FL: Felon Shot Days after being Disarmed

In Florida, a 32 year-old career criminal was captured as he resisted arrest after committing multiple felonies.  It was particularly notable because he had been arrested for illegal possession of a firearm just a few days previously.   Wilford McCloud is accused of breaking into several cars before he was chased by an off-duty Brevard County deputy.  From clickorlando.com:

As Holton attempted to arrest McCloud, the man was reportedly violently resisting, which led to Holton shooting McCloud.

(snip)

McCloud was arrested just days before for carrying a concealed firearm by a convicted felon and has an extensive record.

Trying to prevent criminals such as McCloud from obtaining firearms by requiring everyone else to go through intrusive background checks is counter productive.   It certainly does not stop criminals from obtaining firearms.  98+ percent of background checks (FBI pdf)  are done on people that can legally possess them.   Great numbers of them already have firearms.  Those checks are worthless to prevent possession by criminals.  Of the remaining 1-2 percent  of checks that are not approved, most are either false positives, or are not deemed worthy of prosecution.   Of background checks that are disapproved, only a tiny number, less than .02 percent are actually prosecuted.

So the entire cumbersome apparatus of background checks puts millions of citizens a year though intrusive prior restraint before they exercise their second amendment rights, to obtain a handful of convictions a year.

Millions of background checks, a dozen or so convictions.  Meanwhile, career criminals like McCloud, when checked and found in possession of a firearm are disarmed, and probably would have been convicted and gone back to prison with due process, eventually.  The article does not say if Mr. McCloud was on probation.

As McCloud, according to witnesses, violently resisted arrest, it seems likely that if he still had the firearm that he was relieved of, he might well have used it against the arresting, off duty, deputy.

The effort and money spent on the inefficient and intrusive, constitutionally questionable prior restraints of background checks would be far better spent on tight monitoring of people like Mr. McCloud, with results as noted in this article.   When they are found with illegal firearms, they are relieved  of them and sent back to jail.   That sort of system could allow non violent felons to have long guns at home for self defense, when they are out of jail, and to earn back their second amendment rights after becoming a productive member of society.   Even a criminal has a right to self defense.  But they do not have a right to prey upon the law abiding population.

The comments at the article note that McCloud has been victimizing people for a long time:  From the Comments:

From Section 410 Row P safte:

This dude has been in the system for as far back as I can remember. He was a good guy......back in elementary school. lol!

JtotheR Section 410 Row P :

This guy got caught doing the same thing, breaking into my car about 12-13 years ago. Seems like he's still up to the same stuff.

It is unfortunate that our dysfunctional welfare and inner city educational systems have produced a great number of Mr. McClouds.  Odds are that there was no stable father in his life, and that he has been taught through socialization that studying and working a regular job are "acting white".   Once you cross the threshold of the first felony, it becomes extremely difficult to become a functioning and contributing member of society.   Mr. McCloud will likely spend most of the rest of his years in and out of jail, in both cases, with the rest of society footing the bill.

Trying to stop criminals from obtaining firearms by checking the law abiding is like the old joke: Daily flogging will continue until moral improves!  It is the wrong solution based on flawed assumptions.  Direct, improved monitoring of actual criminals is a far better solution that does not jeopardize constitutional rights or victimize innocent citizens.   It also has the advantage of being effective, as shown by David Kennedy, the renowned criminal justice professor and co-chair of the National Network for safe communities:

 “We now know that homicide and gun violence are overwhelmingly concentrated among serious offenders operating in groups: gangs, drug crews, and the like representing under half of one percent of a city's population who commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”

Read it once more: “ … under half of one percent … commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”

That small number of people can be intensively monitored to insure that their access to firearms is limited.   It is a far more effective approach than punishing the mass for the sins of the few.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch