HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » You want some common-sens...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:21 PM

You want some common-sense gun control? Here you go.

1. All firearms must be purchased from a federally licensed dealer. No private sales. If you want to sell your privately owned gun, you must do so through a federally licensed dealer. All firearms must be registered, no exceptions. This would be retroactive, with a grace period for all guns currently in someone's possession. Part of the registration process will entail a ballistics test,which would then go into a national database.

2. More in-depth background checks and require a gun license. Currently, as long as you've never been institutionalized or deemed mentally unfit by a judge, you're considered mentally fit to own a gun. IMHO, part of the process for obtaining a firearm should require a note from a doctor or psychiatrist confirming that the applicant would not pose a danger by themselves or others. You would have to renew your license on a regular basis. If you become deemed unfit to own a gun, then your license would be revoked or unable to renew. If you commit any violent crime at all - assault, domestic violence, etc - you automatically become ineligible to own firearms.

3. Closely monitor all gun and ammo sales. We already closely monitor purchases of things like fertilizer and Sudafed. Firearms and ammo should be no different.

4. Taxation of all gun and ammo sales, with the taxes going to fund mental health treatment.

5. Banning large-capacity magazines. There is absolutely no need for anyone to have a 30-round magazine.

These are just a few gun-control ideas that would not infringe on anyone's "right" to own guns.

171 replies, 19287 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 171 replies Author Time Post
Reply You want some common-sense gun control? Here you go. (Original post)
Hugabear Dec 2012 OP
Not Me Dec 2012 #1
ROBROX Dec 2012 #145
Happyhippychick Dec 2012 #2
susanr516 Dec 2012 #3
Hugabear Dec 2012 #12
Peregrine Dec 2012 #24
ProfessorGAC Dec 2012 #126
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #63
tech3149 Dec 2012 #131
prius4me Dec 2012 #156
adigal Dec 2012 #163
Flashmann Dec 2012 #4
Voice for Peace Dec 2012 #5
upaloopa Dec 2012 #6
PADemD Dec 2012 #14
upaloopa Dec 2012 #17
Sarah Ibarruri Dec 2012 #48
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2012 #52
frylock Dec 2012 #68
DURHAM D Dec 2012 #74
groundloop Dec 2012 #142
forthemiddle Dec 2012 #169
azureblue Dec 2012 #71
JimDandy Dec 2012 #82
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #86
bw3517 Dec 2012 #96
thecrow Dec 2012 #22
upaloopa Dec 2012 #23
Liberal Gramma Dec 2012 #55
Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #58
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #80
sir pball Dec 2012 #157
flamin lib Dec 2012 #61
billh58 Dec 2012 #66
upaloopa Dec 2012 #76
billh58 Dec 2012 #97
Sherman A1 Dec 2012 #111
judesedit Dec 2012 #113
Squinch Dec 2012 #7
wyldwolf Dec 2012 #112
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #8
Patiod Dec 2012 #13
JoePhilly Dec 2012 #15
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #9
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #30
CreekDog Dec 2012 #144
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #37
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #56
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #59
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #60
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #78
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #94
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #110
daleanime Dec 2012 #124
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #137
daleanime Dec 2012 #165
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #166
daleanime Dec 2012 #167
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #168
Autumn Dec 2012 #10
rgbecker Dec 2012 #11
azureblue Dec 2012 #72
bw3517 Dec 2012 #91
theKed Dec 2012 #102
billh58 Dec 2012 #106
GreenPartyVoter Dec 2012 #130
PADemD Dec 2012 #16
Throckmorton Dec 2012 #34
xmas74 Dec 2012 #39
neverforget Dec 2012 #18
MrModerate Dec 2012 #19
Doc Holliday Dec 2012 #36
hack89 Dec 2012 #64
MrModerate Dec 2012 #83
hack89 Dec 2012 #84
MrModerate Dec 2012 #99
hack89 Dec 2012 #114
MrModerate Dec 2012 #118
thecrow Dec 2012 #20
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #43
RC Dec 2012 #67
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #70
bongbong Dec 2012 #21
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #25
bowens43 Dec 2012 #26
rwheeler31 Dec 2012 #27
ET Awful Dec 2012 #28
Gore1FL Dec 2012 #29
cantbeserious Dec 2012 #31
ybbor Dec 2012 #32
SleeplessinSoCal Dec 2012 #33
calimary Dec 2012 #35
riverbendviewgal Dec 2012 #38
LeftofU Dec 2012 #40
lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #41
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #42
DURHAM D Dec 2012 #73
Godot51 Dec 2012 #44
politicat Dec 2012 #45
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #75
politicat Dec 2012 #87
AtheistCrusader Dec 2012 #98
Llewlladdwr Dec 2012 #46
Hugabear Dec 2012 #47
Llewlladdwr Dec 2012 #49
Hugabear Dec 2012 #53
bw3517 Dec 2012 #92
Hugabear Dec 2012 #119
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2012 #54
bw3517 Dec 2012 #93
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2012 #101
billh58 Dec 2012 #108
BainsBane Dec 2012 #116
BainsBane Dec 2012 #117
billh58 Dec 2012 #121
happyslug Dec 2012 #50
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #51
Sirveri Dec 2012 #57
Glaisne Dec 2012 #62
Bette Noir Dec 2012 #65
clutter424 Dec 2012 #69
ProgressoDem Dec 2012 #77
bkkyosemite Dec 2012 #79
Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #81
backscatter712 Dec 2012 #85
russspeakeasy Dec 2012 #88
defacto7 Dec 2012 #89
on point Dec 2012 #90
bw3517 Dec 2012 #95
on point Dec 2012 #148
shenmue Dec 2012 #100
6502 Dec 2012 #103
Barack_America Dec 2012 #104
Mel Content Dec 2012 #105
icarusxat Dec 2012 #107
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #109
Hugabear Dec 2012 #120
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #123
Hugabear Dec 2012 #129
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #133
Hugabear Dec 2012 #135
bullwinkle428 Dec 2012 #125
UndahCovah Dec 2012 #134
sinkingfeeling Dec 2012 #115
wizard.66 Dec 2012 #127
Bake Dec 2012 #122
azurnoir Dec 2012 #128
former9thward Dec 2012 #132
Hugabear Dec 2012 #136
former9thward Dec 2012 #141
billh58 Dec 2012 #149
former9thward Dec 2012 #150
billh58 Dec 2012 #152
former9thward Dec 2012 #161
billh58 Dec 2012 #162
sibelian Dec 2012 #138
hedgehog Dec 2012 #139
Serve The Servants Dec 2012 #151
davidn3600 Dec 2012 #140
groundloop Dec 2012 #143
davidn3600 Dec 2012 #153
billh58 Dec 2012 #154
Chorophyll Dec 2012 #158
underpants Dec 2012 #146
Glassunion Dec 2012 #147
prius4me Dec 2012 #155
Chorophyll Dec 2012 #159
billh58 Dec 2012 #160
Dems to Win Dec 2012 #164
apnu Dec 2012 #170
Glaisne Dec 2012 #171

Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:24 PM

1. Works for me.

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Not Me (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:13 PM

145. WONDERFUL IDEA

 

The old SIN TAX should work. I always wondered why there was NOT a long investigation period for owning a fire arm. In California there is a 10 day waiting period. California also does not allow people to own assault weapons. Crazy people do not require hundreds or thousands or rounds of ammunition or personal arsenals. We already prevent the public from owning machine guns and RPG, etc. It is time to rethink what is not working and do the RIGHT THING......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:24 PM

2. My husband proposed a "non-violence tax" on all firearms and all Americans to be used for mental

Health clinics. I see you thought of it too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:40 PM

3. I would suggest a couple of other things

All firearms and ammo must be locked in gun safes when not in use.

Restrictions on the amount of ammo that can be purchased in a given time period (in my state, you can only purchase a certain amount of Sudafed in a 30-day period.)

I think an annual license fee (just like vehicles) would be appropriate. I would also be in favor of a mandatory annual inspection of each gun to verify it is still in the possession of the legal owner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to susanr516 (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:00 PM

12. Bingo. How is Sudafed tightly regulated, but not ammunition?

Makes no sense to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #12)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:37 PM

24. It is used to make meth

You want free meth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Peregrine (Reply #24)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:04 PM

126. That's Just Silly

A statement in search of a point.
GAC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:29 AM

63. To prosecute ...

the War on Drugs; there is no need to regulate ammunition because the War on People is going quite well, on its own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to susanr516 (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:16 PM

131. I'd argue against that

I only have two long guns. They were my Dad's and are collectors items. I built a rack to show them off rather than keep them in the closet.
As far as your other points, I totally agree. I don't think I've gone through 100 rounds in two years. I wouldn't mind paying a fee and having an inspection just as I do with the car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tech3149 (Reply #131)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:04 AM

156. Fees for the sake of having fees?

 

What would inspections and fees actually prevent? Besides being a pain in the butt, they wouldn't have actually prevented anything. Mom was legal, sane, followed rules, and probably would have passed any test. Her insane son killed her and stole her guns. No inspection or fee would prevent that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to prius4me (Reply #156)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:50 PM

163. A lock would have avoided this

Especially if she was the only one who knew where it was. Or a combination lock.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:40 PM

4. I'm on board with all of that

And I'm a gun owner...........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:40 PM

5. These are all good and there are so many good suggestions coming up here on DU

I'm not a gun owner, simply don't know enough
to make my own suggestions; but there seem to
be so many good ideas, and should not be difficult
to make this happen.
I'm hopeful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:45 PM

6. I don't agree with retroactively registering guns.

That is too impractical and the cost benefit ratio makes it too costly.
I can see having a data base that could trace new weapons being manufactured. If an unregistered new gun is used in a crime or gun accident there would be a fine and penalty. The information should remain private just as medical records are. The benefit to this is to try and understand how and where illegal guns get into the hands of criminals.
I would also add that people not familiar with guns stay out of the business of writing gun laws. This should not be an exercise in letting anti gun prejudices replace rational thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:08 PM

14. Don't you register your car?

PA requires every car to be registered, and the registration fees go toward road repair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PADemD (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:15 PM

17. I register my dog too do we register for registering sake?

Many people fear a national gun registry and unless there is a good reason or benefit to society that out weighs the right to privacy I am not in support of registration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:33 PM

48. They fear a gun registry but not automobile registry?

There must be a reason why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:49 PM

52. The benefit to society is fewer slaughtered kids

And that just trumps the everliving fuck out of your privacy concerns. If you want your privacy, find a less lethal hobby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:39 AM

68. i own several guns and do not fear a national registry..

we cannot continue to allow paranoid black helicopter idiots to drive our legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:29 PM

74. Also, I pay the county $10 a year to own a cat.

He died this year so I guess when I get his tax bill for 2013 I will need to provide some sort of proof to the county that he passed.

