Anti-gun Dems want to reduce penalty for drive-by shootings

(Scott Sommerdorf/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP)

I came of age in the 1990s, the era of drive-by shootings. They were talked about in the media and appeared in popular culture. Unlike many things like that, though, drive-bys represented a real problem.


See, when gangs drove by and started shooting, they weren’t too particular about who they hit. They just hosed the area down with rounds and then left.

If gangbangers were just shooting each other, I don’t know how many of us would muster the ability to care. The problem is that it wasn’t limited to just other gang members. It was anyone who disrespected a gang member and anyone who happened to be standing nearby when the shooter came looking for retribution.

And in the almost 30 years since, they haven’t exactly gone away.

However, we’re told that if we give up our guns, all will be well. There won’t be any drive-by shootings anymore. It’s one of a plethora of arguments made to make anti-Second Amendment types look like they’re just interested in public safety.

Yet some will also try to reduce the penalty for killing folks during drive-by shootings.

Clearly, we’re still in 2021 because you simply can’t make this stuff up. A pair of Washington State legislators, both endorsed by Everytown and Moms Demand Action, have introduced a bill to reduce the criminal penalties for murders committed in drive-by shootings. The legislators claim the bill will promote “racial equity in the criminal justice system.”

Eleventh District Rep. David Hackney and 23rd District Rep. (and convicted felon) Tarra Simmons introduced House Bill 1692 in the Washington Assembly.

As the Firearms Policy Coalition’s Rob Romano tweets . . .

Both Simmons and Hackney now serve in the Washington State Legislature. Both have also earned the enthusiastic endorsement of Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Control and Moms Demand Action anti-gun rights organizations.


Ain’t that interesting?

Now, Simmons and Hackney are clearly taking this on from a “racial equity” standpoint, but I find it hilarious that two people who want to disarm you because of what criminals do are willing to propose a bill that reduces the penalty for what criminals actually do.

Holy crap, this stupidity is making my head hurt.

See, the problem here is that “racial equity” is about outcomes and only outcomes. I mean, the perpetrators of most drive-by shootings are by young, black men. So, because that’s who breaks the law, the law needs to be changed so they’re not punished as much. It has nothing to do with the heinous nature of the crime or anything.

This is about equality of outcomes and nothing else.

And really, it’s the most idiotic reason to reduce a penalty you can think of. Especially from a racial equity standpoint.

Why? Because most of the innocent victims killed in drive-by shootings also happen to be black folks. They’re young, black children, their mothers and fathers, their grandparents, and so on. Everyone gets impacted, but because these also tend to happen in majority-black neighborhoods, the victims tend to also be black.


Really, what Simmons and Hackney are saying with this bill is that black lives really don’t matter.

Meanwhile, these two will still try to take the guns of folks in Washington state because they say they’re worried about public safety, all while working to let dangerous, violent criminals serve less time in prison for their violent acts.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member