[Poll] Gun control - How much?

[Salandriagado]

Yeah, I'd go with that. Might work well with my proposal above: could attach my criminal record check thing to the permit, to edge off excuses like "he showed me a license, I didn't know it was forged, honest gov" and other such bullshit from those supplying weapons to criminals.

My opinion has changed somewhat since then. There is no real need for any new gun control. We seem to be on the right track with the loosening of carry restrictions sate by state. I would like to see Constitutional Carry become the national standard or at least a national CCW made available.

Any opinions on my actual proposal (here)?

[Sevvania]

With stats like that it really makes you wonder why everyone wants to ban the scary assault rifles.

Because the media portrays them as hyper-lethal and lumps them under the intentionally confusing designation of "assault weapons". They also act like the term is interchangeable with "assault rifle," just to make things extra confusing for laypeople.

[Sociobiology]

which you enforce how? How do you demonstrate the person has sold the firearm to them, you would need a database of sales so you can track the sellers, and having a database of banned owners does you little good if people do not have to check it.

most of the people on this thread have read my proposal

My proposal
create a federal firearms permit.
It would be a lifetime permit

getting said permit requires; a background check with a mental health screening,
a minimal fee to cover cost (~$15 estimated),
a written test of firearm handling and law,
a one afternoon class on firearms safety,
and a practical test (demonstrate safety, hit a reasonable target at reasonable distance)

the licence can be revoked for gun violations (reckless discharge, illegal sales, ect.) , diagnosis of a serious mental disorder that would impair judgement, or conviction of violent crime (armed robbery, attempted homicide, ect.).

To buy a firearm form any seller (including private sellers), to buy certain parts(like receivers),
and to buy ammunition you will need a valid permit.

Record of sales will be kept, but accessible only with a warrant.
so law enforcement can track dirty gun dealers, and illegal sales

things like concealed carry, collectors permits, and perhaps even different firearms type (longgun, handgun, ect.) would be endorsements on the card, similar to how it is done on a drivers licence.

buying a gun without the license would be treated the same as buying dynamite without a licence, it would involve either jail time or a steep fine along with confiscation of the weapon. I would leave the exact punishment up to a judges because I think extenuating circumstances do occur.

with this you could open up sales of various restricted firearms because more dangerous firearms (machine guns, foreign makes, various accessories, larger calipers) would require a more difficult screening process, much like the difficulty of getting a CDL license or a passenger transport licence, while at the same time making it easier for people who meet those qualification to buy the firearms in question.

Using a permit solves the privacy issues of expanding NICS access, without requiring all sales to go through a FFL. The seller needs only to check the validity of the buyers permit, which can be done over the phone or internet.

But in the end I would support a simple requirement for universal background checks instead.

I made a similar proposal (not as detailed) years ago. The biggest difference is in mine, the license also served as a national CCW and open carry permit.

It would in this case too, if you got them, it would be an endorsement on the card.

My original plan, with some enhancement by Dyakovo:

Make safety and marksmanship training available (in high school for the most part with separate training available for those who have already graduated). Upon passing the course you get issued a perpetual license that can only be revoked due to a diagnoses of mental illness, or a relevant criminal act on the part of the licensee. That license being the only thing you need to purchase, own, or carry (open or concealed) a firearm.

Dyas enhancement: Separate endorsements on the license for rifles, shotguns and handguns.

Original post.

Yeah I prefer having people do something extra to get a concealed carry permit, I don't like the idea of concealed carry to begin with, except in special cases.
I think other people should be able to know if I am armed and avoid me if they so wish.

[Sociobiology]

which you enforce how? How do you demonstrate the person has sold the firearm to them, you would need a database of sales so you can track the sellers, and having a database of banned owners does you little good if people do not have to check it.

Enforced the same way most illegal sales are enforced: when you find out that an illegal sale has taken place, you investigate and file criminal charges against anyone breaking the law. A store near my hometown was coaching people to straw buy when they couldn't legally purchase. Law enforcement got word of it, set up a sting, and collected all the evidence they needed for a variety of charges.

except straw purchases are only part of the problem, one off sales are just as problematic, I want the police to be able to take the gun used in a crime, run the serial number, knock on Bob's door and ask him how a criminal got a hold of a gun he legally owns. I want a paper trail and database of sales so they can track who was the last person to legally own the firearm and prosecute them, if they did not report it stolen.

