Guns and Poses: Need for Busts and for Licensing : How the growing gun violence can be tamed

Last month, California gun stores sold a record 8,311 firearms. The dealers who sold those weapons complied with existing law: They had permits to sell firearms, they reported their sales to the state and they required their customers to wait 15 days between purchase and delivery to allow for background checks. However, those dealers probably sold only a fraction of the guns that actually changed hands. For every gun sold legally last month, there were perhaps scores of others sold in the shadows, in violation of federal, state and local laws.

That does little to reassure a public that often must live in fear of gun-carrying criminals. Nor is it reassuring that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms continues to issue, for $30 each, federal gun-dealer permits that are too often granted on the basis of incomplete or outdated criminal records. The agency also is failing to conduct required on-site inspections of proposed dealerships or face-to-face interviews with prospective dealers. And no wonder. With only 12 compliance inspectors to cover the 4,000 dealers of Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, the ATF can barely inspect the dealers who already have licenses, not to mention those people applying.

The result is that lethal instruments are finding their way into the hands of sociopaths like the one who last week deprived society of Alfred Clark, an honor student and football star at Paramount High School who was shot and killed by a robber for his compact disc player.

While the police often respond swiftly to such high-profile shootings, there are hundreds of other gun-related incidents that are never fully investigated, mainly because of lack of police resources. Indeed, part of the problem, as Los Angeles Police Chief-designate Willie L. Williams has correctly noted, is systemic: Federal records show that Los Angeles police rarely trace the origin of captured firearms--a process that authorities in other cities use to uncover illegal gun runners and dealers. In fact, the LAPD and the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department together made fewer than 120 gun trace requests to the ATF National Tracing Center during 1991 and 1992--significantly fewer than smaller agencies in Milwaukee, Boston and Baltimore.

Two new approaches might help Los Angeles reduce the number of illegal guns:

* Locally, special police squads could conduct undercover buy-and-bust operations for illegal guns. These special gun units could also work directly with other state and local agencies to trace stolen weapons or those involved in unsolved crimes. Naturally, the program would require support from, and coordination with, federal authorities. To ensure that police get proper support from the justice system, the county district attorney’s office could be staffed with a special team of prosecutors dedicated to handling gun-related cases.

* Nationally, Washington could establish a system to keep track of individual weapons and their owners, who would be required to register either through a federal program or a joint program with the states. Gun owners would be required to log the weapon’s serial number with a federal or state database. Current federal law does not require that individuals carry permits or that guns be registered with states. The computerized database would store serial numbers and would be able to track a gun from production and sale to successive owners. Like driver’s licenses, gun licenses could be revoked because of improper conduct by owners.

Washington should take California’s lead in requiring a firearm safety course or a skills examination as conditions for purchase. There would be eligibility rules for gun licensees, such as a minimum age requirement, and prohibitions for individuals with criminal records or a history of mental illness.

The biggest obstacle to this program, apart from politics, is money. Clearly it would cost more to hire the additional officers, detectives and prosecutors for such a system. But the crucially needed funding from the federal government is doubtful. The 1992 Omnibus Crime Bill, which would have provided the funds for state and local law enforcement, has languished in Congress because of a threatened presidential veto. Prospects for a separate federal financial-aid package for state and local authorities are remote at this point. This legislative paralysis must be overcome if Americans are to escape the fear of gun-related crime. Our leaders must recognize this, and then act.