Build Your own Gun Laws : What would YOU do ?

[james_bond_007]

It is just a matter of time before SOME form of new legislation rolls along to attempt to reduce Gun Violence and unnecessary firearms-related deaths.
It is not likely that any of us will have much influence, in a first hand fashion.
We can ALL express our opinions to our legislators, and hopefully influence them to support our positions. But this only offers our influence in a 2nd hand fashion.

It is a fact that the US has more Gun Violence issues than any of us would like to see occur (I won't even TRY to quote statistics...let's just say that ANY Gun Violence issue is one too many).
Any time a Gun Violence issue occurs, it just hurts the rest of the firearms community, who have come to enjoy, respect, and safely use firearms, year-after-year, WITHOUT any incidents.
There are a lot of knowledgeable and diverse (culturally, occupationally, economically, etc.) forum members here with opinions on this subject.

I'd like to pose some hypothetical questions.

WHAT IF :

1. You, personally, were asked to offer a list of "problems" that you feel contribute to Gun Violence. What would be on your list and how would you rank them in priority to be "fixed/addressed"?
2. You, personally, were asked to offer a strategy to help reduce the Gun Violence issues in the US. What would you suggest be done ? What would you do first ?
3. You, personally, were asked to compromise some of the smaller existing privileges in order to preserve the other more important ones.
   (We all know that if we were in a position to negotiate, there would have to be some give and take. We would not get EVERYTHING we wanted. )
   What would you be willing TO and NOT TO give up ?

NOTE: The question is "How to reduce Gun Violence in the USA". The suggestions for fixes may not likely be all firearms related.
If the tragedies that have occurred, had not occurred with firearms being involved, but with other means, they would still be tragic, nonetheless. Many of the "root causes" would, however, probably be more likely to be identified, rather than being masked by an attempt to control the method used (i.e. firearms).


So...what would you do if you, personally, could do something ?

[Great-Kazoo]

It is just a matter of time before SOME form of new legislation rolls along to attempt to reduce Gun Violence and unnecessary firearms-related deaths.
It is not likely that any of us will have much influence, in a first hand fashion.
We can ALL express our opinions to our legislators, and hopefully influence them to support our positions. But this only offers our influence in a 2nd hand fashion.

It is a fact that the US has more Gun Violence issues than any of us would like to see occur (I won't even TRY to quote statistics...let's just say that ANY Gun Violence issue is one too many).
Any time a Gun Violence issue occurs, it just hurts the rest of the firearms community, who have come to enjoy, respect, and safely use firearms, year-after-year, WITHOUT any incidents.
There are a lot of knowledgeable and diverse (culturally, occupationally, economically, etc.) forum members here with opinions on this subject.

I'd like to pose some hypothetical questions.

WHAT IF :

1. You, personally, were asked to offer a list of "problems" that you feel contribute to Gun Violence. What would be on your list and how would you rank them in priority to be "fixed/addressed"?
2. You, personally, were asked to offer a strategy to help reduce the Gun Violence issues in the US. What would you suggest be done ? What would you do first ?
3. You, personally, were asked to compromise some of the smaller existing privileges in order to preserve the other more important ones.
   (We all know that if we were in a position to negotiate, there would have to be some give and take. We would not get EVERYTHING we wanted. )
   What would you be willing TO and NOT TO give up ?

NOTE: The question is "How to reduce Gun Violence in the USA". The suggestions for fixes may not likely be all firearms related.
If the tragedies that have occurred, had not occurred with firearms being involved, but with other means, they would still be tragic, nonetheless. Many of the "root causes" would, however, probably be more likely to be identified, rather than being masked by an attempt to control the method used (i.e. firearms).


So...what would you do if you, personally, could do something ?

MANDATORY SENTENCING
IN NY they have a revolving door policy with gun arrest. I know for a FACT a felon arrested on monday morn and arrainged the same day is back on the street by tuesday morning the latest. This FELON (repeat BTW) was in possession of a firearm along with drugs and let go. NUMEROUS TIMES.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK TOUGH ON CRIME STAND BEHIND YOUR WORDS MAYOR BLOOMBUG
SAME FOR EVERY TOUGH GUN LAW LEGISLATOR

[Sharpienads]

I thought this was going to be a thread about laws concerning building your own guns.

[spqrzilla]

We have more knife violence in this country than many other countries too. Maybe that's a clue.

[Ronin13]

As controversial as this may be- we should have ONE new law regarding guns/criminals- they should know that they can't purchase a gun (got this idea from Penn Jillette), if you're a felon and you attempt to purchase a firearm (not just denied for whatever reason, because my brother has been denied in the past and then cleared it up and could buy), you shouldn't be told 'no' then be allowed to just walk away. I'm not a lawyer or legislator, so I'm not sure what you could punish them with, but I'd say something to the effect of community service and/or probation or something.

[OneGuy67]

As controversial as this may be- we should have ONE new law regarding guns/criminals- they should know that they can't purchase a gun (got this idea from Penn Jillette), if you're a felon and you attempt to purchase a firearm (not just denied for whatever reason, because my brother has been denied in the past and then cleared it up and could buy), you shouldn't be told 'no' then be allowed to just walk away. I'm not a lawyer or legislator, so I'm not sure what you could punish them with, but I'd say something to the effect of community service and/or probation or something.

