SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Gun Control Discussion    What if there were serious gun controls?

Moderators: Chris Orndorff, LDD
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
What if there were serious gun controls? Login/Join 
Festina Lente
Picture of feersum dreadnaught
posted
What if there were serious gun controls?

After the Las Vegas murders, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) urged Congress to “take a stand against gun violence by passing common-sense gun safety laws.” On Monday, after the mass murder in Texas, he wrote, “A simple idea: Anyone convicted of domestic abuse should see their rights under the 2nd Amendment severely curtailed.” On Tuesday, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) announced that he and Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) are writing a bill “to prevent anyone convicted of domestic violence — be it in criminal or military court — from buying a gun.

In the spirit of these proposals, here are some ideas for tough federal gun laws — most of which should have been enacted years ago.

For people convicted of domestic violence, even a misdemeanor, how about a lifetime prohibition on firearms possession?

Further, a government license should be required for anyone who wants to manufacture, import, or sell firearms. The license should be mandatory not only for formal businesses, but also for individuals who make repetitive transactions for the purpose of profit. This would cover people at gun shows who put up signs declaring themselves to be “unlicensed dealers.” Anyone who engages in the firearms business without a federal license should be punished by up to five years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.

Manufacturers, importers, and dealers who are granted a federal license should have to keep meticulous records of every transaction. Their records and inventory should be subject to warrantless, random inspections by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). If a license-holder goes out of business, all the records of past sales should be delivered to the ATF.

Before a gun store can sell a firearm to an ordinary citizen, the citizen should have to get government approval. This should apply not only to storefront sales, but also if the retailer rents a table at a gun show. As for the Internet, retailers can be allowed to advertise there, but the actual transfer of a firearm should only be allowed at the retailer’s place of business.

The purchaser should be required to answer dozens of questions certifying her background information. It is important that the government know the purchaser’s race, and whether or not she is Hispanic. Before the sale is consummated, the Federal Bureau of Investigation or a state counterpart ought to be contacted for a background check on the purchaser.

Any customer who purchases two or more handguns in a week should be automatically flagged and reported to the federal government and to local law enforcement.

Every handgun manufacturer should require handgun buyers to purchase a safe storage device for every handgun. Even if the buyer owns a gun safe, the buyer should always be forced to buy a separate locking device.

Of course, licensed manufacturers should have to put a serial number on every firearm. If someone alters or obliterates a serial number, the person should face five years imprisonment.

Felons should be forever prohibited from owning guns. They should never be allowed to hold a gun in their hands for even a few seconds. The lifetime prohibition should include non-violent felons who have been law-abiding for decades; anyone who was convicted of marijuana possession in 1971 should be presumed to be a continuing menace to society.

A lifetime prohibition should also apply to anyone who has ever been committed to a mental institution. Mental illness is not necessarily permanent, but the ban should be.

Patients prescribed medical marijuana should be banned, even in states where such use is legal. In fact, all medical marijuana cardholders should be automatically banned, regardless of whether they are current users.

Current federal gun laws provide a statutory procedure for prohibited persons to petition the ATF for a restoration of rights. For example, ATF would have discretion to restore the Second Amendment rights of a non-violent felon who has been law-abiding for many years. Congress should enact appropriations riders to prevent ATF from considering such petitions.

Only persons over 21 should be able to purchase a handgun at a gun store. That 18-to-20-year-olds defend our country with automatic weapons overseas does not mean that they can be trusted with handguns within our country. A similar law should bar rifle or shotgun purchases by persons who are under 18.

Assault rifles must be virtually banned. These, according to the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power.” For example, the Russian AK-47 or the American M-16 rifles. No civilian should be able to transfer or possess any assault rifle that was not already in circulation by 1986.

Any of the older assault rifles in citizen hands should be registered with the government. If someone wants to acquire one, both the buyer and seller should have to file an application with the ATF. The tax for a transfer should be $200, to discourage ownership. In the application, the ATF should require fingerprints and two recent photographs. Local law enforcement should be notified. The FBI should conduct a background investigation, and the registration process should take months.

If the purchaser is permitted to acquire the assault rifle, she should be required to maintain records proving that the rifle is registered, and notify the government of any change in address. To take the assault rifle out of state, the owner should need written permission from ATF in advance.

