I was just wondering something

[Jogeephus]

With all the recent discussion about the second ammendment and gun crimes I was wondering if anyone knew where one might find gun crime stats that illustrate those committed by first time offenders versus repeat offenders. More specifically gun crimes committed by criminals who by all rights should be behind bars at the time of their crime. Reason I ask, is this recent murder in my area. I would have thought that after shooting one person and in an obvious attempt at murdering the person one would find themselves behind bars for a long time and not out on the street armed with the same guns you first tried to kill someone with. I would love to see what our true crime statistics would be if these people actually had to serve their sentences and it makes me wonder how anyone can blame a gun when its obviously the system that is at fault.

Authorities question how murder suspect obtained gun
Brittany D. McClure
The Valdosta Daily Times

HAHIRA — After a neighbors' dispute left one dead on Friday, Jan. 4, authorities have been investigating why the alleged shooter had guns in the first place.

"We are trying to figure out how they got in his hands," said Lowndes County Sheriff Chris Prine.

David Horace Harrelson, 66, of Hahira is charged with murder in the shooting death of Joshua Commander, 38, along the 7400 block of Union Road, according to the Lowndes County Sheriff's Office.

Yet, in 2010, Harrelson had his weapons seized by Lowndes County authorities after he was arrested for shooting at a man who had pulled a truck into the driveway of his Hahira home. In this case, Harrelson was convicted of aggravated assault, a felony, said Sheriff's Lt. Stryde Jones.

"We seized all the weapons in his possession," said Prine.

While convicted, the prosecutor did not issue an order to have the weapons destroyed.

The Times called the Southern District Attorney's Office for comment on Tuesday and Wednesday, and left messages, but these calls were not returned.

Harrelson, on his own, relinquished the ownership of his weapons to a second party, according to the sheriff's office.

"We gave (the weapons) back to the (second party) with the understanding that Harrelson was not supposed to have them," said Prine.

The gun used last Friday to allegedly shoot and kill Joshua Commander was only one of the weapons found in Harrelson's possession that the county had previously given to the second party, according to the sheriff's office.

"The (second party) is now the legal owner of those weapons," said Prine. The county did conduct a background check on the second party. "He passed the background check," said Prine.

Because the court did not issue an order for the guns to be destroyed, the county had to turn over the guns.

"We can't just arbitrarily destroy things," said Lowndes County Sheriff's Lt. Stryde Jones. "It's somebody's property."

The Sheriff's Office is now questioning the second party.

"We're still working on the gun aspect," said Jones. "This case is not closed by any means."

 

[dun]

makes me wonder how anyone can blame a gun when its obviously the system that is at fault.

There you go using sense and logic again. I'm afraid for out lawmakers those days are long past!

 

[Brute 23]

As Dun said... It won't matter. :x

 

[highgrit]

If the gun used wasn't reported stolen by the second party they need to be charged with murder also. The whole story smells to me.
I think the Sheriff needs looking into also. Sounds like some good ole boy crap going on to me.

 

[Red Bull Breeder]

Police department screwed up!! Guns should have been sold at auction.

 

[john250]

That is the oddest handling of evidence I have ever heard.

 

[Jogeephus]

You'd be amazed at some of the things that go on. What concerns me most is how all this stuff adds up for reasons for firmer gun control when these figures are inflated by things like this. You'd almost think that someone was doing this intentionally. About 10 years ago they let a fella out of jail on a weekend pass - and no I don't live in Mayberry. Very nice of them. He shot a guy that weekend cause he accused him of stealing his drug sales money while he was in the jail.

 

[highgrit]

They do it to make the gun owners look bad. Remember all the assault weapons that were sold to the mexican drug cartels. The DOJ doesn't care about them gangs. But the law abiding, tax paying citizen you better watch out for, they might try to protect themselves.

 

[Arkansas]

I dont know what the State Law says in that area but here if a Gun is used (AT ALL) in a murder it is to be destroyed after the trial and all evidence is collected from the weapon in question. And according to the federal laws its suppose to be the same in every state. Unless the gun that was used was a suicide, upon it being a suicide the owner's next to kin is asked if they want the weapon returned or destroyed. Not in any State in the U.S. According to Federal law is it mandatory to give a weapon back to its owner after a murder has occured. It doesnt matter if the weapon belonged to another man or not, the only way the gun would be returned is if it were stolen and used in a murder. Then State laws can make it legal to return the weapon but Federal laws still supersede those laws and then an injunction can be served on the City it-self or the County. But as far as the Sheriff being held responsable for it, is highley un-likely unless the President gets in-volved or Governor. Because other then that no one else is gonna have any power over a sheriff because he is an elected official. Not even a City Chief of Police can place a sheriff under arrest it has to be another elected offical such as a Constable. The laws are always a grey area when it comes to elected officials. Because they are placed in office by the people so they can not simply be fired. They would have to be impreached like a president and it take's alot of votes for that to happen. Thats why you see so many crooked Sheriffs. I am not a lawyer by any means but I have delt with this same scenerio as an officer before 90% positive that what I have said is almost to the book by State and Federal Laws at least my state

 

[Brute 23]

They didn't give the actual muder weapon to the 2nd party. The guy had multiple guns. When he became a felon he transfered the guns to another person. Basically a sale with out money. They were no longer his.

One way or another he ended up with one of the guns. How? Who knows. He could have bought it back, was given it back, or stole it back.

End of the day. This guy probably would have accuired a gun one way or another to commit this crime. Should the 2nd party be held accountable if they sold or gave the gun back.... Yes.... Would that have prevented the crime.... Maybe... Maybe not.... I would bet he would have gotten a gun one way or another.

 

[Jogeephus]

You can split hairs all you want and discuss the nuances of the law but the bottom line is the man should have been behind bars after his first failed attempt at taking human life. There is no other issue. If you pull a gun to do wrong then you know darn well the gun is capable of murder and should be treated as such. Whether you succeed or not is inconsequential. For a legal system to not be responsible for the actions of the dregs they turn back on society is just confirmation that our legal system is irresponsible.