This one point is an interesting issue that I've tried to deal with before. I have tried to prosecute a felon who lied on the federal form 4473 in order to obtain a firearm and was denied. The local DA wouldn't take the case as he believed it was a federal issue due to lying on a federal form; the federal prosecutor wouldn't take the case as it didn't satisfy their minimum threshold for prosecution. So what is the local LE to do other than be blamed by the likes of Rich Wyatt for not doing anything about that issue? It would take a revamping of our current system and to have state level forms instead of federal level forms, state level control over federal control to change the environment. California requires state forms ON TOP of the federal forms for certain purchases. We may be right there shortly, depending upon what the Dems propose this legislative session.

[TFOGGER]

This one point is an interesting issue that I've tried to deal with before. I have tried to prosecute a felon who lied on the federal form 4473 in order to obtain a firearm and was denied. The local DA wouldn't take the case as he believed it was a federal issue due to lying on a federal form; the federal prosecutor wouldn't take the case as it didn't satisfy their minimum threshold for prosecution. So what is the local LE to do other than be blamed by the likes of Rich Wyatt for not doing anything about that issue? It would take a revamping of our current system and to have state level forms instead of federal level forms, state level control over federal control to change the environment. California requires state forms ON TOP of the federal forms for certain purchases. We may be right there shortly, depending upon what the Dems propose this legislative session.

CRS 18-12-108 covers possession, but doesn't address attempted purchase. Perhaps we can get Looper to settle for making state law more effective, instead of passing do-nothing feel-good bullshit...

[james_bond_007]

... I have tried to prosecute a felon who lied on the federal form 4473 in order to obtain a firearm and was denied...

I'd like to offer my thanks for at least TRYING to do the right thing.

I'm sorry the authorities were not more cooperative.


To another point, any chance this guy would TRY to buy a firearm FTF after being denied by an FFL? (add sarcasm here)

In FTF transactions it is hard to tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys", even if you WANT to do the right thing.
After all, there is not a big "FELON" tag marked on a DL, or rotated DL like the "Under 21" licenses, to make it easy to identify them.
There is not, to my knowledge, even a more discrete way, to determine felons, like a publicly accessible online DB, as there is for sex offenders.
(The THOUGHT of something like that probably violates a former felon's "rights" in someway, right ?)

And in OneGuy67's case, when he COULD tell it was a "bad" guy, no one would HELP him do the right thing.

[wreave]

This isn't going to be a popular opinion here, but I would support a Colorado-style instant check law to be spread nationwide. Colorado's instant check includes mental health, which the national check does not. I would also support requiring background check before all transfers, including private party. Yes, I know that will get me flamed on here. But I can see the transfers that take place, and "peek at your CO DL" does not support our cause. It does not help the law-abiding, gun-owning public to exhibit such trust when there are many people out there who are prohibited from owning guns, who just buy them private party from people who put on the blinders and pretend not to care.

The instant check law should include prosecution of people who are prohibited from owning a gun that try to buy one anyway. Our current system is: 1) try it, see if you get approved; 2) buy one private party. I doubt any of you would support arming people who are legally prohibited from owning a gun, but that's what occurring. Let's be smart.

The instant check system must include sufficient funding and staff to avoid the de facto waiting period we're currently experiencing. That's not okay, and we must make our voices heard.

Lost or stolen firearms must be reported to the police promptly. This is to keep the unethical person from selling a gun and just waiting to say, "Oh yeah, that was stolen" if it ever comes back to bite them.

This will not be terribly popular on this board or in some elements of the gun-owning community, but it is very likely to have a positive impact on both gun violence and the national perspective on gun owners. The current system makes it far too easy for people to get guns that aren't supposed to have them. We can do better.

On the flip side, we should eliminate gun free zones in all public buildings, except those with metal detectors and armed security. Yes, including schools (obviously). Private property may continue to post as they do now, but NOT facilities that count as "places of public accommodation".

Concealed carry permits should be shall-issue on a system similar to Colorado's, obviously with reciprocity.

Criminals who commit assault or other crimes should be prosecuted. I'm tired of hearing, "commit a crime with a gun and go to jail". How about "commit a crime and go to jail"? What does the instrument matter? Negligence, drunk driving, and other vehicular assaults should be no different from assaults with a gun or a knife or a baseball bat.

I don't think this "gives up" anything. Making the system work isn't giving up. In Colorado, we "closed the gun show loophole" and it was fine (except for this weekend, due to the general panic, which is causing a massive, unprecedented cluster fuck). They should do it nationally, and we should do the same with private party sales.

[XC700116]

This isn't going to be a popular opinion here, but I would support a Colorado-style instant check law to be spread nationwide. Colorado's instant check includes mental health, which the national check does not. I would also support requiring background check before all transfers, including private party. Yes, I know that will get me flamed on here. But I can see the transfers that take place, and "peek at your CO DL" does not support our cause. It does not help the law-abiding, gun-owning public to exhibit such trust when there are many people out there who are prohibited from owning guns, who just buy them private party from people who put on the blinders and pretend not to care..

I think most of us that deal with FTF on PP guns would be willing to take this step, if we could get access to the NICS or CBI without having to go to an FFL and pay for it. Something like a 1 time fee of $100 or something for a ID and passcode access to the system from our own computer, and then just fill out a standard form similar to a 4473 to run through and retain for record. This wouldn't be making everyone an FFL, but giving us access to the system for PP sales only, and not allow shipment of firearms into and out of state, or anything that we currently have to go through an FFL for. Not that I would mind if it did allow all powers of an FFL, but I'm also realistic enough to believe that the FFL's need to be able to hold onto that for business viability, and I'm OK with that.