Assault rifles are one type of automatic firearm, but there are many other types of automatics. All of them should be controlled just as strictly as assault rifles. A violation of the stringent laws on these guns should be a felony with up to 10 years imprisonment—and much longer in cases of multiple violations.

The above is just the minimum baseline for federal laws. States should be allowed to enact must more restrictive additional laws.

If you think that this legal system would make firearms the most-regulated common consumer product in the United States, you would be correct. Every one of the above restrictions is already federal law, and has been for decades. A few of these date back to the 1980s or 1990s. Most of them are from the Gun Control Act of 1968. The tax and registration laws on automatics are from the National Firearms Act of 1934.

For decades researchers have found that many Americans do not understand how strict gun control laws already are. Some elected officials and journalists are similarly misinformed. Widespread ignorance about existing law makes things easier for anti-gun lobbyists who always insist that every notorious crime proves that we need more gun control laws.

http://thehill.com/opinion/cri...ious-gun-controls%3F



NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught"
 
Posts: 6374 | Location: in the red zone of the blue state, CT | Registered: October 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Brass Pounder
Picture of roustabout
posted Hide Post
The rabid anti Second Amendment people and their left wing extremist friends in the media don’t care about existing federal gun laws. They won’t be satisfied until private ownership of all firearms is outlawed completely. All Democrats and RINOS need to either voted out of office, or at least kept in the minority. If they get control of the US Congress again, a return to the AWB days will be the likely result.
 
Posts: 936 | Registered: August 21, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Not sure where Sen Flake has been but those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence are already prohibited via Federal Law from buying firearms legally, through the Lautenberg Amendment.

James
 
Posts: 667 | Registered: March 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The anti-rights bloomberg collusion squad rarely get the current laws correct, they are too busy just spitting out the non-sense without any regard to the truth. The goal is to remove all firearms from lawful owners (well, except their private security).

When it gets bad, each person will need to make a choice; surrender your rights or join the New York State gun-owners that may -or may not- be hoarding millions of rifles and ammo.
 
Posts: 132 | Registered: January 15, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
In most states the government has no record of what someone owns. I mean after all, I don't own a single firearm, I just like reading about them.
 
Posts: 1965 | Location: New Hampshire | Registered: February 25, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Cruising the
Highway to Hell
Picture of 95flhr
posted Hide Post
And my concealed carry permit is only used as a second form of identification.




“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”
― Ronald Reagan
 
Posts: 5663 | Location: Near the Beaverdam in VA | Registered: February 13, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Was that long diatribe your actual opinion or simply a cut and paste. If it was your own opinion I would suggest that you actually read the Second Amendment carefully. Because you seem to agree with sliding down a slippery slope to a complete and total ban on firearms, even a single shot musket.

For instance a Federal License is CURRENTLY required to Manufacture or Import a firearm. So why do you wish to re-write statutes currently in place. BTW, any time a statute is re-written it will typically become more burdensome for either Industry or Populace. If you want a clear illustration of this phenomena they just take a look at the constantly increasing over reaching by the EPA.

I could go on but it would take just too long. In brief in nearly every state there is a minimum 7 year ban on acquiring firearms for anyone convicted for Domestic violence.

Those who have been admitted to a mental Health care facility by Court Order are currently banned from purchasing a firearm by Federal Law, it's right there on the 4473. In many states those who have been self admitted are also banned. Unfortunately Privacy concerns have kept many Mental Health care institutions from reporting these banned individuals. That is something that should be addressed.

I will also note that IMO those being treated for certain mental health defects be reported to the NICS system and be required to have a waver signed by their Care Professional in order to purchase a firearm. As for the specific conditions just look at the mental health issues common to almost all mass shooters. They all share a rather distinct and definitive array of rather severe mental health defects.

Currently Federal Law bans EVERY SINGLE USER of Marijuana from purchasing a firearm. Also a question on Form 4473.

As for your requirement that every purchaser having to obtain a Federal License before purchasing a firearm you have just suggested Rescinding the 2nd Amendment. Because you have in effect granted the Federal Government the name and address of every single legal firearm owner. The end result of that will be regular Army troops being sent to seize firearms from all of us. If you don't believe that can happen then study the History of the Nazi's in Germany during the late 20's and throughout the 1930's. At the end of this period Jews who gave up their firearms were being marched into gas chambers.

