Lets have a rational discussion about guns

[Joecooool]

Many of you think I'm against gun ownership. That is not correct. I don't like hand guns but I'm OK with fully automatic weapons for example.

I'd love to see hand guns banned and ownership limited to rifles and shotguns. I am aware this will never happen just as some of you who support no legislation also know that will never happen.

Here are what I think are fair and reasonable efforts to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't possess them.

1) Guns should be sold with a title. When you sell the gun, you have to change the title at a police station where a back ground check can be done.

2) Bullets should come with serial numbers, and ammo must be registered when sold.

3) Gun owners should all be required to have a license and have to pass a psychological exam. Like a drivers license, they must be retested every five years.

4) Guns should come with unique rifling patterns that can be documented before the gun is sold.

5) All guns already sold would have to be registered, titled and the owners licensed.

6) All gun related crime regardless if fired come with a minimum 20 year sentence.

7) Some measure to prevent kids from getting hold of their parents guns. For example, charging the parents with manslaughter if their kid shoots someone with their gun.

Would this end all gun crime? No, but I'm sure it would start to make a dent on the tens of thousands of gun related deaths.

[DAB]

pass.

[FasterTraffic]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Here are what I think are fair and reasonable efforts to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't possess them.

1) Guns should be sold with a title. When you sell the gun, you have to change the title at a police station where a back ground check can be done. Isn't this what FFL dealers do?

2) Bullets should come with serial numbers, and ammo must be registered when sold. I don't see the point here.

3) Gun owners should all be required to have a license and have to pass a psychological exam. Like a drivers license, they must be retested every five years. Where are we retesting drivers every five years?

4) Guns should come with unique rifling patterns that can be documented before the gun is sold. Not all firearms have rifled barrels and the rifling is what it is. This is like saying all cars should have unique engines.

5) All guns already sold would have to be registered, titled and the owners licensed. This wouldn't be unreasonable if we knew that was the end of it.

6) All gun related crime regardless if fired come with a minimum 20 year sentence. There are already sentencing enhancements for use of a firearm in the commission of a crime.

7) Some measure to prevent kids from getting hold of their parents guns. For example, charging the parents with manslaughter if their kid shoots someone with their gun. California already requires purchase of a trigger lock or ownership of a gun safe of some type. Beyond that, you can't legislate people into doing something.

Would this end all gun crime? No, but I'm sure it would start to make a dent on the tens of thousands of gun related deaths. Color me skeptical.

Comments inline.

[GentleBen]

Do you have any concept of what that would cost?

[bsmith]

serial numbers on bullets?

uh...how?

explosion on the backside, massive impact on the front, they fragment, the brass that could be stamped...can easily be picked up.
Or in a revolver, it stays in the gun.

How would you have room to put a serial number on them, considering the amounts that are made?

[VatorMan]

Most of your items deal with regulation and trace ability. I have a problem in telling the .gov information they can use against me if say, they change their mind and decide ALL guns are banned.

I can get behind the mandatory gun crime sentencing. Subjective psych testing is well, subjective. Maybe if you've been on any kind of psych medicine or depressant medicine.
Kids/Parent accountability. I can agree with-as long as it is the parents gun. Parents of under age 14 should be responsible for monetary damages from their ankle biter as well.

[kingpin]

[DAB]

while we are at it, also make people register all their blank paper, inventory their ink, pen, and pencil supplies, tax high capacity copiers and printing presses, subject people to random searches of their papers and thoughts, require people to preview their spoken ideas before offering them in public, require offensive ideas to be kept locked up after business hours, require annual loyalty testing.......

i elect to live free.

[Chris Fowler]

1) I don't have an issue with a sensible version of this. I do not believe that infringes on the right to own. Your version is probably to much. Free exchange is probably too little.

2) Ridiculous, in my opinion. And eliminates reloads.

3) As you define it, I see this as an absolute violation of the 2nd amendment

4) Ridiculous, and nearly impossible. It would make the price of gun unreachable for most and would do nothing about the millions of guns currently in existence.

5) Impossible to implement. Again, only punishes law abiding citizens. No benefit, other than "feel good"

6) I'm not a big fan of mandatory sentencing, but I'm all for significantly harsher penalties for gun violence. Oddly, this seems to be in direct opposition to your desire to have less people in prison and rehabbing...

