Are Peepers Packing Pistols Predisposed to Plug Prey?
Lincoln Police Chief Tom Casady, still stinging from the City Council’s refusal to ban concealed carry, wants to limit who can possess a weapon in the city. Fair enough. It’s not especially surprising that a police chief doesn’t want citizens—especially citizens with a rap sheet—carrying guns. It makes his officers’ job more difficult.
But why does Casady keep harping on the importance of keeping guns out of the hands of those convicted of crimes like indecent exposure? I’ve asked this before, but the question remains unanswered so I’ll ask again: are those convicted of indecent exposure more likely to commit gun crimes (or any violent crime) than those convicted of other misdemeanors? Because if not, Casady’s proposal amounts to nothing more than feel-good legislation and is therefore a waste of time.
To me, Chief Casady’s “Peter” and “Robert” examples aren’t notable for their combined 18 indecent exposure arrests, but for their 227 collective arrests overall. Why focus on the arrests for behavior that is offensive, but essentially harmless? Surely among those 227 there are some other anti-social behaviors that are much better justifications for Casady’s goal.
Are there any criminal justice pros out there who can shed light on the relative likelihood of a person convicted of indecent exposure later committing a violent crime?
The Comments
Dave K August 15, 2006 at 8:18am
I also thought it was strange that he finds some sort of special importance in keeping weapons out of the hands of those who can’t seem to keep their own weapon out of their hands. And citing how many times one has been arrested only dilutes his point: if they have been arrested 227 times for various misdeeds, what makes anyone think they’ll obey the no-CCW ordinance that pertains to them?
Mr. T August 15, 2006 at 8:29am
My only guess is that the chief is trying to construct a preemptive drag net type of effect and keep guns out of the hands of people who might either be: 1) potential stalkers; 2) potential sex offenders; or 3) homeless people. That would be my guess. And I have no idea if there is an established link with any of the above from indecent exposure based on empirical data.
Neal August 15, 2006 at 11:35am
My best guess is that he feels those types of offenses demonstrate bad judgment that directly affects others.
Dave, if only I were still at the DN, you bet you’d see a cartoon along the lines of “he finds some sort of special importance in keeping weapons out of the hands of those who can’t seem to keep their own weapon out of their hands.”
Mr. Wilson August 15, 2006 at 11:42am
You’re always welcome to whip up a special edition cartoon just for your good friends around here, Neal
Mr. T August 15, 2006 at 7:07pm
You’re always welcome to whip up a special edition cartoon just for your good friends around here, Neal
That would be awesome Neal. I particularly liked your “Star Wars” themed cartoon a while ago.
Mr. Wilson August 15, 2006 at 7:19pm
I probably should jump in quickly and make it clear that although it would be cool if Neal did that, I don’t actually expect him to work for free. I wonder if he works for burritos…
Neal August 15, 2006 at 7:28pm
I do believe that I would be in violation of my work agreement if I received compensation for sharing a cartoon with another Lincoln media entity.
However, tomorrow is a cartooning day, so I vow to submit an idea long these lines...if it doesn’t get picked, I’ll post the sketch EXCLUSIVELY ON THIS SITE. If it does get picked, then it’ll just be in the paper Thursday.
Deal?
Mr. Wilson August 15, 2006 at 8:50pm
Sounds good to me. And the burrito offer still stands.
Dave K August 15, 2006 at 9:30pm
However, tomorrow is a cartooning day, so I vow to submit an idea long these lines...if it doesn’t get picked, I’ll post the sketch EXCLUSIVELY ON THIS SITE. If it does get picked, then it’ll just be in the paper Thursday.
Awesome!
Mr. T August 15, 2006 at 9:45pm
If there is an exclusive Lincolnite cartoon by Neal, I wonder what the probability is that it may feature Dave K, Beer Orkid, and others as some of the characters.
foxspit August 16, 2006 at 8:50am
Quite a coup Mr. Wilson. I love Neal’s cartoons and having one in Lincolnite would be cool! Of course, having Neal as a reader is cool, too.
Neal August 16, 2006 at 2:39pm
Well, that cartoon didn’t get picked for tomorrow, but it’s being held onto for possible future publication so I don’t want to post it here yet...the content warranted some extra contemplation…
Dave K August 16, 2006 at 2:45pm
That’s too bad. As juvenile as the DN is/was, the restrictions were much looser as to what you, and the others, could do. I don’t get the impression the editorial board at the LJS has much of a sense of humor, unfortunately.
Neal August 16, 2006 at 2:59pm
Well here’s a completely different rejected sketch from today’s batch:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/cheeksofgod/sketch0816-5.jpg
foxspit August 16, 2006 at 8:54pm
I like the Sheridan cartoon. I thought it was fairly tame considering how easily you could have lambasted the perpetrator.
Seems like Commissar Casaday could write somebody up for graffiti.
Mr. T August 16, 2006 at 9:16pm
More Neal!
Neal August 17, 2006 at 3:53pm
Well, they decided it was too risque.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/cheeksofgod/sketch0816-1.jpg