Now for a bit of History, something you don't seem to be familiar with. The first battles of our Revolutionary War were those at Lexington and Concord Massachusetts. The trigger for the Minutemen being called out to fight these battles was British forces coming into the area to locate and seize a "4 Pounder" and it's powder and ammunition rumored to be held by individuals in a barn in the area. Note, a "4 Pounder" was a small field cannon cable of fireing a 4 lbs. cannon ball or 4 lbs of grape shot or shrapnel. It was that periods equivalent of a WWII 105mm Howitzer. A MILITARY WEAPON. Now, go read the 2nd again and keep in mind that this was written by the very same people who had just had to fight a War for the Freedom of this Nation to determine it's own path and they fought that War with the very same weapons the British Regular Army was using. I will also note that at this time our Founders didn't feel there was any need to keep a large standing Army in place, the plan was to rely on the civilian populace to come to our Nations Defense when needed. Note, the war of 1812 pretty much illustrated that this particular notion was not really effective.

Now read the 2nd Amendment again and put what was written in that periods perspective and you will come to realize that we have given up a lot of what out Founders had intended. Basically that intent was that our citizens keep and maintain military weapons suitable for use as a Light Infantry soldier.

Finally our Nations Founders put the 2nd Amendment in place after the 1st because it was second to the first in order in importance for insuring our Freedom. Quite simply the 1st is intended to insure that we can ALWAYS object to any action or policy of your Government. The 2nd was put in place to insure that if necessary our citizens would be able to use Force of Arms in insure the !st Amendment and every other Right put forth in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

I will also note that Ben Franklin expressed the opinion that that there should be a revolution every 20 years in order to prevent any single segment of the population from gaining absolute control of the government. This is in large part why we have Elections at rather frequent intervals because an Election can in many ways produce the results of a Revolution without the need for any shots being fired.


I've stopped counting.
 
Posts: 4129 | Location: Michigan | Registered: November 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Rinehart
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by MikeNH:
In most states the government has no record of what someone owns. I mean after all, I don't own a single firearm, I just like reading about them.


Same here- lost my collection in one of those tragic canoe accidents.

I can tell you from experience that in the people's republic of New Yawk any pistol you conceal carry on your permit must be listed by make, model, caliber and serial number...
They know in NY.
 
Posts: 971 | Location: PA | Registered: March 15, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Festina Lente
Picture of feersum dreadnaught
posted Hide Post
Scooter - it is an opinion piece, as linked at the bottom. I'm not suggesting any further regulation - I live in CT, so already am at the ugly end of restrictions.

Also, at the end of the article, note:

"If you think that this legal system would make firearms the most-regulated common consumer product in the United States, you would be correct. Every one of the above restrictions is already federal law, and has been for decades. A few of these date back to the 1980s or 1990s. Most of them are from the Gun Control Act of 1968. The tax and registration laws on automatics are from the National Firearms Act of 1934."



NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught"
 
Posts: 6374 | Location: in the red zone of the blue state, CT | Registered: October 15, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of bendable
posted Hide Post
it would work every bit as well as the 18th amendment did





Safety, Situational Awareness and proficiency.



Neck Ties, Hats and ammo brass, Never ,ever touch'em w/o asking first
 
Posts: 46806 | Location: Henry County , Il | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
If there was gun control happening, then even law-abiding citizens will have to get prior government approval.

You'll also have to purchase a safe storage device to store your gun.
Older guns should also be registered.
Anyone purchasing 2 or more handguns in a week will be reported to the federal government.
 
Posts: 7 | Registered: March 13, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post
It appears that the link above seems to be trying to either spam me, or install a virus. I can't tell which. I think I would be cautious in clicking it. All it does is lead to 400 pages of essays on gun control before it starts to redirect....


_______________________________________________________________________
www.opspectraining.com

"Make it a shooting, and not a gunfight" LSP552 02/19/2011



 
Posts: 31849 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Gun Control Discussion    What if there were serious gun controls?

© SIGforum 2018