Having a database would obviously do a lot of good. It would A) allow people to check the person to whom they are interested in selling (something I would use, but do not have the ability to check), B) incentivize using it, and C) allow for jailing and fines of anyone selling to a person forbidden from purchasing firearms.

Exactly. I just want you to fully flesh out what you want. people have knee jerk reactions against some things that they actually want, but they haven't thought what they want all the way through so they don't realize they want it.

besides if you are carrying the firearm for protection most of the benefit is lost by concealing it.

[BK117B2]

Enforced the same way most illegal sales are enforced: when you find out that an illegal sale has taken place, you investigate and file criminal charges against anyone breaking the law. A store near my hometown was coaching people to straw buy when they couldn't legally purchase. Law enforcement got word of it, set up a sting, and collected all the evidence they needed for a variety of charges.

except straw purchases are only part of the problem, one off sales are just as problematic, I want the police to be able to take the gun used in a crime, run the serial number, knock on Bob's door and ask him how a criminal got a hold of a gun he legally owns. I want a paper trail and database of sales so they can track who was the last person to legally own the firearm and prosecute them, if they did not report it stolen.

Having a database would obviously do a lot of good. It would A) allow people to check the person to whom they are interested in selling (something I would use, but do not have the ability to check), B) incentivize using it, and C) allow for jailing and fines of anyone selling to a person forbidden from purchasing firearms.

Exactly. I just want you to fully flesh out what you want. people have knee jerk reactions against some things that they actually want, but they haven't thought what they want all the way through so they don't realize they want it.

besides if you are carrying the firearm for protection most of the benefit is lost by concealing it.

I wouldn't want such a database since government agencies in the US have proven they often cannot be trusted that much.

How does being concealed erase most of the benefit gained from firearm carry?

[Sevvania]

How does being concealed erase most of the benefit gained from firearm carry?

I suspect because nobody realizes you have it until you pull it, so its effectiveness as a deterrant could be reduced.

[Tule]

except straw purchases are only part of the problem, one off sales are just as problematic, I want the police to be able to take the gun used in a crime, run the serial number, knock on Bob's door and ask him how a criminal got a hold of a gun he legally owns. I want a paper trail and database of sales so they can track who was the last person to legally own the firearm and prosecute them, if they did not report it stolen.

Exactly. I just want you to fully flesh out what you want. people have knee jerk reactions against some things that they actually want, but they haven't thought what they want all the way through so they don't realize they want it.

besides if you are carrying the firearm for protection most of the benefit is lost by concealing it.

I wouldn't want such a database since government agencies in the US have proven they often cannot be trusted that much.

Neither can the public considering how easy it is for criminals to obtain firearms from law abiding citizens.

[Kernen]

How does being concealed erase most of the benefit gained from firearm carry?

I suspect because nobody realizes you have it until you pull it, so its effectiveness as a deterrant could be reduced.

The idea of concealed carry as deterrence relies on the idea that enough of the population could be carrying that it's not worth attempting anything


I'm personally against open carry as for concealed carry. Open carry makes people uncomfortable and, in the wrong setting, makes you a target. I hate carrying openly in areas I'm liable to encounter Young Adult Males in conjunction with either booze or a demographic to show off for, because many seem to take my carrying a pistol as a challenge. I've walked out of a lot of situations that got nasty because some guy got up in my face to proverbially wave their dick in my face. It's no fun for anybody.

When it's concealed, at least, I don't make people uncomfortable and I can still keep myself safe.

If we're going to allow firearms in public, as it's clear the majority of the US does, the most tactful response by far is allowing them to remain concealed.

[Big Jim P]

My opinion has changed somewhat since then. There is no real need for any new gun control. We seem to be on the right track with the loosening of carry restrictions sate by state. I would like to see Constitutional Carry become the national standard or at least a national CCW made available.

Any opinions on my actual proposal (here)?

One moment and I will address your earlier post.

[Big Jim P]

What exactly, in your mind, would these tighter regulations encompass?

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I'll answer it anyway, to give a somewhat different perspective on gun control to others in this thread (or at least, the parts of it that I've read), and I believe a somewhat unusual perspective in general (as someone who is both a qualified rifle instructor and an advocate of stronger gun control than most of the US currently has).