Anyway, gun owns should pay county property taxes for their pets (guns) as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:42 PM

142. "Many people fear a national gun registry..." - Hell, I fear my kids being shot at school

It's way way past time to get over the right wing arguments about gun control. I don't give a flip if someone "fears" registering their firearms, or if someone is inconvenienced by it. Those people who lost their children were a damned sight more than "inconvenienced". I go through the inconvenience of registering my cars once per year, and somehow I manage to survive. Gun owners (of which I am one) can damned well accept the common sense suggestions put forth in the original post, I find them to be well though out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #142)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:10 AM

169. Weren't the guns that killed all those innocent children last week registered?

I don't know the answer to this for sure, I just assumed they were registered to the Mom since we knew within a few hours that they were her guns. Without being registered, how did they know that?

How would the gun registry have prevented this? I don't disagree with her being irresponsible by, apparently, leaving the guns unsecured, but the registry wouldn't do a damn thing, because I think they were already registered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PADemD (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:06 PM

71. car registration

Is a good model:

1 - Register guns.
2- If you use the gun, you must have a copy of the registration with you.
3 - License the gun owner and test on the gun range along with an exam. Gun owner must pass a marksmanship exam that includes a barrier of two shots to hit a target - IOW, if you can't aim the thing and hit a target in two shots, you have no business owning a gun. And require retesting ever three years.

I think that all auto and semi auto fire guns should be banned. I used to hunt, and I used a bolt action rifle. It used to be a badge of honor and a verification of your skills to be able to hit your target with a single shot. Now these gun nuts want 30 round magazines and guns that spray lead, because they can't aim and control their weapon. They claim that a 30 round mag is needed for home defense, but that's BS. a 16 gauge pump action shotgun does a much better job - the shot doesn't go through walls, you have a much better chance of hitting your target, and they make a hell of a noise when fired.

Trust me, I doubt any of these gun nuts could survive using colonial era black powder muzzle loaders, but that is what the founders of this country used, and they managed to feed themselves with their guns, as well as defend their property. You had to make your own cartridges (roll the powder into a paper cylinder) and make your own lead shot. If it was good enough for George Washington, then it should be good enough for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #71)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:45 PM

82. Perfect!

I like the idea of mandatory carry (registration )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PADemD (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:43 PM

86. Registrtion is only required for vehicles operated on public roads.

 

There are some exceptions for farm/work vehicles which have to travel across or along publi roads to access other separate private property. Private vehicles operated in private are not subject to public traffic laws or regulations. You can drive a car 100mph on your own road on your own property without a license, registration, or insurance if you please.

Perhaps guns should be the same as cars, like you mention. You would need a license to use (carry) it in public but you can use it on private property with impunity. Oh wait... that's already how it is in most states

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #86)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:54 PM

96. Well stated

 

Imagine that, logic and critical thinking skills can be applied in forums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:30 PM

22. You would fine them AFTER a crime or accident?

I don't think this is very useful. How is this different than what we have now?
I like the OP's suggestions better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thecrow (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:35 PM

23. You can't punish them for breaking a law until

you know they have

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:27 PM

55. Ya know, by that logic abortion access legislation should be enacted only by women

Of course, I am in favor of that anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:52 AM

58. Because that has worked so well up to now, hasn't it?

I would also add that people not familiar with guns stay out of the business of writing gun laws. This should not be an exercise in letting anti gun prejudices replace rational thinking.




And why would any 'rational thinking' person be against registering the serial numbers, make and model of any firearm already owned unless they were obtained illegally?

If you have nothing to hide, own the weapon legally, it shouldn't be a problem.

You have to register a used car when you purchase it to attain title to it, or to legally re-sell it to someone else, unless it was stolen you should have no problem in doing so.


Setting up a database and using it for new registrations would be easily expanded to register firearms already owned.

And those that refuse to do so after a grace period expose themselves as unwilling to follow the law, and are a danger to the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:59 PM

80. One reason...

If you register the firearm (including ballistic fingerprinting), it could be returned to its rightful owner if it were stolen and then turned up later.

If you DON'T register the firearm, you have virtually no chance of getting it back, and so you'll go out and buy another one.

Repeat business is good for the firearms industry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #80)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:17 AM

157. Registration, OK

Ballistic fingerprinting, nope - not because of any theoretical objections, I'll gladly own every bullet that comes out of every one of my weapons, but because it's more or less completely useless.

Since I bought them, every one of my rifles has been "fire lapped" by shooting abrasive-coated bullets through it. It's done to recondition a potentially abused barrel and to increase accuracy. It also completely changes the patterns the rifle leaves on the bullet - unless you'd mandate a resubmission yearly, there's no useful information to be gained from "printing". The same effect happens with any high-volume shooting, I'm just using the lapping as a particularly rapid and clear example. New York dropped their law after umpteen years and bumpteen million dollars did exactly nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:18 AM

61. Three things:

1. All guns manufactured here or imported are tracked by serial number from source to final owner. Those records remain with the FFL as long as the FFL is active. Not much cost involved in forwarding the records to the FED for registry.

2. 40% of gun sales in the US are private person to person sales. Without a federal registry there is no way to enforce background checks on those transactions.

3. Without a federal registry, even if a person is diagnosed with acute mental illness and a danger to themselves or others, there is no way to know if they have access to guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:02 AM

66. Spoken like a true

Gungeon devotee and NRA spokesperson, right down to the tired old bullshit NRA/Gungeon talking points. Do you get paid to write this stuff, or do you just copy and paste?

All guns should be registered in order to affix responsibility and accountability. And why in the hell should the information "remain private?" Are you people ashamed of owning guns? Is there some difference between what you Gungeoneers call just another "tool," and your automobile, or your shovel?

I know the argument from the NRA is that if gun ownership is public knowledge it would invite thieves. That is where the "responsibility" part comes in: secure your fucking gun. The accountability part kicks in after your gun is stolen, and should carry stiff penalties.

And your last statement is just asinine. What in the hell makes a gun owner more qualified to legislate gun laws than the people being shot at and killed in this country? The "business" of writing gun laws is the business of ALL the people, and not just the politician-buying Republican NRA. That's the thinking that got us to our current position, and it needs to end right fucking now.

Finally, it is extremist pro-gun thinking which has replaced rational thinking, and it's way past fucking time to put a stop to the NRA influence which has led to so many needless deaths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #66)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:05 PM

76. Are you talking to me? I'm not a gunner

If you are referring to me I await your apology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #76)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:01 PM

97. If it talks like a duck...

Yeah, well keep on waiting and tell your Gungeon buddies I said hi...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:56 AM

111. Pardon me for a moment

in regard to "I would also add that people not familiar with guns stay out of the business of writing gun laws. This should not be an exercise in letting anti gun prejudices replace rational thinking." I am a tax paying, voting citizen of the United States, therefore I do have a say in not only this debate, but any other debate in which I choose to participate. You do not get to decide if I as a non gun owner or gun owner gets a voice. This is simply too important a debate to stifle participation. You may disagree with what I or others have to say, but we get to participate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:20 AM

113. That's bullshit.You should WANT to register all of your firearms.No excuse.At least register.Maybe

ballistics, too. If your kid got shot, you'd probably be the first to bitch. And if the gun's used in a crime, forget fine and penalty...jail time is needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:51 PM

7. So where do we go from here with this?

Another DUer, in a conversation on another thread, suggested mandated secure storage with criminal liability for failing to store appropriately, and biometric safeties on all new guns and free retrofitting on old ones.

A voluntary buyback program wouldn't hurt either.

There seem to be a lot of measures that everyone - even many gun owners - agree on.

So what is the the next step?

Is it to send Feinstein the list of what you've suggested? Or is it to compile the list of measures, and post it to DU and encourage everyone to send it to their congresspeople, both state and federal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:32 AM

112. yes, like you said, a buyback program

One of the steps that made Australia's program work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:52 PM

8. Graded weapons licensees.

Think of it like the different driver's licensees.

A new teen driver can only drive during the day and can't have more than one friend in the car with them.
I can only drive cars and light trucks, but I'd need a special license to drive a commercial dump truck or 18-wheeler.

