TR> My source was noted as (Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime
 TR> Reporting Program). There is also a person's name and year, I
 TR> suppose the name of the statistician (McEnery, 1996).
 RT> Thanks, I must have just missed it.
I should have chosen different wording above. You didn't miss anything. I did
not list my source with the post.
 RT> I absolutely don't think that gangbangers, etc.. should have *any*
 RT> access to a firearm, but I don't know how to accomplish that without
 RT> violating a piece of paper known as the Constitution.  It could maybe
 RT> be done with street sweeps on *known* felons, but it would be very
 RT> touchy.
We manage to legally take firearms away from gangbangers here on a regular
basis. The majority of them are either stolen or otherwise illegal anyway
(i.e. serial numbers filed off, sawed-off shotguns, etc.). Each gun battle
and some drive-bys usually yield a few weapons that we are able to remove
from the street. "Sweeps" are really not that touchy if you have the right
information and intelligence mixed with the right police records on a known
felon with a history of firearms violence. The guidelines and procedures have
to fit the information that you have, but it can be done quite legally with
no Constitutional problems.
Tom Rightmer - Victims' Rights Advocate
... A crappie is not a sunfish found in a toilet.
--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
---------------