We'll start with the basics that we should be able to agree on: yes, I support your right (assuming you aren't excluded by criminal record etc.) to buy, own, and use guns for whatever (lawful) purpose you like. I think we can agree, though, that guns getting into the hands of criminals is bad. The task, therefore, is to figure out how to minimise the latter without compromising the former. Primarily, this means cutting down on criminals buying guns through private sales.
So, with that as our starting point, here's my proposal:
1) Make it much, much quicker and easier to do background checks. My suggestion would be to allow people to request from the government some form of code that will allow anybody who has it to access their criminal record on the fly. Maybe store that (in some suitable encrypted way, such as used in credit cards [minus the whole magnetic strip thing, which is silly insecure]) on something small and convenient to carry. I'm envisioning something along the line of the buyer just going into the gun store (or other store: the same system could be used for other things), handing over some other bit of plastic along with his card when he goes to pay for the gun, and the gun store owner just sticks that extra card into a reader, which checks (via some suitably secure channel) to a government computer which confirms that the person has no problematic criminal record, and the dealer goes ahead with the sale. This checking system should also be accessible to anybody, with no special technology - you should be able to do it with your phone, to facilitate its use in private sales - hell, you could just store the code on there as well. This is not something that's technologically particularly difficult. [Incidentally, if the government isn't already keeping national up-to-date records of (serious) criminal records, it should really start doing so, regardless of this proposal.]
2) Following up from the above, make supplying weapons to those barred from owning them a strict liability crime. This way, you can still happily carry on doing private sales, and still do them without doing any sort of checks if you know/trust the person you're selling to, but if you're selling to a stranger, you're going to want to do the check, since failing to do so puts you at risk of prosecution if they turn out to be barred. No paperwork forced on anybody, and if they do want to cover themselves, they can do it quickly and easily. Having done the check and having it come up clean should protect you from prosecution on this issue, even if the person you sold it to turns out to have been barred, so people aren't screwed over by any problems that might be in the system.
3) Since they don't do anything anyway, get rid of all of the silly assault weapons bans et al.


And there we have it. Legitimate owners/traders can carry owning and trading guns without impediment, suppliers for criminals can be prosecuted more easily (no "nah, I didn't know he was a criminal, honest gov" bullshit), and the primary supply of weapons into criminal hands gets shut down hard.

1: I agree that we need to make the process of buying a gun just as easy as possible for the law-abiding citizens. Your ideas have merit.

2: Selling a gun to someone barred from owning one is already illegal. We don't really need to change anything here, just start seriously prosecuting violators. As for background checks on private sales when the seller has some questions: All you have to do is voluntarily conduct the sale through an FFL. That way, you pay a nominal fee and the background check is done.

3: Agreed. A rifle is the least likely firearm to be used in a crime, and the so-called "assault weapons" (really, they are sport or defense rifles), being a smaller subset of the category "rifle" are even less likely to be used than the numbers imply.

Edit: On point 2: I intend to get my FFL and build a business based on just such a demand: Voluntary background checks between individuals and conducting the background checks and delivery of firearms bought online.

[Sociobiology]

I suspect because nobody realizes you have it until you pull it, so its effectiveness as a deterrant could be reduced.

The idea of concealed carry as deterrence relies on the idea that enough of the population could be carrying that it's not worth attempting anything

which doesn't work, less than 1% of the population has such a permit (45 out of fifty states have little restriction), and it is not likely to increase drastically. A criminal knows most people will not be armed. The deterrent value of a concealed weapon in almost non-existent. If you are really interested in personal defense deterrence should be your primary goal since if a confrontation never happens your risk is zero.

I'm personally against open carry as for concealed carry. Open carry makes people uncomfortable

And for many people in modern society rightly so, you are carrying a lethal weapon that can easily kill people you do not intend to kill, that in and of itself for many people makes you someone to avoid and if you want to carry such a weapon you should learn to deal with that truth.

and, in the wrong setting, makes you a target.

just as appearing unarmed will do in others.

I hate carrying openly in areas I'm liable to encounter Young Adult Males in conjunction with either booze or a demographic to show off for, because many seem to take my carrying a pistol as a challenge. I've walked out of a lot of situations that got nasty because some guy got up in my face to proverbially wave their dick in my face. It's no fun for anybody.

which is about your self control, which is going to be as much if not more of an issue with concealed carry. Drunks don't need an excuse to wave their dick in your face.