You can own any weapon and ammo you want, but only after you obtain the appropriate graded license. Those with mental health issues would struggle to make it through the stricter process.

Weapons and ammo would be classed based on kill potential.

We could have law enforcement, military and government work to design the classes and the criteria for moving from level to level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:04 PM

13. What need would there be for military-style semi-automatic weapons

outside ranges, arsenals, armories, and barracks? Should anyone be licensed to have these in a private home (except maybe active-duty SWAT teams)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Patiod (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:09 PM

15. You build that into the grading system.

You should notice that I did not attempt to define the classes of weapons.

I'd bring in law enforcement, FBI, military and maybe some others to define the classes and the required criteria that must be met.

I recently heard a man who owned a farm claim that the deer population in his state is so large that they destory entire crops. So at certain times, they hold an event to thin the heard. They drive the deer towards one or two shooters, armed with semi-automatic weapons. After the first shot, the deer scatter, and so they need the ability to fire more rapidly.

I'm not sure how much of this situation is true, but I'm not against the possibility that it is a real situation. And so, these folks could obtain such weapons, but the hurdles to do so would be non-trivial. Which they are today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:54 PM

9. Brilliant. Now that the nation is finally gaining a tenuous grasp on sanity regarding drugs,

 

we will need something else to constitute the next huge black market in the nation that has armed the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:06 PM

30. shhhhh

it feels so good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #30)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:54 PM

144. gun control doesn't work in other countries?

or are Europe, Canada, Australia and Japan just flukes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:51 PM

37. 26 people were not beaten to death with a bong on Friday n/t

Nor were 12 people killed and 58 injured by a Timothy Leary advocate swinging blotter paper around in Aurora in July.

So on down the line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:47 AM

56. Do you honestly believe that passing a law banning whatever is going to stop people from

 

meeting that demand? Prohibition has never worked, not once. Ever.

So you and all the nice white people will feel better and the people that want their guns, most of whom will probably be white, will pay vicious criminals lots of dollars to get them. And here's a special bonus for you, the new gun lords won't have any qualms about fully automatic rifles and pistols, silencers & suppressors, armor piercing rounds, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:11 AM

59. This bullshit again. "People will break the law, so don't bother having a law!"

Prohibition of alcohol and drugs fail for some simple reasons.

One, they're fucking easy to make and transport. You can make a few thousand dollars' worth of cocaine for about two bucks, and ferry it around very easily. This low cost of production and ease of transport combine with prohibition to make the profit to cost ratio astronomical and encourage the trade. I'm no expert, but I don't think you can make an automatic rifle for a few cents and hike it across the border stuffed up your ass to sell for a couple grand.

Two, illicit substances are generally regarded as only truly being harmful to the people who partake of them, if that. This perception of "not hurting anybody but me" makes the prohibition look rather ridiculous and actually encourages breaking the ban, just to show the law what for. Maybe if every time a gun-user did something dumb with their guns, only their own heads got blown off, that would be different (oddly this would be called "malfunction" and such an item would possibly face recall... ERMAGERD PERHERBISHUN!)

The more expensive and more prohibitive to move an item is, the higher the costs are, the lower the profits, the greater risk of detection and punishment, thus the greater the success of prohibition. The more widely an item is recognized as having an inherent cost to others, the more likely people on the "buying" end are going to honor the ban and not seek the product - take for example trade in illicit ivory.

Will it be 100% effective? Of course not, no law ever is - if they were, then laws would be fucking redundant. There is always a black market for proscribed items. The idea is not to halt the trade, but to curb and diminish it, and to bring penalties to those who persist anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:36 AM

60. You're right. You're not an expert. This is a trade that you can learn by mail filling out a form on

 

a matchbook. The only reason that it's not more common today is because it's not very profitable and it's not very profitable because people can get them from factories pretty cheaply. So what, are you going to try to track down everyone with a lathe and a workshop? Do you know why the AK is so popular, particularly in poor countries? Because it is really cheap and easy to make and it works better than the expensive stuff this guy used.

What even you cannot argue about is that there is a huge demand, and prohibition makes whatever is prohibited much more valuable. Are you starting to see a connection here?

What works is to reduce the motivation. Why do these people do these things? How can we find them and help them?

Oh wait, that is hard. Can't make any serious effort to do that. It's much better to pretend to solve the problem by passing useless and unenforceable laws and move until it happens again. Then we can go through this yet again, and pass stricter laws and walk away until it happens again...

I don't care about the laws, they won't effect me. I do care about stopping this, all of it. Not just the horrors that occasionally make the news, but all of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:11 PM

78. So now that you've thrown your little fit, you're done. Gee, I wonder why we never

 

seem to be able to solve any problems?

Prohibition of anything where demand exists doesn't work. never has never will. Reducing the demand is what works, but doing that is hard and you certainly don't want to try to do anything that is hard.

But you go right ahead, scream and cry and stomp your little feet for a few days, I'm sure it will make you feel better. Meanwhile, 47 more people died Saturday, 47 Sunday, 47 yesterday, and the next 47 are being killed today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #78)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:48 PM

94. Actually, it does....

We've had uber-strict rules against the private ownership of fully-automatic weapons, and these are rarely ever used in crimes. And other countries have strict laws on all types of firearms, and clearly it works there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #94)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:41 AM

110. Actually it doesn't. Everybody in America that really wants a full-auto rifle/pistol

 

has one or can get one. I know that here in Las Vegas and in Scottsdale there are several places that specialize in letting people shoot full-auto weapons for exorbitant fees and they are always busy every day all year long. Some people come here from all over the country, and the world, just to shoot them.

You'll have to define the term rarely; Use of rifles of all types in crimes are a tiny fraction of gun crimes and gangsters still have and use them with regularity. The other countries issue is the one worth looking into and in those nations where it has worked (all of them) have removed firearms from their culture entirely (or never had them in the first place). The thread on disarming the police has an abundance of information on it if you care to look at it.

The emphasis here is the demand. That's what we need to address. Passing a law prohibiting a few weapons that nobody can even define will have little positive effect, we've been down that road before and got the Gingrich Congress because of it. The it took the gun industry about 6 weeks to come out with new weapons that filled the same market but complied with the ban. And people kept being killed, mostly with pistols.

One last point. The absolutely surest and proven way to reduce crime of all types, including gun crimes, is widespread prosperity. When people are gainfully employed and doing well, they stop beating, killing, and robbing one another with absolute predictability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #56)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:58 PM

124. I would love the weapons your 'gun-runners' .....

can make in their basement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #124)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:12 PM

137. To own? Why?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #137)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:47 PM

165. Because it would likely blow-up...

in the face of any one crazy enough to use it. Making it the best type of selective gun control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #165)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:27 AM

166. You apparently have come to the erroneous conclusion that firearms are some

 

highly advanced and complicated mechanism. A 10 year old can build a perfectly serviceable firearm in his back yard with dad's toolbox, a bicycle handlebar, a nail, a rubber band, and a clothespin. It won't be very accurate, but it won't blow up in his face.

That's one of the biggest problems we face in trying to get rid of the gun culture in America. Our most vocal and strident allies know absolutely nothing about them. You have to be pretty fucking stupid as well as incompetent to make a rifle that will actually blow up in your face.

Again, do you have any idea why the AK-47 (the real one, not the every other rifle that a reporter sees at a photo-op) is the most popular rifle in the world?

I didn't think so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #166)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:23 AM

167. My "erroneous conclusion"?

I seem home made before-how many people would have died if the Sandy Hooks killer had used your 10 years olds bike handle gun? How long would it take to reload? Could your 10 year old make a AK-47 out of his bike handle? How many rounds could he get off before that tube became scrapemetal? I wouldn't use it more then once.

AK-47's are popular because they kill people. Repeatedly.

Just because the concept is simple doesn't make the creation easy, but feel free to "missunderstand" me. I kind of think you will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #167)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:07 AM

168. I see what you did there.

 

Wow, I'm totally outfoxed by your "Look! Over there!" strategy.

And thanks for so perfectly answering the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:54 PM

10. Big K/R from a gun owner

I am on board with every one of those ideas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 05:58 PM

11. How about a skills test to obtain a license?

Not unlike a drivers test....take a course, fire the weapon in front of a police registrar etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rgbecker (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:15 PM

72. That's what gun nuts want to avoid

That's why they want 30 round mags - their idea is to sling as much lead at something as you can until you hit it. Stupid, and proof that they can't aim their weapons.

the test:
Take apart and reassemble the gun.
Gun inspection, down to component level
Eyesight exam
Written exam
Range test: they have two shots to hit a stationary target, three to hit a moving target. You miss, you fail the test, and you lose your guns until you can come back and pass the test.

I would add: If you get caught using a firearm while committing a crime, you get the chain gang. Most of these criminals don't care about jail time. But they will, for sure, think twice if they see thugs out on the street digging holes, weeding, busting up concrete, etc., at hard labor, 5 days a week, 9 hours a day, for the duration of their incarceration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #72)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:35 PM

91. Why is it

 

that when people are against something or someone, they tend to use insults instead of facts?

Oh, and by the way, if obtaining a license to drive a car went under the same tests as you propose for getting a firearm, then most of the population would not be able to legally drive. That being said, more people are killed in the United States by car accidents than guns...so then shouldn't it be harder to obtain a car than a gun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bw3517 (Reply #91)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:46 PM

102. Cars aren't designed for the express purpose of killing

Guns are. The hurdles must be higher.
Also, cars see significantly more usage day-to-day than guns (for now, anyways) and that might be skewing your "more lethal" "statistic"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bw3517 (Reply #91)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:19 AM

106. I see what you did there...

You thought that we are stupid enough to let that fly right over our heads didn't you?

