“That is the goal, to make it radioactive to even pick up a gun.” – Richard Aborn, president of the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City in Gun Cases are Notoriously Hard to Make Stick. New York Thinks It Has the Answer [via thetrace.org]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

55 COMMENTS

  2. Makes me want to fondle a “dirty” gun every morning…
    Oh wait. This time of year here, I do!

  3. Of course, every thug in creation knows to put a pair of socks on over his hands while doing dirt. What will this douchebag do then? Ban socks? Ban rubber gloves? Half the time they never even find the gun that was used in the crime! More moronic ideas from the party that still can’t figure out why it lost.

    • I believe the *point* is to stigmatize gun ownership itself.

      I can see where this is going. Next, they will want a cheek swab at the time of purchase.

      A little ‘pre-crime’ for ya, so to speak…

  4. I can’t see this ever becoming a commonplace tool for law enforcement . DNA testing is far too expensive and complicated to be used in every case involving a firearm and until it is not so it should be reserved only for aggravated felonies such as homicide. Yeah, we all want bad guys locked up but what’s the cost/benefit ratio for using DNA evidence to convict someone of a minor offense?

    • DNA testing is getting really cheap.

      Oh and if you’re ever arrested for anything, anywhere, they’ll take a DNA sample. If you get the case thrown out you -might- get the DNA sample destroyed if you petition the court correctly, otherwise you’re in the system forever.

      • “DNA testing is getting really cheap”

        As cheap as nuking NY? As long as we’re jumping right to making something nuclear. People like Dick Aborn keep telling us that’s where the problem is, it’s their F’d up NY people. Other people keep warning us about F’d up SChitcago, and other F’d up snake-ball knots of POS (D). Blue cities where we can’t swing a dead cat without hitting mass problems.

        NY likely just needs to be boarded up for awhile.

    • Most likely they’ll just raise taxes on gun purchases to pay for the increased costs.

      Nothing says common sense gun legislation, like “taxing the innocent to pay for a failed pet gun program.”

      ….

      Though secretly I must admit, this one isn’t as bad as most. It might actually catch bad guys for a change.

  7. Translation:
    That is the goal, to make anything radioactive if the Almighty Government says so – Richard Aborn

    Mr. Aborn is another example of a petty tyrant.

    Uh oh. I should set up a Go Fund Me account for my legal expenses … Mr. Aborn is sure to sue me and prosecute me for speaking critically of him, government, and petty tyrants (but I repeat myself).

  8. More “We’re F’d up, we need to fix you” from the broken turd evil POS (D).

    When are they going to admit, that either their people really really suck, or the policy / politicians suck cause they don’t trust their people?

    What if someone makes it difficult for you to hide in your home, and impossible to go out, or to contact anyone?
    Ya got groceries and comic books stocked for Armageddon? Ya gonna tolerate piss ant aholes like (your neighbor) Dick Aborn there?

    Definitely sounds a sh_t pile lot like a pre-cursor to enforcing the 2nd Paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Someone may eventually show you what you can do with your ‘make it nuclear’ swabs.

  9. In the article using DNA testing convicted Lamar of criminal possession and sentenced him to three years in jail. That was his first offense.

    • “In the article using DNA testing convicted Lamar of criminal possession and sentenced him to three years in jail.”

      When the public at large hears “DNA test”, they associate that with irrefutable proof.

      Couple that with a slimy, lying cop – “We have the DNA evidence on you, you better take the deal because you will lose at trial.”.

      Instant intimidation…

      • Except that cops aren’t the ones who offer the choice of a plea bargain or a draconian sentence if convicted. The prosecutor does that. And it’s not at all uncommon, even for cops who have been charged with offenses.

        • “Except that cops aren’t the ones who offer the choice of a plea bargain or a draconian sentence if convicted. ”

          Correct, but they will be *happy* to videotape your confession, and hand that over to the DA.

          Cops can lie to you while ‘questioning’ you…

          • The cops CAN lie during interrogation – up to a point. The operative SCOTUS case is Frazier vs. Cupp if you want to look it up. What the police CANNOT do is coerce a confession by making threats, promises or inducements such as telling the suspect that they’ll get a more lenient sentence if they confess or that the State will subject them to a sanction by something like taking their children away from them if they refuse to cooperate. However, I know of no such prohibition on a prosecutor’s blandishments to accept a plea bargain.

        • “Help us help you by telling us what you did” may not be actually saying you will get a lesser sentence, but it does sound like it.
          “Questioning” a suspect is down to a fine science of saying words just inside of the limits, but sounding like something else.
          If being questioned, ask for a lawyer. If they tell you you’re not under arrest, tell them you’re leaving. If they then tell you you’re being “detained,” again ask for a lawyer. You always have the right to remain silent.