When it's concealed, at least, I don't make people uncomfortable and I can still keep myself safe.

except your reducing your ability to protect yourself and really people have the right to be uncomfortable around an armed person, even the threat of violence is becoming increasingly rare in modern societies.

If we're going to allow firearms in public, as it's clear the majority of the US does, the most tactful response by far is allowing them to remain concealed.

I prefer to leave that to the individual to decide.

[Salandriagado]

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I'll answer it anyway, to give a somewhat different perspective on gun control to others in this thread (or at least, the parts of it that I've read), and I believe a somewhat unusual perspective in general (as someone who is both a qualified rifle instructor and an advocate of stronger gun control than most of the US currently has).

We'll start with the basics that we should be able to agree on: yes, I support your right (assuming you aren't excluded by criminal record etc.) to buy, own, and use guns for whatever (lawful) purpose you like. I think we can agree, though, that guns getting into the hands of criminals is bad. The task, therefore, is to figure out how to minimise the latter without compromising the former. Primarily, this means cutting down on criminals buying guns through private sales.
So, with that as our starting point, here's my proposal:
1) Make it much, much quicker and easier to do background checks. My suggestion would be to allow people to request from the government some form of code that will allow anybody who has it to access their criminal record on the fly. Maybe store that (in some suitable encrypted way, such as used in credit cards [minus the whole magnetic strip thing, which is silly insecure]) on something small and convenient to carry. I'm envisioning something along the line of the buyer just going into the gun store (or other store: the same system could be used for other things), handing over some other bit of plastic along with his card when he goes to pay for the gun, and the gun store owner just sticks that extra card into a reader, which checks (via some suitably secure channel) to a government computer which confirms that the person has no problematic criminal record, and the dealer goes ahead with the sale. This checking system should also be accessible to anybody, with no special technology - you should be able to do it with your phone, to facilitate its use in private sales - hell, you could just store the code on there as well. This is not something that's technologically particularly difficult. [Incidentally, if the government isn't already keeping national up-to-date records of (serious) criminal records, it should really start doing so, regardless of this proposal.]
2) Following up from the above, make supplying weapons to those barred from owning them a strict liability crime. This way, you can still happily carry on doing private sales, and still do them without doing any sort of checks if you know/trust the person you're selling to, but if you're selling to a stranger, you're going to want to do the check, since failing to do so puts you at risk of prosecution if they turn out to be barred. No paperwork forced on anybody, and if they do want to cover themselves, they can do it quickly and easily. Having done the check and having it come up clean should protect you from prosecution on this issue, even if the person you sold it to turns out to have been barred, so people aren't screwed over by any problems that might be in the system.
3) Since they don't do anything anyway, get rid of all of the silly assault weapons bans et al.


And there we have it. Legitimate owners/traders can carry owning and trading guns without impediment, suppliers for criminals can be prosecuted more easily (no "nah, I didn't know he was a criminal, honest gov" bullshit), and the primary supply of weapons into criminal hands gets shut down hard.

1: I agree that we need to make the process of buying a gun just as easy as possible for the law-abiding citizens. Your ideas have merit.

2: Selling a gun to someone barred from owning one is already illegal. We don't really need to change anything here, just start seriously prosecuting violators. As for background checks on private sales when the seller has some questions: All you have to do is voluntarily conduct the sale through an FFL. That way, you pay a nominal fee and the background check is done.

The strict liability thing is just there to make those prosecutions easier - essentially, it means that "I didn't know he was barred from owning a gun" isn't an excuse. The rest of it is there to make those checks very quick (for which read: essentially instant) and free, so people have no excuse for not checking when they don't know the person.

[Gun Manufacturers]

The only people whose guns need to be controlled are white people. Have you ever heard of a mass shooter that wasn't a white man?

Nidal Malik Hasan, Palestinian American
John Allen Muhammad, African American
Lee Boyd Malvo, African American
Seung-Hui Cho, South Korean
Aaron Alexis, African American
Christopher Dorner, African American
Omar Sheriff Thornton, African American
John Felton Parish, African American
Nathan Jerard Dunlap, African American

It seems to me that you're talking out of your racist ass.