How would you go about administering the "same" tests for driving as for shooting a gun? Do guns stop for stoplights, or people in crosswalks? Do guns have speed limits? Do guns have to stay in their own lanes? Do guns need headlights at night? Does a gun owner need to signal when he or she is about turn (or shoot)? Does a gun need to pull over for emergency vehicles?

You state: "more people are killed in the United States by car accidents than guns (emphasis added)..." Get it? Not intentionally, but by car ACCIDENTS. By the Gungeon's own accounting, deaths by accidental shooting are very rare. So that must mean that most of the 30,000 gun deaths a year are NOT accidental, but were in fact intentional (murder and suicide).

You gun apologists never seem to learn that your use of these false equivalency comparisons(masquerading as "facts") only make you look even less intelligent. A gun is the fucking weapon of choice for killing a living thing, and NOT a fork, a spoon, a shovel, a plane, a train, or a fucking automobile. It is what a gun was specifically designed and manufactured to do: kill living things, including innocent human children killed by someone who should never have been near a fucking gun.

Now please, go back to the Gungeon and let the adults discuss what steps should be taken to rid our country of the blight of too many guns, in too many hands, for all the wrong reasons. It is way past time to begin undoing the damage done by the NRA through their bought and paid for politicians. It is time to reclaim this country from the scourge of gun violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #72)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:14 PM

130. Sounds good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:13 PM

16. Parents of mentally ill children

Should not be allowed to have guns in their home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PADemD (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:32 PM

34. I got rid of mine for that very reason

four years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Throckmorton (Reply #34)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:08 PM

39. I worked with someone who did the same

fifteen+ years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:18 PM

18. I was thinking the same thing plus some more. Every gun owner should

have to register their gun that they own now and that would include me and my only gun: a .22 cal rifle.

There should also be more gun buy back programs.

Mandatory gun safety classes and gun locks with every gun purchase.

All guns must be safely and securely stored when not in use (gun locks or gun safes). I have a gun lock on my rifle.

A tax on each bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:22 PM

19. 6. And re-register existing firearms . . .

Some of which would be deemed "nonregistrable." (Auto- and semi-auto rifles, for instance). After a certain date, any other gun found goes into a metal shredder and the owner in the pokey.

7. Establish civic armories in which guns would be stored unless in use for armory-sanctioned activities.

8. Imposed intentionally crippling regulations on firearm manufacturers to the extent that they are shut down.

And those magazines? How about two rounds, max?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrModerate (Reply #19)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:42 PM

36. What's that shadow on your face?

Ah...I see.....it's your tongue, protruding like an erection from within your cheek.

Never mind...carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrModerate (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:33 AM

64. 7 is unconstitutional per Heller

The SC said that mandated trigger locks for guns while in a home were unconstitutional because it prevented the owner from using his gun for self defense.

If it renders the gun useless for self.defense it is unconstitutional. Your idea does exactly that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #64)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:12 PM

83. Well, then it's time to do something . . .

About a Constitutional Amendment that's grown obsolete and/or a Supreme Court that makes wildly stupid decisions (and not just one!).

Especially given that the Amendement is silent on what individual gun owners are supposed to do with them (other than fulfill militia duties when called to do so).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrModerate (Reply #83)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:15 PM

84. So you are looking for a multi-generational solution?

for that is about as long as it will take.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #84)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:36 PM

99. As opposed to doing nothing . . .

Or something with purely political rather than practical effects, yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrModerate (Reply #99)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:44 AM

114. There are many practical things that can be done

Last edited Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:55 PM - Edit history (1)

strengthen background checks, refocus the justice system on violent crime and healthcare reform for starters.

Easy to do and much more likely to get broad popular support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #114)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:51 PM

118. Let's do them, too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:24 PM

20. Are there any penalties involved for failure to follow the rules?

Maybe renew every year....a lot of things can happen in a year. I like the ballistics test BEFORE purchase. Alot.

Maybe a huge fine for commiting fraud per the "doctor note" thing... Maybe that should be tighter. Remember VA Tech? THat guy had been to doctors, yet his family sent him to VA Tech. to get rid of him.
Many families try to protect their relative who is mentally ill and it goes undiagnosed for years because the family is ashamed/afraid of the person. They need to identify mentally ill persons BEFORE they shoot someone.
The FBI already has profilers who do a great job identifying possible perps... could we train more and put them to work?
I like the idea of carefully monitoring ammo sales. Why would anyone need to buy huge amounts of ammo for "home protection"? What do you consider reasonable here? I like the comparison to the Sudafed and fertilizer. The FBI showed up at a friend's house because someone in the house tried to buy a 50 gallon drum of phosphorus. That person was/is a schizophrenic. They were pretty fast with their response, because that amount could have blown up half their town.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thecrow (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:28 PM

43. If you put two mags through a gun, and then clean the barrel...

the fingerprint is toast. Yearly re-fingerprinting isn't enough. This technology is essentially unworkable.

Something more workable, would be registering ammo in lots, and include in the powder, tags that can be used to identify the source of the ammo. Harder to avoid. Still won't catch every criminal, but hell of a lot more workable than BF's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #43)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:34 AM

67. They tried to implement the powder tags at one time, during the Clinton Administration.

 

The NRA and the Republicans killed and buried it. Smacked too much of sanity for the gun freaks to allow, I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #67)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:03 PM

70. Bring it back. Make it an either-or proposition.

One can work, the other is a unicorn. One is really expensive, one is only a little bit expensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:30 PM

21. Insurance & accountabllity

 

Add insurance, and accountabilty

Insurance: Enough insurance, payable yearly, to pay off any liabilities caused by your gun.

Accountability: If your gun was used in a crime, you would be responsible. Even if it was stolen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:52 PM

25. Sounds pretty good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:54 PM

26. no one has a right to own a gun outside of the construct of a well regulated militia......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:57 PM

27. Good ideas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:59 PM

28. As an addendum to No. 5 . . .

This ban should include easily modifiable magazines such as those that merely require removing a pin or cutting/replacing a spring to allow higher capacity. Without that addendum, the law is meaningless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:05 PM

29. I like it. Here are some more I would suggest:

People are allowed to buy entry level firearms with the background check you propose.

After meeting the necessary requirements (which demonstrate responsibility, safety knowledge, gun care, etc.) a person may be certified to purchase more powerful guns. There may different paths for collector, hunter, etc.

If a gun registered to you is used in a crime, you lose your certifications. If a gun registered to you is used by someone else and an accident occurs, you lose your certifications.

We'll never be safe from a suicidal madman with a weapon. It only makes sense to take simple steps to minimize it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:13 PM

31. A Good Start To Meaningful Change

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:28 PM

32. I agree 100%

Also, when buying ammo, or guns your name goes into a federal database and if you purchase more than 3 guns, or 100 rounds or some other amount, the ATF is notified. Much along the line of how the SEC is or IRS is notified when you deposit, I believe $10,000 cash into your bank account. Just my thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:30 PM

33. This makes total sense unless your're a crazied tea bagger with a desire to take down the govt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:32 PM

35. Terrific ideas! I like them all!

Gonna post 'em on my own thread, too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022008662

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:51 PM

38. Sounds like Canada

K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:18 PM

40. As long as the same applies for the Police. nm.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:21 PM

41. I like the idea of taxes going towards mental health....but

 

but creating a black market in gun sales with the Federal Govt in charge....?

We have gang wars for control in the War On Drugs. If we add firearms....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:25 PM

42. Inline.

1. I would support this. (Except the ballistic test, which, at the cost of millions of dollars, has availed the trial program state one, single, conviction, after 10 years. This 'technology' (ballistic fingerprinting) does not work, and worked in that one case only because the firearm was apparently not used after purchase, aside from the shots at the site where the crime was committed. If you are curious about the technical details why, I can provide. Even re-fingerprinting the gun yearly is likely insufficient to get this technology to actually solve crimes)

2. I support. We already do some of this, but there are sometimes reporting problems between the state-federal levels. This requires some additional things you didn't specify: enforcement money. When a background check fails, we need enforcement to follow-up, because this individual has now 'outed' themselves as a likely threat, and you could short-circuit that person going to a black market source for a gun, by intervening. You also need the police to follow up with people who have had permits revoked to collect guns. This is not currently done. Needs to be done.

3. Support.

4. This is already done, more than an 11% excise tax on both, currently funding wildlife habitat restoration. Do you wish to redirect funds, or simply add on? What percentage did you have in mind? Tentatively support this idea.

5. Support. I can live without mine. Keep in mind, anyone with access to a middle school metal shop can make these in no time, but few criminals would bother.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:25 PM

73. Re: #4 -

I believe it is only 10% now. I have not seen a list of the current exceptions/exemptions to the surtax.

As for adding on an additional amount or removing the current tax, I think the states should become more responsible for managing habitat. Currently they pay 25% and the federal government provides 75% of the funds. Reverse the percentages - state 75% and fed money 25%. Move the freed up money to mental health programs and also up the tax to 12 - 14%.

my .02

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:29 PM

44. The Bill of Responsibilities

How about a "Bill of Responsibilities" as a counter to our rights.

Libel is an example (albeit a poor one with various decisions from various courts) of a basic responsibility toward the 1st Amendment.

Here's a long list. It could be altered to face reality.