  10. Ah yes….. another idiot.
    This is one of the many reasons i shoot and clean my guns with gloves on.
    They cant reverse course on guns now. Its way too late for that. They would lose any campaign contributions from the brady bunch, bloomberg, and moms demand action from beta males.
    Also that would mean admitting they were wrong and we know these pompous @$$holes will never do that. They are incapable of it.

  11. Processing a DNA swab from a gun… $500.

    Letting the perp walk anyway… PRICELESS!

    What a bunch of nonsense.

    • But the perp’s gun is off the street. We are much safer now!
      Lol
      In all seriousness, there is a huge police push to extract DNA for any reason. One bill is for DNA for 16 yo who want a license so they can be identified in an accident. Maybe one reason why many fewer under 18 yo have licenses than 20 years ago. When self-driving cars arrive, DNA samples will be to prevent kidnapping or something else.

      • I think the real reason so few teenagers have their license now is because mommy has always been willing to fire up the minivan and give little Timmy a ride wherever the hell he wants.

        Instead of being pissed off about having to walk EVERYWHERE prior to 16 and dying for the freedom of a license Timmy just mooches off mommy or calls a fucking Uber.

    • From the decision:

      “This point brings into focus the legally decisive fact: the good-reason law is necessarily a total ban on most D.C. residents’ right to carry a gun in the face of ordinary self-defense needs, where these residents are no more dangerous with a gun than the next law-abiding citizen.”

      “Bans on the ability of most citizens to exercise an enumerated right would have to flunk any judicial test that was appropriately written and applied, so we strike down the District’s law here apart from any particular balancing test.”

      “We pause to draw together all the pieces of our analysis: At the Second Amendment’s core lies the right of responsible citizens to carry firearms for personal self-defense beyond the home, subject to longstanding restrictions. These traditional limits include, for instance, licensing requirements, but not bans on carrying in urban areas like D.C. or bans on carrying absent a special need for self-defense. In fact, the Amendment’s core at a minimum shields the typically situated citizen’s ability to carry common arms generally. The District’s good-reason law is necessarily a total ban on exercises of that constitutional right for most D.C. residents. That’s enough to sink this law under Heller I.”

      “And the resulting decision rests on a rule so narrow that good-reason laws seem almost uniquely designed to defy it: that the law-abiding citizen’s right to bear common arms must enable the typical citizen to carry a gun.
      We vacate both orders below and remand with instructions to enter permanent injunctions against enforcement of the District’s good-reason law.

      So ordered.”

      I’m no lawyer, but this looks *GOOD*…

      • Indeed, it is not only heartening but downright amazing given the jurisdiction. However, let’s not get all excited about this because it will surely be appealed to the federal Fourth Circuit Court in Richmond and their record on Second Amendment decisions is downright execrable. I can guarantee you that Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, the crafter of Maryland’s draconian “Gun Safety Act of 2013” will push for the appeal to the Fourth Circuit even if he has to do it all by himself. That man HATES the Second Amendment.

        • Actually, the DC Circuit decided Heller in our favor, reversing a district court judge in the process — just as it did in this case.

          Moreover, the 4th Circuit has no jurisdiction over this case. Appeals and cert applications from decisions of the DC Circuit Court go to SCOTUS.

        • “Appeals and cert applications from decisions of the DC Circuit Court go to SCOTUS.”

          And since SCOTUS isn’t interested in touching the 2A until the balance of the Court is more solid, the decision stands?

          This could be neat for that bill in Congress that makes carry reciprocal with other state’s carry permits…

    • Thanks for the link; good reading.

      The DC decision is a minor victory because it applies only to one circuit. But a “victory” nonetheless. The dissenting opinion will likely prove troublesome in subsequent appeals in DC, or elsewhere. Neither Heller 1, nor 2 clearly defines the second amendment as inviolate. Both Hellers leave ambiguity in their wake, rather than a definitive reading and ruling that 2A is as near absolute as can be constructed without including active criminals. There remains much adventure (and mischief) ahead.

    • But DNA is needed to take the choice out of the jury’s hands.
      All you need is some liar to tell the jury it’s scientifically proven that the odds are 15 billion to one that the defendant’s guilty, and the jury will convict him every time.

  16. Do cops really need DNA to twist the system? Don’t think so. Do DAs really need DNA to twist the system? Don’t think so.

    There is a reason for the name of “The Garden of Good and Evil”. Everything humans do can be used for good or evil. That Genie left the bottle long ago. No turning back. There is absolutely no way to prevent DNA testing from being used as a permission tool: permission to drink; permission to drive; permission to fish; permission to hunt. Pick your favorite.

    It is eminently reasonable to require a cheek swab for any public transaction. One day, in order to lower the burden of such things as cheek swabs, a tiny mark (printed or embedded) on the head or hand will be mandated as a means to encourage and enable people to more conveniently go without cash or credit card (or even building access cards).