[Omega America II]

The only people whose guns need to be controlled are white people. Have you ever heard of a mass shooter that wasn't a white man?

Really? I highly doubt that information is true. You need to recheck your facts before you go saying things that aren't true.

[BK117B2]

I wouldn't want such a database since government agencies in the US have proven they often cannot be trusted that much.

Neither can the public considering how easy it is for criminals to obtain firearms from law abiding citizens.

Ah, but you can forbid Person A from having a firearm without having to involve Person B at all. Government is not so independent

[Spirit of Hope]

The idea of concealed carry as deterrence relies on the idea that enough of the population could be carrying that it's not worth attempting anything

which doesn't work, less than 1% of the population has such a permit (45 out of fifty states have little restriction), and it is not likely to increase drastically. A criminal knows most people will not be armed. The deterrent value of a concealed weapon in almost non-existent. If you are really interested in personal defense deterrence should be your primary goal since if a confrontation never happens your risk is zero.

1) If you mean 5% of the population has concealed carry permits you would be more correct. This doesn't include states where there is no concealed carry permit, or where data isn't kept on the numbers..

2) I wouldn't say little restriction. Average fee is $60 and 6 hours of classes.

[Colorful Bund]

The only people whose guns need to be controlled are white people. Have you ever heard of a mass shooter that wasn't a white man?

Nidal Malik Hasan, Palestinian American
John Allen Muhammad, African American
Lee Boyd Malvo, African American
Seung-Hui Cho, South Korean
Aaron Alexis, African American
Christopher Dorner, African American
Omar Sheriff Thornton, African American
John Felton Parish, African American
Nathan Jerard Dunlap, African American

It seems to me that you're talking out of your racist ass.

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

Congratulations, you don't know what racism is.

[Kvatchdom]

Nidal Malik Hasan, Palestinian American
John Allen Muhammad, African American
Lee Boyd Malvo, African American
Seung-Hui Cho, South Korean
Aaron Alexis, African American
Christopher Dorner, African American
Omar Sheriff Thornton, African American
John Felton Parish, African American
Nathan Jerard Dunlap, African American

It seems to me that you're talking out of your racist ass.

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

Racism is not something that does not include prejudice against whites.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Nidal Malik Hasan, Palestinian American
John Allen Muhammad, African American
Lee Boyd Malvo, African American
Seung-Hui Cho, South Korean
Aaron Alexis, African American
Christopher Dorner, African American
Omar Sheriff Thornton, African American
John Felton Parish, African American
Nathan Jerard Dunlap, African American

It seems to me that you're talking out of your racist ass.

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ish/racism

1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior


1.1The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races

You most certainly be racist against white people.

[Conserative Morality]

Gun type matters less to me than the owners. Background checks and psychological tests and all that jazz, but I could care less about assault weapon bans and such.

[BK117B2]

Nidal Malik Hasan, Palestinian American
John Allen Muhammad, African American
Lee Boyd Malvo, African American
Seung-Hui Cho, South Korean
Aaron Alexis, African American
Christopher Dorner, African American
Omar Sheriff Thornton, African American
John Felton Parish, African American
Nathan Jerard Dunlap, African American

It seems to me that you're talking out of your racist ass.

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

Yeah, trying to cover for racism with 'it doesn't count for whites' doesn't really help your case

[North Calaveras]

Gun type matters less to me than the owners. Background checks and psychological tests and all that jazz, but I could care less about assault weapon bans and such.

agreed, they should focus on that, regulating the weapons themselves in my opinion is unconstitutional.

[Colorful Bund]

Yelling racism is silly because you can't be racist against whites who are the dominant group.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ish/racism

1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior


1.1The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races

You most certainly be racist against white people.

Nope. Racism is just a power relation in which the dominant race oppresses nonwhites. Look around. I don't see whites being oppressed as they are dominant. So according to science you and your racist dictionary are wrong.

[Kvatchdom]

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ish/racism

1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior


1.1The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races

You most certainly be racist against white people.

Nope. Racism is just a power relation in which the dominant race oppresses nonwhites. Look around. I don't see whites being oppressed as they are dominant. So according to science you and your racist dictionary are wrong.

You cannot negate the exact bloody definition of a word.