1. You must be of age. (I'd recommend 18.) You must submit to regular retesting. (I'd recommend every 5 years until 65 and then every 2 or 3 years due to possible deteriorating mental and physical faculties.)

2. You must have a full physical and mental examination (and be re-examined for re-licensing).

3. You must take and successfully complete an initial 6 weeks course in gun safety and use (and be required to take a shortened course for re-licensing).

4. You must pass a written test on gun use, safety and responsibility (and be retested regularly).

5. You must pass a physical test in all of these areas (and be retested regularly).

6. Once you pass these requirements you can obtain a license to purchase a hunting gun such as a single shot rifle or shotgun. Hand guns are permitted only for police, military or other law enforcement needs. No owner would be allowed more than 2 functioning weapons.

7. All gun collections must be rendered harmless and unusable as weapons.

8. All hunting must be in season and all hunting grounds must be in designated zones only.

9. All target ranges must be licensed and in designated zones. Public safety is paramount.

10. All gun owners must carry liability insurance. Without insurance your license is forfeited and your guns confiscated by insurance company.

11. All gun owners must have an approved gun safe in their homes. All guns must be kept unloaded in that safe unless in use. Ammunition is to be kept separately in the same safe.

12. Until hunting time has begun all guns must be kept unloaded and in a safe container with a trigger guard. When hunting time has ended the trigger guard is replaced and the gun placed in a locked case.

13. Gun may only be purchased in person at licensed stores. Gun my not be resold except to licensed stores.

14. Any gun lost, misplaced or stolen must be reported to the police. If no report is received all liability for such guns remains with the owner.

15. All guns need to be tested and registered by the manufacturer before sales. All guns should have a ballistics "fingerprint" on file. The manufacturer is responsible until the gun is purchased by a licensed store. The store is responsible until the gun is purchased by a licensed gun owner.

16. A tax must be applied to all guns and ammunition. (I'd recommend 10 ~ 15%.)

Draconian? Not to the thousands of annual victims. Where are their right today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:40 PM

45. I'm okay with exempting single-shot black powder devices & National Guard service.

The National Guard is the logical extension of "well regulated militia." Want an unlimited license? Then please pass a physical, and we'll see you one weekend a month and for a couple weeks every year. We also expect you to pitch in when your state gets hit by $Disaster. The license lasts as long as your service. (You can't pass the physical? Then you're looking at a more limited license. We limit in practical terms the rights to assembly, speech, and access to the courts, too, and those are all in the Bill of Rights. Well-regulated. It's in the Amendment. Please protest to the Framers. Line forms at the TARDIS.)

Alternately, firearms in 1787 were limited to muzzle-loading, black powder, single shot devices. They could be almighty big, but they took between 20 and 40 seconds to reload. They could be very accurate, but that took a lot of practice. (I'm interested in the Napoleonic Wars, so essentially, the same era in terms of technology.) Also, even the pistols of the day were freakin' awkward. Warfare of the time was a team endeavor. If bow hunters today and 18th and 19th century hunters could manage to bring home the venison, duck, goose and boar, so can we. Hunting is a skill one can't pick up by paying some money and not practicing.

Lastly, today, the median household income is about $45K. In 1787, after adjustments for fluctuations, a single, basic rifle cost the equivalent of between 10 and 15% of annual income. (The numbers get funky.) Today, they're around 1%. Industrialization has been very, very good to us, but this consumer good is too cheap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicat (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:43 PM

75. Error.

Girandoni repeating rifle. 20 shots. Killed humans just fine. Went into service with the Austrians in 1780, and some Americans had them as well.

Edit: Interesting that you mention the Napoleonic Wars, the Austrians used that rifle against the French. Historians disagree somewhat on to what degree of annoyance it actually caused, but a lot of history books recorded that Napoleon was pissed about the rifle, and ordered that no prisoners be taken with the rifle, that the people using it be killed on the spot. Again, that story is contested somewhat, by credible sources, but that's been bandied about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #75)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:53 PM

87. Thanks!

I hadn't come across that reference (at least, it's not in my top-level mental index... My interest is primarily intelligence and communications.)

You wouldn't happen to have a reference to a source, would you? (Hopes...)

Huh... Interesting if that anecdote was true -- essentially, Napoleon was calling it a WMD and considering its users to be what we'd call agents of rogue states.

Thanks again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicat (Reply #87)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:21 PM

98. Sure.

Basic background on the hardware itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle

More in-depth info, but I do not vouch for the accuracy of all of this info. Some is correct, some is unknown. http://beemans.net/Austrian%20airguns.htm

This is one of the sources that says it did not see use against Napoleon, only against Prussia and Turkey.

It's a fascinating firearm, light years ahead of contemporary black powder weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:49 PM

46. So, does common sense tell us where the money to do these things can be found?

Does it tell us the unintended consequences that these actions will have for our already fragile privacy rights in other areas? What other rights would require a doctor's note to exercise?

I'm not sure common sense is what's at work here....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:58 PM

47. Well then let's do nothing

Because it would cost too much!

Sounds like a typical right-wing response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #47)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:36 PM

49. Why do you feel that something MUST be done?

And why must that "something" always be a restiction on MY rights when I've done absolutely nothing wrong?

Imagine how much more effective the money you want to spend on this would be if spent on mental health care...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:53 PM

53. After last week, you can say that with a straight face?

Then you can go to hell, along with Wayne Lapierre and the other NRA asshole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:40 PM

92. Is this how you talk

 

to everyone who uses inanimate objects that are sometimes used to kill adults and children by other people? Many, many children and adults are killed by automobiles every year. I still support letting people use automobiles. I guess I can go to hell too. Me and those Ford, Chevy, and Dodge assholes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bw3517 (Reply #92)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:18 PM

119. See ya later, troll

n/m

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #49)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:54 PM

54. Are you human? Why DON'T you feel something should be done?

I really question where you're coming from, given that little children were just fucking executed. You have a sick sense of priorities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #54)


Response to bw3517 (Reply #93)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:39 PM

101. You're among your betters

Run along, guntot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bw3517 (Reply #93)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:24 AM

108. No, we should ban

twits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #49)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:35 AM

116. What about the rights of those 20 children?

Why would you suppose your ability to stockpile WMD should be more important than their right to live? They didn't do anything wrong. They were completely innocent. How is it that you are unable to think about anyone's rights but your own? Twice as many pre- school children die from guns as police die on duty. Don't you find that shocking? What grave crime did those Babies commit that should warrant their execution? How many thousands have to die before you decide your capacity to play war isn't the most important thing in life? Or will you never care about human life?

Your attempt to scapegoat mental illness is a canard, and bigoted. There is no correlation between mental illness and crime, whereas 70% of all homicides involve guns.

No right is absolute. Society must balance the rights of all of its citizens. Guns long ago surpassed human life in value in this country. There is a kind of selfishness and callousness displayed by NRA types that is impossible to comprehend. Enough. We will tolerate it no longer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Llewlladdwr (Reply #49)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:41 AM

117. Yes, it's all about YOU

The human rights of the rest of us and our children are inconsequential. Yours are the only rights that matter. You must have the right to stockpile the capacity to kill thousands, and the fact That thousands of children die every year because of guns is meaningless. They are only human beings. They don't matter. Those babies havent figured out how to align themselves with corporate gun interests, so their rights are meaningless. You and those like you who exist in some paranoid world that makes you feel you need 30 to 100 bullets to walk through the street are all that matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #117)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:42 PM

121. +1000

Great post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:38 PM

50. Ballistics tests are a waste of time

I am assuming when you use the term "Ballistic Tests" you are referring to actual pictures of bullets fired from a gun NOT how that bullet travels through the air.

Ballistics test work, if you mean the markings on bullets after they have been fired, are only good if you get two rounds fire close enough to each other so you can get a match. The problem such ballistics is the result of wear and tear on the barrel, shooting more rounds or even cleaning the bore can change ballistics. Remember most barrels are worn down after firing 20,000 to 25,000 rounds. In a modern Assault rifle that can be done in normal combat in about 3-4 months. In such conditions the ballistics can change by the hour simply by the mere volume of shooting.

While, Civilian weapons are fired less often then military weapons, firing just a few rounds would change ballistics so much that that the one on record would be useless within a week of its bring fired and recorded.

It is for this reason ballistics are used only in actual shootings where the weapon can be tracked down. In most such cases, it is HARD to fire the weapon so that its ballistics are changed, but merely cleaning the barrel may be enough to make the ballistic test just show it is the type of gun that COULD have been fired, not that it was fired.

Funding mental health treatment from the sales of firearms will effect every US agency involved with the environment. Present US law taxes firearms 15% for Federal Conservation efforts. To add a tax for Mental Health care would reduce sales of firearms and thus reduce the money for these agencies. The reason the 15% tax rate has not changed since the early 1900s is that if you increase it to much more, you will get more people finding ways around the tax. This is a problem with any sales or use tax, it is more a nuisance then a tax to avoid up to about 10%, above that level you start to see massive evasion of such taxes. Given the restrictions on who can sell a firearm, the 15% tax rate is low enough NOT to encourage evasion, but if you raise it to much higher, you are asking for evasion. Such evasion will encourage illegal gun sales which does NOT help the people with Mental Health or the limited funds for Federal Conservation efforts.

