Baltimore declined to comment on the case.
The article goes on to insinuate that the reason for a lack of a federal prosecution is that federal prosecutors are turning their attention to immigrant related crime. But so what? The federal government was never intended to exercise general police powers or handle local criminal matters. Besides, as the article points out in its last couple of paragraphs, Baltimore Police have significantly increased the number of arrests they have been making for felony possession of firearms. Perhaps the dimwits at Reuters should instead ask why the Maryland courts are letting violent criminals back onto the streets so quickly.
Also, a hint for the Reuters' dimwits: a drop of 10% in federal prosecutions of gun crimes is not "everything being swallowed up by immigration enforcement." Learn some basic arithmetic and be less credulous of Democrat hacks.
They want the crime.
ReplyDelete