Santa Cruz enacts own APPs Program

[jdberger]

Gun Check Program Aims to Prevent Violence in Santa Cruz County

SANTA CRUZ -- The Santa Cruz County District Attorney's Office has been working quietly on a program to keep guns out of the hands of felons and other offenders.

Operation Street Sweeper, spearheaded by the Santa Cruz County District Attorney's Office, has checked up on at least 48 suspects since February, according to District Attorney Bob Lee.

Investigators in the project have tried to prevent violent crime by checking on three groups of people with gun restrictions: felons, domestic violence offenders and people with mental health problems.

More at the link.

[1859sharps]

two points....

first, ask you and receive. "we" keep saying go after the criminals, do more to prevent "crazy" people from having guns. well, they are actually doing it. So at a high level...they are doing exactly what we wanted. if we didn't want this, we shouldn't have asked for it.

The other half of my first point, is the devil is in the details. programs like this need to NOT be secretive and we just need to keep an eye on "them" so that given an inch, they don't take a mile.

second....why are they wasting time on new buyers. that seems a bit of both a over stepping of their authority and a unnecessary redundancy that is a wast of resources. that part does concern me a bit. again, devil is in the details. I think this part needs to be checked out a bit more.

[Can'thavenuthingood]

I don't know how the APPS program actually works in practice but I think giving the lists to the County Sheriffs is a good idea. Sheriffs control the issuance of License to Carry so this goes along with that principal of local control.

I do wonder about the Sheriff not knowing how many guns have been confiscated in his local program though. How does he justify the needed dollars in the budget to perform this task if he has no results?

Vick

[dfletcher]

I do wonder about the Sheriff not knowing how many guns have been confiscated in his local program though. How does he justify the needed dollars in the budget to perform this task if he has no results?

Vick

He just adds "1" to the 2nd digit from the left in his existing budget. $15K in 2013 becomes $16K in 2014 - and so on and so on. After he does that for a few years he can run for Congress .....

[a1c]

I do wonder about the Sheriff not knowing how many guns have been confiscated in his local program though. How does he justify the needed dollars in the budget to perform this task if he has no results?

Depends on how you define "results". On this kind of thing, I wouldn't measure the sheriff's success on the number of guns confiscated, but on the number of prohibited persons whose house his men visited.

[otteray]

He was not sure how many guns have been seized.

"We've been doing it for about nine months," Lee said.

If there had been any rate of success, I'll bet he would've had the exact number on the tip of his tongue.

[Rumline]

two points....

first, ask you and receive. "we" keep saying go after the criminals, do more to prevent "crazy" people from having guns. well, they are actually doing it. So at a high level...they are doing exactly what we wanted. if we didn't want this, we shouldn't have asked for it.

The other half of my first point, is the devil is in the details. programs like this need to NOT be secretive and we just need to keep an eye on "them" so that given an inch, they don't take a mile.

second....why are they wasting time on new buyers. that seems a bit of both a over stepping of their authority and a unnecessary redundancy that is a wast of resources. that part does concern me a bit. again, devil is in the details. I think this part needs to be checked out a bit more.

I agree with both points. Reminds me of "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance."

[ElvenSoul]

You know it is going to happen they are going to F'UP real bad and a video will get out on the internet.

[Can'thavenuthingood]

Depends on how you define "results". On this kind of thing, I wouldn't measure the sheriff's success on the number of guns confiscated, but on the number of prohibited persons whose house his men visited.

Yes that would be a better measurement for a success rate, also a number I think he should have had at the ready. That would have been a part of the same data sheet of those moved to new address, imprisoned, deceased etc.

It looks like he was not prepared for this interview.

Vick

[sl0re10]

Depends on how you define "results". On this kind of thing, I wouldn't measure the sheriff's success on the number of guns confiscated, but on the number of prohibited persons whose house his men visited.

Or better yet how many crimes were, statistically, probably prevented. Guessing its probably 0.... considering the sample size....

[mshill]

While I don't disapprove of what they are doing or the way they are doing it (except maybe the checking on new buyers) this at the end of the article is disturbing.

The Santa Cruz County District Attorney's Office asks anyone with information on illegal gun owners to call 831-454-2400.

I would hate to have some ignorant member of the public assume that any of my firearms are illegal (because they look like an M4, FN2000, or P90) and I later get a visit from the local LEA. As it is no one at Calguns even trust LEOs to know legal from illegal, let alone uninformed citizens. I wouldn't expect neighbors or even close friends to know whether or not I am a prohibited person.

[uhlan1]

Political tripe. If he was really serious they'd be working the parole and probation books and violating the gangbangers we are awash in. Or all the transients who come here for the free grub and commit quite a few crimes. Many have warrants from other jurisdictions.

[1859sharps]

Political tripe. If he was really serious they'd be working the parole and probation books and violating the gangbangers we are awash in. Or all the transients who come here for the free grub and commit quite a few crimes. Many have warrants from other jurisdictions.

some truth in your comments.

it is simply human nature to take the path or least resistance. I strongly suspect that most of the people they are checking are not a threat and in hind sight tracking them down, confiscating their firearms is probably a wast of resources when you compare their level of "threat" verse the ones you mention.

it is just so much safer and easier to go after these types and to spend time double checking new purchases and spinning the data collected in these endeavors than it is to actually go after the real hard core criminal. the type that will fight back, are pretty good jail house lawyers in addition to having the real deal. the ones that know how to work the system etc.

but again...we asked for this... so, remember next time...be careful what you ask for...you just might get it.

[movie zombie]

interesting.

[oldyeller]

Do medical marijuana cards count as prohibitions? They would probably get a lot of action in that department.