Gun Permit

[Liriena]

I've never found any numbers on it (and in truth I haven't looked all that hard) but I've always heard that firearms charges like illegal possession or the like are some of the first things bargained away or dropped in exchange for other guilty pleas or other cooperation.

Perhaps eliminate plea bargaining if a firearm is used, as well as stiffer penalties?

It's a very fine line that would have to be walked...but it sounds plausible.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

So, what's the big difference between installing a national ID card system, and a system of gun permits?

And again, I must ask: why is it so annoying to demand that someone demonstrate that they can handle a car or a gun properly before allowing them to?

Because I'm a reactionary. Liberals want to institute strict background checks, I want to do away with them all together. Extremism on one side requires it on another to balance things.

[Liriena]

So, what's the big difference between installing a national ID card system, and a system of gun permits?

And again, I must ask: why is it so annoying to demand that someone demonstrate that they can handle a car or a gun properly before allowing them to?

Because I'm a reactionary. Liberals want to institute strict background checks, I want to do away with them all together. Extremism on one side requires it on another to balance things.

How is it extremist to require strict background checks? When you think about it, it's not really something worth a reactionary counter-balance. It's just the state asking you to prove you can drive or shoot without breaking laws or acting irresponsibly.

I'm not asking the state to ban guns altogether, or to keep them away from all blond-haired people. Heck, I'm not even asking for the state to ban obese people from owning a gun.

If you think my proposal is extremist...boy, don't you ever go to Japan!

[Individual]

Yes, make it so only criminals have guns, enforcing the black market itself as was said and turn the US into a police state. That will certainly hit the spot.

Nice try, but no. Not even remotely close to what was being talked about.


I'll let someone else do the talking for me...

Deterring illegal gun ownership/use is easy: Double (or triple whatever it takes) the penalty for any crime committed with a firearm. Instead of going for the legal owners, make the criminals pay.

Sure, whatever. Doesn't tread on my rights, so why not?

[Nua Corda]

My proposal:

Licensing

Prospective licences-holders must complete a state-approved training course and two tests, a written test and a practical test, much like a driver's license. The License would take the form of a photo ID card, with license-holder's gender, height, weight, hair and eye color, date of birth, signature and address. It would have significant protection against forgery, much like a driver's license, and could be used as a catch-all ID. Hunting licenses would be applied to the back of the license, as stickers, much like car tabs.¹

The basic license would be good for any semi-automatic long guns (rifles or shotguns with barrels exceeding 18 inches in length), but could be updated with icons indicating additional classes of firearm permitted such as handguns, short-barreled shotguns, short-barreled rifles, NFA "machineguns", "destructive devices" and suppressors. These could be added either by passing a qualification test (primarily for handguns), or by meeting requirements set by the government. States may increase the requirements for classes at their discretion, but the federal minimum must be met.²

The license would require a background check to be issued, need to be renewed every five to ten years (depending on the state), and could be revoked following any firearms violation which endangered life, or any felony conviction for violent crime. It would serve as the only thing necessary to purchase a firearm, provided that firearm was permitted by the class of license.³

Penalty for owning or carrying a firearm without a license would be a felony, and barr the convict from ever owning firearms again.⁴

Registration

All firearms, bolt-heads and barrels must be registered with the government upon purchase. This could be easily done through the FFL, simply by showing your license, signing a document, and the FFL holder adding the weapon to your file and printing off a conformation of registration and duplicate of your signed document. Registration would include make, model and serial number of all firearms, boltheads and barrels, as well as a test-fired bullet from every barrel, and a test-fired casing from every bolt-head. Police could then search serial numbers, persons, or recovered bullets and casings in the database and receive all of the information.⁵

There would be no grandfathering for registration. All gun owners must bring their weapons, barrels and bolts into an FFL or State office to be registered within a year of the enacting of the law. Found guns, inherited guns, or other weapons not previously known of can still be brought in and registered, and there is no penalty for registering a gun late, only for being caught with an unregistered gun over a year after the law was passed. The state would be required to notify all residents of the law.⁶

Penalty for being caught with an unregistered gun after the allotted period would be a felony, and bar the convict from ever owning firearms again.⁷

Overall: Your proposal goes into more detail than either mine or SBs, and in my opinion steps to far into restrictions on personal rights. That being said, let me address the points:

1: This is a more detailed version of what has been proposed.
2: Again, a more detailed version.
3: More details. The only objection here is the renewal requirement. that is covered in the revocation clauses already proposed and skirts close to the violation of personal rights. I am somewhat on the fence about this.
4: Felons who have served their sentences may petition for a reinstatement of their rights. This should be allowed here as well.
5: Now we are definitely steeping on personal rights: Change the registration requirements to "Upon manufacture" and the police search to "with a warrant".
6: Again, definitely stepping on personal rights. However I have no proposal.