The same with mental health reports, doctors will just sign what ever is needed if and when they are paid. If you hold the Doctor Liable for such reports, then they will NOT do such reports, but then force people into the illegal arms market (remember prohibition and today's war of Drugs? Remember ow successful they have been given no legal substitution is possible?). Legal Substitution, i,e, Restricted but legal Alcohol sales drove most moonshiners out of business, but if no legal sales are possible for most people, then illegal business boomed. Thus, by requiring a doctor's report and punishing the doctor if it is wrong is just driving people into the illegal arms market, something we do NOT need to expand.

We already regulate the sale of firearms, the problem is what happens if both parents die and the Children inherit the weapons? This comes up in Bars quite often, the law is clear, for example take a the one year heir, such a baby will own the bar due to his parent's death, but can not enter it for the baby is under 21. In many ways the same for firearms among family members, People transfer weapons among family members all the time, just like Automobile ownership (through off road vehicles would be a better comparison, for the State hold no title for such vehicles unlike automobiles that operate on the highways). The problem is how do you handle such situations without TAKING the property of the Child? The answer is something like the law is now, private transfer is permitted if among family members, unless it is illegal for the person who inherits the item to inherit the item, then such person has to dispose of it in a commercially reason matter (i.e. sell it or give it away, but not touch it if we have a felon that inherits a firearm)

Now in the most recent mass killing it is clear the large capacity magazine was an essential part of the reason for so many dead (Just like the easy access to explosives was the key to the even larger death toll in the 1927 Bath School house massacre, where 58 people died). These magazines permitted constant fire from the rifle. The shooter seems to have been well trained in how to operate the weapon. Ar-15 actions, while reliable, are noted for jamming. You have to be trained on what to do to unjam it quickly (Most just "jams" can be fixed within seconds). In the Aurora Movie Shooting, that shooter seems NOT have been trained on what to do if the weapon jammed. Thus he ended up throwing away his AR-15 Type rifle when it jammed and reverting to his less effective pistols.

Bath School disaster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

Aurora Movie shooting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Aurora_shooting

Thus, part of the reason for the mass death was the shooter had the training on how to use his weapon. That was a bigger factor then the large capacity Magazine. The problem is it is hard to prevent such training if someone wants to do it. This occurred in 1997 At Penn State, a student took a 7mm Mauser Bolt Action rifle and opened fire, killing 1, wounding three. What worked against that shooter is she decided to fire from an open location, so people had places to run to AND someone could charge her from a position she could NOT see. That was NOT the case in the School, the hallways contained any attack to two directions and while the Principal and the School Nurse did attack (which is what you do in such situations). In effect the Penn State Shooter had the weapon to do a mass killing but her choice of position permitted her capture AND permitted most of her potential victims to run for cover. People tend to forget, that 5 round magazine 7mm Mauser is an ideal weapon for mass murder, it has enough fire power to keep most attackers at bay and enough fire power to do what this shooter did with his AR-15.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetzel_Union_Building_shooting

As to recording rounds purchased, you have a problem, it is that the US reloads it ammunition and US Ammunition is noted for being re-loadable, all you need is powder and primers (and generally a sizing tool to make sure the expended shell is sized back down to size). I first ran across this unpleasant "fact" during the Vietnam War. During that War, the US wanted to aid certain guerrillas in Laos, but did NOT want to give them any ammunition that could be traced back to the US. The problem was the US wanted to produce the Ammunition but the US and Canada are the only country, as a general rule, that use British designed Boxer primers, due to the fact they are one piece and thus easy to be removed for the Shell to be reloaded. The rest of the work uses Brendan Primers, designed by an American during the Civil War and permitted easier mass production but harder to reload. Due to this problem the US had to look for a country that uses Boxer primers and mark the ammunition as coming from that country. The US went as far away as it could, to Canada.

I bring this up, for reloading is done in the US and is extensive. More and more of it is on the net. Thus restricting who has access to such ammunition is a waste of time.

Sorry, you proposal will not work for the above reasons, a better set of social improvements would be as follows:

1. Increase spending on Mental Health Care, including a two way system. System "A" is a voluntary system where people can agree to get Mental Health care at no cost AND they can keep their weapons. I mention the later requirement for I have run across a couple of people, who were in need of mental health care but would NOT apply for it, for they MAY lose their weapons. Sorry, we want them to seek care, more then we want to take their weapons away.

The alternative system, what I call System "B" is that anyone can report anyone else as a danger to themselves and others (this is the law today, so no change is needed as to reporting, through that people can make such a report should be advertised on TV and other media), taken to a place of mental care and checked out. If the person opts for system A no problems, if he refuses to permit care then the intake specialist should do a quick analysis and either commit him or not. If committed held for three days and then the patient's case is reviewed by a Judge. If the Judge, based on the report of the Psychiatrists keeps the person in the Mental Care Hospital such enforced care should be grounds to deny access to any weapons in any house the patient may live in.

2. Increase spending for Mental Health Care, including housing for such people in a structured housing situation (i.e. they MUST be in at certain times, they must do certain things and if they do not they go into more restrictive housing). Increase spending on people who visits and support families with such people in their households. This will NOT be cheap, unless you understand it is the best way to catch such shooters before they actually kill anyone. You have to spend money to prevent losses as occurred in Connecticut but so far, as a society we have been reluctant to pay for such treatment.

3. In High School, where Schizophrenia tends to develop in males (Schizophrenia tends to develop in females in ten years later) AND other problems start to occur, students should be reported by their teachers (and parents or anyone else) and evaluated by Psychologists to see if they have any long term problems. I do not mean normal teen age hang ups. i.e, Fights in Middle School, sexual language etc (teachers know what I mean) but something more. Such Children should be reported AND seen by an outside Psychologists to determine if anything is wrong. If, in the opinion of the Psychologists there is no real problem, nothing more, but if the Psychologists determined something is up, then a referral to a Psychiatrist is on order.

The reason for the above is Psychologists do a better job of evaluating patients as such patients are today, while Psychiatrists, being Medical Doctors, are better on giving treatment.

All of the above has to be paid by the State or Federal Government, the local school will NOT be able to come up with the funds and neither will the families (and it has to be funded based on need of students NOT a formula as used in Pennsylvania where money for special need children are allocated by total students NOT total students with special education needs). Without funds any program is doomed and taxing firearms will NOT bring in the money needed.

I bring up the above for most shooters are NOT people without a history, but people with a history, including untreated mental health care.

4. All School rooms should have more then one exit, the alternative some exit OTHER then into the hallway the other entrance is in. Had these Children been able to get outside, the loss would have been much lower (as was the case in Penn State). I know this is expensive, but it also permits quicker evacuation of schools in such situations. I know schools will hate them, giving kids alternative ways to leave is some teachers nightmare but the classic solution is a door to the outside that can NOT be use to enter the School room. Such one way doors have been around for over 100 years, easy retrofit to any school with one floor, more expensive in a two or more room school. If done right could make the school look nice, have a "porch" on each floor with steps leading downward (The ugly alternative would be old fashion fire escapes with a door on the bottom floor to prevent people from using them to enter the school).

I am sorry, like fire, such nut cases should be included in the design of any new school. Getting the Children away from the School is the best way to reduce such losses and if you have more then one way to exit each school class room it would be hard for one gun man to kill to many. I know the idea would be no one get killed but we can NOT even guarantee that is case of a fire in school. Remember Napoleon's famous Maxim, to defend everywhere is to defend no where, the same with class rooms, the best defense is to get the children out and dispersed. Do not try to stop such a shooter, it is a waste of time and resources, the solution is to minimize harm if one should break in and that can best be done by dispersion as what happened in Penn State.

95 % of all crimes (including School Shootings) are done with pistols and I have no objection to restrictions on who should have access to pistols. On the other hand restrictions on Rifles and Shotguns are not just cost effective, knives and "Blunt instruments" kill more people then Rifles and Shotguns. In fact more people in most states (there are some exceptions) were killed by Hands, fists and other parts of the body then by Rifles AND Shotguns (West Virginia, Texas, Tennessee. South Carolina, Ohio, North Carolina, Montana, Missouri, Mississippi, Minnesota Michigan, illinois and Indiana are the exceptions with more people killed by Rifles and Shotguns then by Hands and feet):

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats

Murder by Weapons by state:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

In fact this shooting is going to screw Connecticut's numbers:
In 2011 the numbers for Connecticut were
54 were murdered by Pistols,
1 by a Rifle.
1 by a Shotgun
38 weapon unreported, but probably a pistol.
18 by knives,
10 by other weapons (generally a "blunt instruments" but maybe explosives) and
6 by fists, hand or feet.

There is a old saying in the law "Tough Cases make bad law" and that is true of tragedies like this one, something has to be done, but lets not pass an ineffective law just because we can (in many ways the 1968 Gun Control Law was passed in such a situation and reason it is considered bad law is that it was rushed into passage due to the various assassinations of the 1960s, a better law could have been made if both sides had taken more time and did it right). The assault weapons ban was a similar bad law, making a weapon illegal based on various aspects for the writers of the law could NOT agree on how to define an "Assault Weapon" without making various other rifles illegal. This was a "wall" they could not get around and thus a bad law was written (With its provision to expire in ten years, which it did),

A better law would be all cities of a certain size must have a free range where people must register to shoot (or if a private range, connected to a central computer to report who is at the range). People, to use the range must report what weapon they are firing. The reason the range would be free is to encourage people to go to the range and self report they shooting. Patterns of firing could then be seen and if certain pattern is found, that shooter would be investigated behind his or her back (check with his neighbors, friends etc check any criminal or psychiatric history). Some one who comes for years and fired 1000 or more rounds, don't worry about him he just likes to shoot. Someone who comes in one week, shoots 1000 rounds, then does not come back, he should be checked out, to many round in to short a time period to be a shooter. It is reports like that that are needed, not if someone purchased an AR-15. The real test if how often is it fired. To much over a very short time period, something is up. After a quick check it may just be a group of friend who got together to due some firing, it may also be someone planning some sort of massive attack. A check on who did the shooting can quickly determine which is which (and often can be done by looking at who else was present or not present.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:45 PM

51. Okay. It think there is ground we can work from.

1. I prefer opening the background checks to private citizens, I don't like the private and for profit middleman but can live with it the logistics are unreasonable.