7) Absolutely. Parents should be held responsible if their child injures or kills someone because of their proven negligence.

And I don't think it would make much difference. You make the classic mistake of gun control people in assuming that criminals will follow the laws...

[Craig]

All of those laws would be obeyed by people who obey laws; the crime that comes from guns is by people who don't obey the law.

Several of those try to regulate guns like regulating cars; the problem I see is you can hide a gun on your person, but it's hard to hide a car on your person. So, again, the people getting licenses and trading guns with a title are the ones obeying the law. Criminals wouldn't, and there's not much you can do about it.

What is a gun related crime? If someone robs you with a knife, should he get a break in his sentence? If you shoot him for trying to rob you, do you do twenty years?

Here's my problem with more laws: They'll only be obeyed by law abiding citizens, so they don't impact crime. They do impact law enforcement though. Every time you pass new laws you put more work on law enforcement; why waste more of their time?

[Sea Six]

Joecooool, let's ask you one very important question.

Do you feel that it's ok for a law-abiding citizen who is not crazy to use a firearm in lawful self defense?


I await patiently for your answer.

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by FasterTraffic

Comments inline.

1) Guns should be sold with a title. When you sell the gun, you have to change the title at a police station where a back ground check can be done. Isn't this what FFL dealers do?

FFL isn't needed for private firearms sales.

[RedLS1GTO]

I actually started to go through those 1 by 1 but got tired of using the words ridiculous, asinine, and cost.



You want to end gun crime?? Start enforcing the laws that already exist.


Long story short... with the exception of harsher sentencing, the only thing any of that ridiculous shit would do is limit those of us who actually follow the law at a cost bordering insanity. There is nothing at all rational about any of those things and not a single 1 of them would actually prevent criminals from getting weapons. Serialized bullets??


It isn't the gun, it isn't the bullet, it is the person who pulls the trigger. To top it off... those commiting the crimes DON'T FOLLOW THE LAW. Why is that so hard for people to comprehend?

[VatorMan]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

1)
6) I'm not a big fan of mandatory sentencing, but I'm all for significantly harsher penalties for gun violence. Oddly, this seems to be in direct opposition to your desire to have less people in prison and rehabbing...

in defense of Phil-Like me, our stance on prisons come from the drug war. And not those drug related gun offenses.

[DAB]

existing law already makes it a crime to go about shooting people that are not a threat to you.

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by VatorMan

in defense of Phil-Like me, our stance on prisons come from the drug war. And not those drug related gun offenses.

Not exactly.

In his thread protesting prison crowding he quoted an author that was asking for shorter sentences for violent criminals.

And he specifically cited other countries using rehab efforts where the offender and the victims or families of the victims were brought together to help get violent criminals out of prison earlier.

[VatorMan]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

Not exactly.

In his thread protesting prison crowding he quoted an author that was asking for shorter sentences for violent criminals.

And he specifically cited other countries using rehab efforts where the offender and the victims or families of the victims were brought together to help get violent criminals out of prison earlier.

I must have missed that one-Continue to pile on then.

[lander]

I think several of his points are great! That way I can go steal a gun, use it in a crime, put it back, and some poor fool gets to go to jail in my stead!

BRILLIANT!

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by lander

I think several of his points are great! That way I can go steal a gun, use it in a crime, put it back, and some poor fool gets to go to jail in my stead!

BRILLIANT!

Imma have to ask you to turn around and put your hands behind your back.

[BuckyThreadkiller]

I'll buy number 6. It's the only one that actually punishes a criminal. You know, those guys who really don't care what kind of gun law you want to enact.



I own a rifle, a shotgun and a pistol. I got the pistol because my former next door neighbor went nuts and was threatening to kill his exwife. (She had gotten the house in the divorce) She called us one night freaked out because she thought he was breaking into their barn.

I told her to call the sheriff (20 minutes away) I went over with my pistol thinking if I found him there, a pistol under my jacket was less likely to incite him than showing up with a shotgun.

He split before I got there and there wasn't a scene, but I still think the pistol was the right call. A long gun would probably have made the situation worse.