1-2: more detail is better.

3. Many states demand driver's license renewals. And sometimes people forget, or their mental state changes

4. Depending on how petitions were considered, I'd support this.

5. We demand the same thing for cars. That's not considered stepping on personal rights. But I would be open to making a warrant necessary to use the database, if it went like this: police find firearms evidence, or a suspect. Police apply for warrant to run the evidence or person through the database. Police receive warrant because, well, it's kinda obvious that if you found firearms evidence, it's pertinent, and usually judges are pretty willing to grant warrants for checking medical records of suspects. Police run database.

6. Ditto.

[Individual]

If you see a crazy mofo on a killing spree, it's not only your right, but an obligation to aim at him and pull the trigger.

Which, assuming you hit and incapacitate him, only prevents him from firing more shots. It does not prevent him from having fired the shots that he already fired.

For the former, Isn't that kind of the point in doing that? For the latter... it happens.

[Liriena]

Nice try, but no. Not even remotely close to what was being talked about.


I'll let someone else do the talking for me...

Sure, whatever. Doesn't tread on my rights, so why not?

Awesome.

[Liriena]

Which, assuming you hit and incapacitate him, only prevents him from firing more shots. It does not prevent him from having fired the shots that he already fired.

For the former, Isn't that kind of the point in doing that? For the latter... it happens.

But it doesn't need to happen in the first place. Not if you can put legislation in place that can decrease the chances of this hypothetical event from happening.

[Individual]

Sure, whatever. Doesn't tread on my rights, so why not?

Awesome.

I may be egoist, but I'm no criminal, as long as the nation doesn't tread on your personal, economical and political liberties. If that happens, you can refer to me as a criminal if you like to some extent, but I will not have my rights trodden on. You get that, don't you?

[Individual]

For the former, Isn't that kind of the point in doing that? For the latter... it happens.

But it doesn't need to happen in the first place. Not if you can put legislation in place that can decrease the chances of this hypothetical event from happening.

Jim's proposition about punishing the nutjobs is quite nice for us legal owners, but just because few fart knockers terrorize da hood, we don't need to punish us 'legitimates'.

[Liriena]

But it doesn't need to happen in the first place. Not if you can put legislation in place that can decrease the chances of this hypothetical event from happening.

Jim's proposition about punishing the nutjobs is quite nice for us legal owners, but just because few fart knockers terrorize da hood, we don't need to punish us 'legitimates'.

Enforcing gun permits is no punishment at all. It's prevention, and very fair prevention at that. If you believe yourself to be a responsible gun owner, then you should have no problems whatsoever proving it and getting the permit.

[Liriena]

Awesome.

I may be egoist, but I'm no criminal, as long as the nation doesn't tread on your personal, economical and political liberties. If that happens, you can refer to me as a criminal if you like to some extent, but I will not have my rights trodden on. You get that, don't you?

Of course.

[Individual]

Jim's proposition about punishing the nutjobs is quite nice for us legal owners, but just because few fart knockers terrorize da hood, we don't need to punish us 'legitimates'.

Enforcing gun permits is no punishment at all. It's prevention, and very fair prevention at that. If you believe yourself to be a responsible gun owner, then you should have no problems whatsoever proving it and getting the permit.

Sure, I just oppose needless bureaucracy that only slows down processes and isn't necessary for determining a person's self-responsibility.

[Liriena]

Enforcing gun permits is no punishment at all. It's prevention, and very fair prevention at that. If you believe yourself to be a responsible gun owner, then you should have no problems whatsoever proving it and getting the permit.

Sure, I just oppose needless bureaucracy that only slows down processes and isn't necessary for determining a person's self-responsibility.

Actually, it pretty much is necessary to determine how healthy and responsible you are. Besides, it's not as if it would involve asking you to show a million pictures of where you store your gun and ammo, or that you give each of your children a bullet-proof vest and a taser necklace that keeps them away for your guns, or that you shoot a flying hummingbird from a mile away with a .22 caliber handgun.

If you don't have the patience to go through that process, then the problem is not the state.

[Individual]

Sure, I just oppose needless bureaucracy that only slows down processes and isn't necessary for determining a person's self-responsibility.

Actually, it pretty much is necessary to determine how healthy and responsible you are. Besides, it's not as if it would involve asking you to show a million pictures of where you store your gun and ammo, or that you give each of your children a bullet-proof vest and a taser necklace that keeps them away for your guns, or that you shoot a flying hummingbird from a mile away with a .22 caliber handgun.