    The clock is ticking.

    Meanwhile, if DNA testing takes even one criminal (felony or misdemeanor) off the street……

    (this is a combination commentary)

    • Coincidentally, I just saw on the NBC Evening News last night a story about a company which will, at the employee’s request, imbed a chip so that the employee doesn’t need to carry an access card to unlock doors, computers, etc. Yep, it’s coming …..

    • Sam I Am – “It is eminently reasonable to require a cheek swab for any public transaction. One day, in order to lower the burden of such things as cheek swabs, a tiny mark (printed or embedded) on the head or hand will be mandated as a means to encourage and enable people to more conveniently go without cash or credit card (or even building access cards).”

      Now, I’m not religious by any stretch of the imagination buuuuuuut……. sounds a lot like the Revelations Mark of the Beast. And it seems like that’s the path we’re headed for

    • Yep, the almighty state will get there eventually. Just like Social Security numbers were never going to be used for identification purposes, and just like they’re optional right now (if things like paying taxes, going to school, and driving are optional).

      • We agree. Just noting that once evil is out of the bottle, it cannot be extinguished. DNA testing for whatever purpose cannot be stopped. It will go where humans direct it.

  17. $8 million. How many convictions? One we know of. If there were more, I’m sure that would have been touted.

    But it’s not.

    So until evidence is presented otherwise, that’s $8,000,000 per conviction.

    Great way to spend the taxpayers money. Not.

    O2

  18. It is eminently reasonable to require a cheek swab for any public transaction. One day, in order to lower the burden of such things as cheek swabs, a tiny mark (printed or embedded) on the head or hand will be mandated as a means to encourage and enable people to more conveniently go without cash or credit card (or even building access cards).

    Now, I’m not religious by any stretch of the imagination buuuuuuut……. sounds a lot like the Revelations Mark of the Beast. And it seems like that’s the path we’re headed for

  19. Reading through the Trace, this is spurned on by the fact that the city can’t seem to get convictions necessary because juries are doubtful of police testimony. So cops arrest a guy who already has an open arrest warrant out for him, they find a 9mm gun on the dude, and yet the DA’s office can’t convict because the jury thinks it was a drop gun (or something). Give me a break. Maybe instead of asking for expensive DNA tests, the city hires better attorneys and fires the ones they currently have. And hell, who are the lawyers defending these thugs?

    • Unfortunately, this is a case of the cops “making their bed and having to sleep in it”. When one cop gets caught in a lie on the witness stand, ALL cops get painted with that broad brush as liars. No matter how many times it’s hammered into a cop’s head in the police academy that you must always tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” when they testify, there are those who can’t resist the temptation to prevaricate or embellish testimony.

      That applies to prosecutor’s, too. It applies to ANYONE who is held up to public trust and scrutiny. As for defense attorneys, it’s their JOB to get people off the hook, their guilt or innocence being something not under consideration.

    • I’m with Mike on this.
      Juries don’t believe cops because the media tells them that cops are racist bastards, who will lie about anything. Perception is reality.
      This is the same reason cities want Shotspotter; they can’t rely on the public to report shots fired, because the people know damn well that the cops’ reaction time sucks, and nothing comes of the call other than time wasted fielding a lot of questions there are no answers to. The people know, deep down inside, that the cops aren’t worth the metal in the badge far too many times.
      I support our LEOs as much as anyone. But not all of them deserve that support.

  20. $8 million a year to add 55 people and equipment. Someone’s friend, brother, uncle is in the DNA testing, just like that ShotSpotter.

    Until they are put away for a long time, nothing will change. The legal justice system has a money maker in illegal guns. Kid in Charlotte shot a 12 year old in the stomach, NEXT year he is shot by a police officer off duty as a guard in a mall. All he did was point a gun at the cop, having previously fired it at someone.

    How does anyone shoot someone in the stomach and they are out at a alternative school a few months later? Follow the $$$$$$$$$$ and the political power.

    If people with illegal guns were sent away for a real 10 years, what would the judges, lawyers, social workers, rehab centers do?

    It’s a revolving door and until that stops, we will continue to see shit like this.

  21. If you are receiving tax payer subsidies, you should be sterilized. Make it radio active to pick up a welfare check.
    We have a gang problem, crime problem. Not a gun problem.
    Why does a repeat DUI offender have a drinking problem rather than a vehicle problem but an armed robber is cause to restrict access to guns? How about focus on the problem. Hint, it ain’t guns.

    • “We have a gang problem, crime problem. Not a gun problem.”

      I’m inclined to think that we have a politician problem. Get rid of the slimy pols who are providing cover and money to the gangs and the gangs will shrink like a radiated tumor.

  22. Ralph – I stand corrected. Thank you, Sir. The appeal Frosh and his cohorts will undoubtedly file will get to the SCOTUS faster that way.

Comments are closed.