2. I think the background check for concealed carry works, I'd leave it at that. No competent psychiatrist can make an educated prognosis based on a stop by, a medical doctor would likely be guessing, and both would have a big increase in the cost of malpractice insurance probably resulting in refusing to sign off either way (aka back door systemic ban having nothing to do with the individual.
In any event, if you are going to try and put the ball in medical professionals laps then I think they should be involved in the entire process early and by early I mean during drafting of legislation you would make them point people for.

I'd also add that if a person is diagnosed as mentally ill, they are again eligible for licensing seven years release from care (to demonstrate they have not relapsed. Just as we account for a person not remaining stable we should account for healing. You close it out and you build a perverse incentive for people to not seek and receive care they need.

I also believe that once you have served your time that all rights should be restored and that conviction should not be a bar to cross for those who have served their time, a fully discharged felon should just be a citizen across the board. This has nothing to do with guns at all and has consistently been my strongly held belief.
We shouldn't be throwing people away like we currently practice and it makes folks more likely to be repeat offenders and acts as a barrier to meaningful rehabilitation. I could live with a plus seven rule here too, understanding the concern but eventually a person who has paid their debt to society should be restored to full rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

I empathize with your reasoning and caution but I think it is a toxic as hell way to run a society that puts people back into population. If the people are too dangerous to re-join society then they shouldn't be out at all.

3. I'm not sure of the objective here? Monitor for what and then act based on what? Is there some past incident this monitoring program would have prevented? It is stupid to waste resources tracking sudafed too. The fertilizer may make some sense but I'd like to see the justification after the years since the initiative.
Maybe there is deterrence value too.

4. Sounds good as long as the taxes are not used as a prohibition, meaning reasonable amounts. I'll float 5% of pre-tax cost.

5. You don't need it is not much of a rationale. I'm open to the clause because I wouldn't use such an unreliable piece of equipment and agree that it isn't needed but am unclear on the bottom line of the purpose, opinions on need aren't reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 02:26 AM

57. I actually take issue with #5, those things jam more easily, which is a good thing.

If the guy knows he only has ten rounds, he's going to practice speed reloads and bring a ton of mags with him (and ten round mags are VERY reliable). If he has a 30 round mag he might practice more, but might think he doesn't need to as much and will slow down on the reload, that said, 30 round mags don't jam that often either but more than 10 rounders. The shooter in Aurora had a 100 round mag, it jammed, and that possibly bought some folks some extra time since he likely had trouble clearing it.

So just saying, it's not quite crystal clear on mag sizes, smaller mags might actually make the shootings worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:26 AM

62. As part of the process of getting a gun license

you have to take a gun safety course. All gun registrations and licenses have to be renewed on a regular basis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:42 AM

65. Hubby and I have been talking about this for a few days.

Add requirement for liability insurance as with automobile drivers.

Add requirement to report lost/stolen guns immediately. Owner to retain liability for injuries/death traceable to his gun until loss/theft reported.

Guns required to be in approved, locked containers when not in use.

Owner may not lend or allow use of gun by unlicensed persons.

License revoked on recommendation of physician, or on diagnosis with certain dementias/psych illnesses, including but not limited to alcoholism, drug addiction, paranoid schizophrenia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 03:54 PM

77. Now, post this on Facebook and say it came from Morgan Freeman, or Warren Buffett.

And then we might just get something done!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 04:52 PM

79. This is some of what I wrote to the President yesterday

and called CA legislators and Oregon too.

THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO ANNOUNCE THIS:::::

ANYONE OF THE 40% OF PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY WITH A UNREGISTERED GUN NEEDS TO REGISTER IT AND GET A THOROUGH BACKGROUND CHECK WITHIN A SPECIFIED NUMBER OF MONTHS OR TURN THEIR GUNS IN.

IF THEY ARE CAUGHT AFTER THAT TIME WITH A UNREGISTERED GUN THEY WILL GO TO PRISON FOR TWO YEARS AND OR A LARGE FINE LARGE LARGE FINE.

A HOTLINE IS BEING SET UP FOR THOSE ANNOMOUSLY TO REPORT IF THEY KNOW OF SOMEONE WHO HAS A UNREGISTERED WEAPON AFTER THE GRACE PERIOD IS OVER.

THIS WILL HELP IN GETTING PEOPLE TO GET RID OF THE UNREGISTERED GUN OR REGISTER ....THINK OF A MAD GIRLFRIEND CALLING OR A WORRIED MOTHER OR A SIBLING WHO IS CONCERNED...THIS WILL WORK MR. PRESIDENT DO THIS!

Yes it was in capitals to emphasize. I think if those who are not gang members or murderers just those who purchased guns that are unregistered then this may get some of these 40% registered or to be given up. I thought it was a good idea but I'm sure there are down sides people will see. Just was thinking if there is a serious action to get them registered just as we must have a driver's license or car insurance that it is the law or not drive drunk so too this must be taken seriously. Maybe after a time most will be registered from regular folk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:01 PM

81. This is moderate and well-reasonsed...

Which means that the NRA will opposed like a pack of rabid howler monkeys.

But this is an excellent suggestion!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:34 PM

85. How about some technological proposals.

1. RFID/NFC-based interlocks installed on all new weapons. The weapon's owner needs to be carrying an RFID tag or NFC device, which can be an RFID tag in a card, or a NFC-capable smartphone, or even an implanted RFID tag (sort of like when you get your dog or cat chipped at the vet in case he gets lost...) The gun would have an electronic interlock with an RFID/NFC reader built into it, paired to the owner's tag/device, and it will only unlock the gun and enable it to fire when the tag is detected. For the sake of those complaining that such interlocks are unreliable, I would recommend that these devices be engineered to "five-nines" reliability (In other words, 99.999% reliable - it works 99,999 times out of 100,000.) Rigging guns so they will not fire when in the hands of unauthorized people would save a lot of lives.

2. Mandatory gun cameras. As anyone who's ever seen a cell phone or web cam knows, digital camera technology is extremely miniaturizable. You can get a relatively inexpensive camera system with a digital camera-on-a-chip, a small battery, a micro-USB interface and a micro-SD card, in a package that can be built into the gun itself, or fit on many pistol's or rifle's accessory rails. The total size can be as small as the end of your pinky. Of course, at minimum, the camera would be rigged to take a picture every time the gun is fired. Alternative modes could include continuous recording in a loop (when the memory is exhausted, the camera starts overwriting old footage), recording triggered by a motion-detection algorithm (so when you pull the gun out of its holster or storage case, and the camera detects movement, it records), and so on. This could be very handy for investigations after someone's been shot. Oh sure, the smart criminal would disable these devices, but in many cases, they don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:22 PM

88. This is excellent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:34 PM

89. Not a bad idea at all!

Good thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:11 PM

90. No concealed or open carry. How can you know they aren't on their way to a massacre?

If you have a gun you are subject to being stopped. Period.

Exceptions very limited for under cover and very select professionals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to on point (Reply #90)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:48 PM

95. How can I be sure

 

that the next time you get into your car you aren't drunk? I guess we could make breathalyzers mandatory in every vehicle. How do I know you won't be texting while you drive? Lets ban cell phones. What about applying makeup? That isn't a necessity of life so it has to go. Eating? No more fast food joints. Falling asleep at the wheel? Ice on the road?

More people are killed every year due to car accidents than shootings. What are you willing to give up to stop all the deaths? Will it actually help? You don't hear people going crazy about any of these deaths...do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bw3517 (Reply #95)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:35 PM

148. The difference is a hair trigger....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:39 PM

100. Pretty good

I think that would work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:14 AM

103. All ammo must be inspected and counted by the police...

... office with all records held and managed by the FBI.

All uses of the firearm documented and the ammunition tallies checked for statistical anomalies.

Statistical anomalies will be used as just cause for the automatic issuance of search warrants at the federal level easing the way for all local police operations to easily coordinate multi-state investigations without bureaucratic slowdowns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:15 AM

104. I'm on board with each and every one.

Rec.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:17 AM

105. what happens to a Dr. who okays someone who then goes 'postal'...?

 

i don't think that most doctors would want the possible liabilities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:21 AM

107. My 2 cents worth...

It might be time to trust the community. In this case I would have to say that means the teachers. A mental health professional might spend time with a student, but no where near as much time as a student spends with a teacher. Teachers can spot the students that are outside the boundaries of acceptable citizenship behavior. They are referred to the administration and records are kept. At age 18 these records are sealed.

Imagine what would happen if a person under the age of 25 had to obtain a letter of recommendation from three different teachers from three different school years, from junior high through high school, in order to purchase any gun. No records would have to be compromised, no privacy issues breached. But, it would provide a clear indicator of that person's development over the years, and their ability to responsibly maintain and use the weapon.