If you don't have the patience to go through that process, then the problem is not the state.

The state...isn't...the problem...?

*anarchist ragequit*

Anyway, doesn't seem at all too troublesome.

[Liriena]

Actually, it pretty much is necessary to determine how healthy and responsible you are. Besides, it's not as if it would involve asking you to show a million pictures of where you store your gun and ammo, or that you give each of your children a bullet-proof vest and a taser necklace that keeps them away for your guns, or that you shoot a flying hummingbird from a mile away with a .22 caliber handgun.

If you don't have the patience to go through that process, then the problem is not the state.

The state...isn't...the problem...?

*anarchist ragequit*

Anyway, doesn't seem at all too troublesome.

I live in a country where slow and excruciatingly complicated bureaucracy is an annoying fact of life. Is it exasperating beyond belief? Fuck, yes! But...on the other hand...with a population raised in an irresponsibly individualistic culture (as in "break any law if it will get you only a few seconds early to work"), tight controls might be the only thing keeping us from collapsing into that primitive bloodbath Hobbes talked about.

[Veceria]

Actually, it pretty much is necessary to determine how healthy and responsible you are. Besides, it's not as if it would involve asking you to show a million pictures of where you store your gun and ammo, or that you give each of your children a bullet-proof vest and a taser necklace that keeps them away for your guns, or that you shoot a flying hummingbird from a mile away with a .22 caliber handgun.

If you don't have the patience to go through that process, then the problem is not the state.

The state...isn't...the problem...?

*anarchist ragequit*

Anyway, doesn't seem at all too troublesome.

It isn't. We have a similar system here in Austria.
Just a bit stricter. And our guns are expensive as fuck.
But that's another story ...

[Galloism]

Against. Either have a national ID card and provide that to quickly make sure you aren't a felon or mentally disabled, or build it into a driver's license or something. Background checks are uselessly thorough.

Why is it so radical to ask people to prove to the state that they can be healthy, responsible and law-abiding gun owners before giving them permission to own a gun, but's it not crazy at all to demand the same thing for a bloody car?

We don't ask that for a car. What are you talking about?

Anyone with sufficient money can buy a car at any time.

[Liriena]

Why is it so radical to ask people to prove to the state that they can be healthy, responsible and law-abiding gun owners before giving them permission to own a gun, but's it not crazy at all to demand the same thing for a bloody car?

We don't ask that for a car. What are you talking about?

Anyone with sufficient money can buy a car at any time.

But can anyone drive it without a license?

[Galloism]

We don't ask that for a car. What are you talking about?

Anyone with sufficient money can buy a car at any time.

But can anyone drive it without a license?

On private property where they have permission yes.

The license allows you to operate a vehicle of appropriate class on public roadways.

[Sociobiology]

But we, unlike you, want to prevent preventable shit from happening, starting with making surely dangerous mentally ill individuals can't own a gun, and that some unqualified idiot doesn't try to play hero, getting himself and others killed in the process.

Sigh... “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” --Benjamin Franklin

The world moves, and ideas that were once good are not always good.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Galloism]

Rather. You want this permit to be good for any firearm, so presumably your afternoon class and examinations will be covering every extant class of firearm. I doubt $15 would even cover the paper targets.

Every extant class? How do you define a "class" of firearm?

I see them as rifles, shotguns, revolvers, and semi-autos. Possibly full-autos, although those are basically de facto illegal right now.

Using all four to an acceptable level of competence could be taught in a day.

[Sociobiology]

I might be being stupid, but it seems to me that the harder guns are to get, the larger the black market demand for illegal firearms becomes, which makes it more profitable, which means more illegal firearms.

then why are they not a huge problem in every other first world country?

[Sociobiology]

One of my friends is epileptic. He cannot safely operate a car, and I damn sure would not hand him a gun.

The idea that anyone should be able to own a gun, regardless of physical or mental condition, is irresponsible, both socially and legally.

The source on your sig was very clear in its comparison between the US and Switzerland: yes, guns are legally a lot less restricted there, but people themselves take guns seriously, they own them and use them responsibly, their entire culture revolves around an authoritarian idea of national duty when it comes to guns (rather than personal liberty) and most if not all male inhabitants have had at least basic military training.

uh Switzerland has stricter gun control than the US. they have mandatory licencing for one thing.

[Sociobiology]

So, what's the big difference between installing a national ID card system, and a system of gun permits?

And again, I must ask: why is it so annoying to demand that someone demonstrate that they can handle a car or a gun properly before allowing them to?

Because I'm a reactionary. Liberals want to institute strict background checks, I want to do away with them all together. Extremism on one side requires it on another to balance things.

and you think a background check to purchase a deadly weapon is Extremist??