Teachers know these students. Maybe their assessments of these students should be taken into consideration when judging the parents' abilities regarding how responsible they are in their gun ownership. All of the indicators are readily available. How could we possibly get caught running out of gas unless we are in denial as a nation as to how to address the problems we are facing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 12:45 AM

109. No, no, no, no, and no

 

The idea of there being a massive "gun problem" in this country is a myth.

Check out the statistics. The firearm-murder rate has been halved since the '60s. The system as it is works. No need for more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #109)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:23 PM

120. "The idea of there being a massive "gun problem" in this country is a myth"

Keep pushing those bullshit NRA talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #120)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:57 PM

123. Its not NRA

 

Its not NRA talking points. Its reality. Deal with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #123)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:12 PM

129. You don't think that we have a major gun problem in this country?

And you're telling me to deal with reality?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #129)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:37 PM

133. Statistics don't lie nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #133)


Response to UndahCovah (Reply #109)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:01 PM

125. So you're saying the Gun Control Act of 1968 was actually pretty effective?

"The firearm-murder rate has been halved since the '60s."

Okay, I can agree with you on that!

"The system as it is works."

Not so well for 26 people in Connecticut last Friday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bullwinkle428 (Reply #125)


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:17 AM

115. Treat guns and ammo like dynamite. Require a federal license be obtained before

purchase. One must produce said license before any sale. Have a computerized system to check all presented licenses with a federal data bank to ensure there are no forged licences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #115)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:06 PM

127. I agree

I am a gun owner, Mine are registered, properly stored and I have been trained to safely use them. Thats all I want from others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 01:54 PM

122. I don't disagree, but the devil's in the details

For example, how much taxation on gun/ammunition sales? Enough to make it prohibitive? That's a non-starter, so where do you draw that line?

Magazines: Agree that 30 rounds is too many, but again, where do you draw the line? A typical 9 mm pistol has a 15 or 16 round mag. Want to take it down to 5 or 6? Pocket guns, like a .380, typically hold that. So where's the line?

Like I said, the devil's in the details. That's where "common-sense gun control" will stand or fall.

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:10 PM

128. well your suggestion are indeed interesting especially the part about

More in-depth background checks and require a gun license. Currently, as long as you've never been institutionalized or deemed mentally unfit by a judge, you're considered mentally fit to own a gun. IMHO, part of the process for obtaining a firearm should require a note from a doctor or psychiatrist confirming that the applicant would not pose a danger by themselves or others. You would have to renew your license on a regular basis. If you become deemed unfit to own a gun, then your license would be revoked or unable to renew. If you commit any violent crime at all - assault, domestic violence, etc - you automatically become ineligible to own firearms.


psychological testing and who would be authorized to do this testing? a regular MD is not qualified for that type of examination so then who? and remember these tests are done for the government and you actually suggest this? also what about other household members, remember that in the case of CT school shootings it was not the gun owner herself but her son so should all household members be tested also and starting at what age 5, 10, 11, what? While I agree to most of what you said that part is disturbing IMO to say the least, it lends itself to massive abuse from both ends and would you be suggesting this if we still had a Republican administration?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:24 PM

132. Guns and ammo are already specially taxed.

Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax. It is collected by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). What they do with it I have no idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #132)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 02:52 PM

136. Then tax them more.

And eliminate all private sales.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #136)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:05 PM

141. Eliminating private sales would be as successful as eliminating private car sales.

Not going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #141)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 09:19 PM

149. Uh, private car sales

still require a transfer of title and registration. Why not the sasme with guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #149)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:13 PM

150. Uh, title and registration are easily enforced by the police observing random traffic.

Do you suggest police visit hundreds of millions of residences to do a search to determine if there are unregistered guns? Good luck with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #150)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:28 AM

152. Really?

Cops can "easily" tell just by looking at a car whether or not it is properly registered and the title has been transfered? I don't think so Bubba, unless it's a traffic stop. And no one suggested that cops visit "hundreds of millions" (Really? Hyperbole much?) of residences to do a search.

Honest people would register their guns and fill out the proper paperwork for a gun sale just like they do for their automobiles. Or are you saying that gun owners would break the law before they complied with a requirement to register their guns?

Here in Hawaii all legal guns are registered, and we don't seem to have a problem with honest people complying with the law. If you are caught with an unregistered and/or illegal firearm, you pay the penalty which can include jail time depending on the circumstances.

Good luck with supporting the NRA against the turning tide of opinion...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to billh58 (Reply #152)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:11 PM

161. When all you have are insults you have lost the argument.

Of course you know that. A hui hou

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #161)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:37 PM

162. I honestly did not

intend to insult you, and I don't really think that I lost the argument at all. If that's the excuse you want to use for not addressing the counter points I raised to your original snark, so be it.

Registering guns and requiring transfer of ownership paperwork for private sales is logical, would help to track accountability and responsibility, and not that hard to implement. It works well in Hawaii which has the lowest gun death rate in the nation.

Malama pono...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:46 PM

138. K and also R.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:49 PM

139. Instead of getting a doctor's approval, how about

publishing the names of gun owners annually and keeping them on record with public access? Let anyone who objects make a case before a judge as to whether the gun license be suspended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hedgehog (Reply #139)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:23 AM

151. That's a fantastic idea...

We should also keep a publicly accessible database listing the names of everyone diagnosed with HIV\AIDS, Hepatitis, severe psychological disorders, etc. After all, they have a potentially dangerous disease or condition and deserve no right to privacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 03:57 PM

140. And what happens when the next guy blows up a school with a bomb?

What do we ban next?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #140)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:44 PM

143. So.... we're just supposed to accept children being slaughtered by guns????


And if you've forgotten Oklahoma City, many restrictions were put in place on bomb making materials after that as well as adding tagants to fertilizer so that it can be traced if it ever is used in a bomb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #143)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:36 AM

153. People will be slaughtered no matter what

Violence is part of human nature. War, violence, killing...it goes back to the cave men. We are a violent species.

There will always be someone out there that hates the world. That's reality. There will always be criminals, serial killers, and terrorists. We can eliminate every gun on the planet and still have this same exact problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #153)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:23 AM

154. Then how do you

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:47 AM - Edit history (1)

explain away the fact that the USA has the highest gun death rate in the world? Everything you said is partially true, but half-truths don't solve problems. In Hawaii, where I live, we have strict gun laws and mandatory registration, AND the lowest gun death rate in the nation.

The stock false equivalency arguments and outright lies used by the NRA over the years to push their "all guns, all the time" agenda, and the buying and bullying of politicians to support that agenda are all falling apart in the light of reality.

Yes, people on a mission will find a way to kill others, but that does not mean that we have to make it easy for them. Less access to guns (the preferred choice for mass killings) means fewer deaths as evidenced by Hawaii in the USA, and other developed countries around the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #153)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:22 AM

158. This attitude drives me nuts.

No one is suggesting that human beings are not going to be violent. No one is suggesting that we can prevent all forms of violence. But the only reason the US has so much gun crime is because we have more guns and fewer gun restrictions than any other developed nation.

It's really not rocket science. We don't have to be sitting ducks every time we leave our homes to go to school, or work, or the movies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:17 PM

146. DUI = lose gun. Assault =- lose gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Reply #146)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:24 PM

147. Assault conviction you do lose your gun already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:01 AM

155. None of these ideas would have prevented Sandy Hook

 

To get a law passed, lets think about regulations that would have made a difference recently.


Pretty sure all guns were purchased legally, owner wasn't insane, no criminal record.

Monitor guns and ammo - for what? Just so a new government department can have another database? Wouldn't have made a difference.

Taxation - may have been a deterrent to initial purchase, but unlikely. Taxation should go to school protection vs mental health.

Banning 30 rnd magazines - could have used 10 or 20 rounders, considering no one was there posing a threat to the shooter he had all day to change smaller capacity magazines.

An idea that you didn't mention that might work - gun storage requirements. Owner should be required to keep guns in a SAFE, not protected with a simple trigger lock. THAT would have made a difference.

But again, since mom is dead, who would we prosecute for violating that one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to prius4me (Reply #155)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:24 AM

159. But maybe they'll prevent some future shooting incidents?

We don't have a time machine. But we can have gun control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chorophyll (Reply #159)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:52 AM

160. +1000

The arguments that there is nothing that we can do are so lame. What these people really mean is "there is nothing we WANT to do, because I have a God-given right to my gun, and gun deaths are the price we must pay to protect my rights."

What utter bullshit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:53 PM

164. Background and mental checks would need to cover everyone in the house, not just the owner

Nancy Lanza was a legal gun owner, passed all the tests. No one tested her son, though....

You've offered a fine list, but truthfully, I wouldn't expect the massacres to stop or slow down even if we enacted all of it. As long as we accept an America full of hundreds of millions of guns, we'll have continued gun carnage.

Repeal the Second Amendment!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:15 AM

170. I'd go one step further and make the gun licence as obtuse and annoying like the DMV.

We have to take numerous tests and hours of training to qualify for a driver's license and then we have to return every few years to renew and take some minor tests (quick eye exam) and update our info. Failure to update the license results in hefty penalties when caught driving (I know from experience).

We do it for cars, why not for guns? Responsible, gun loving, citizens who want to possess one or more guns, should have zero problems with this. The paranoid militia types, the gangsters and all the rest of the loons won't. And they're the ones we don't what having guns.

If you don't like having a DMV experience to own a gun? Don't get a gun. Really want a gun? Stand in line for half the day and show us your conviction. Simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:00 PM

171. Let's summarize

all these ideas posted and create draft legislation to send to our representatives! Something that can be a model for uniform national regulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread