Let's get practical about this whole mess

[Scruit]

You need to reasearch the way that word was used in the time of our Founding Fathers. Read the writings of the Founders and use their words to come to a proper context for 'regulated'. Do you really believe that Thomas Jefferson thought the government should regulate the citizens? Or' date=' more sensibly, do you believe the Founders believed in a 'well-disciplined, properly functioning' citizen militia?

Would you use today's colloquial to study historical documents of biblical times? Why would you use it to study the meanings of the Founders? They didn't speak as we speak.[/quote']

Can you give me an example of "regulated" meaning "trained" in any of the documents from that time period?

EDIT: Here's one... http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_29.html

The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.

So, Alexander Hamilton said that a well-regulated militia means a well trained militia, but that the amount of training required is beyond what the general public could achieve. Following this meaning, would the "well regulated milita" mean only those people sufficiently trained as to be ready to go to war?

Edited January 2, 2013 by Scruit

[Helmutt]

The more that gun sales are regulated, the larger the underground gun market will become - it's a symbiant circle of cause/effect and felons dont/wont care about ANY laws pertaining to proper gun purchase and use, they will simply find a way and I can't see any other way around this, ever - even if the entire countries weapons are confiscated and consumer sales are completely shut down, there will always be something that modern day criminals can do to get them or manufacture their own

[Scruit]

We need to better identify the source of illegal weapons, and work to try to stop those sources (knowing we will never stop them completely)

Most common sources or criminals' guns (according to the pdf in the other thread) are stolen, obtained from from family/friends (including straw purchases?) and "existing black market".

Stolen: Safe storage. If it's not in your holster it needs to be in a safe. Anyone who burglarizes your home should not be able to easily walk out with your guns.

Family/Friends: People need to be responsible for who they give their guns to. Straw purchases are already a felony (falsifying federal records wrt 4473). How much "more illegal" can you make it?

Existing black market: Gun buybacks with amnesty help in a small way but if the buyback paid out more then they'd get more guns in. This also creates a problem whereby the gun may be evidence in a crime, but it's generally better to stop a future crime than solve an existing one. They need to figure out the black market value of these guns and see if it makes sense to match or beat that. Guns turned in at a buyback need to be returned to the rightful owner if determined to be stolen. This may be an insurance company (whereby they may just allow it to be destroyed) or an individual. Even after NFA or the new AWB, and stolen guns (even "banned" guns) recovered by the police should be returned to their rightful owner, no hiding behind the "no transfer" rule.

Continued police enforcement upon finding illegal guns, etc, is always going to be necessary against the black market.

Penalties for possession of a stolen gun need to be high enough to dissuade lower level criminals. The girlfriend who agrees to "hold" her boyfriend's illegal firearm needs to know that she's looking at several years in jail if caught.

Suggestions to help fund a buyback this:

1) When a gun returned to the rightful owner, that owner has to pay the cost of processing/returning the gun. This will go to pay for the manpower required to trace the gun. The tracing would only include checking for the serial number in police reports of stolen guns, not trying to follow the gun's history through sales. If it was not reported stolen then tough.

2) The police and government should be able to keep and use any guns they can make use of (lowering the cost of procuring guns) provided that no lawful owner exists or can be found, and that the gun is not wanted in any crime (ballistic fingerprinting, if that is still a valid thing or easily searched. etc) If people voluntarily turn in a gun that the police can use, why not let them use it? or other branches of government. Guns that are siezed, rather than voluntarily surrendered, would have to be returned to the lawful owner or destroyed - don't want to set up a system when the police can think; "That guy has a nice rifle, let's seize it on a pretense and keep it!"

3) The destroyed guns would be recycled and the scrap would help fund the program.

[4DAIVI PAI2K5]

We need to better identify the source of illegal weapons, and work to try to stop those sources (knowing we will never stop them completely)

Most common sources or criminals' guns (according to the pdf in the other thread) are stolen, obtained from from family/friends (including straw purchases?) and "existing black market".

Stolen: Safe storage. If it's not in your holster it needs to be in a safe. Anyone who burglarizes your home should not be able to easily walk out with your guns.

Family/Friends: People need to be responsible for who they give their guns to. Straw purchases are already a felony (falsifying federal records wrt 4473). How much "more illegal" can you make it?

Existing black market: Gun buybacks with amnesty help in a small way but if the buyback paid out more then they'd get more guns in. This also creates a problem whereby the gun may be evidence in a crime, but it's generally better to stop a future crime than solve an existing one. They need to figure out the black market value of these guns and see if it makes sense to match or beat that. Guns turned in at a buyback need to be returned to the rightful owner if determined to be stolen. This may be an insurance company (whereby they may just allow it to be destroyed) or an individual. Even after NFA or the new AWB, and stolen guns (even "banned" guns) recovered by the police should be returned to their rightful owner, no hiding behind the "no transfer" rule.

Continued police enforcement upon finding illegal guns, etc, is always going to be necessary against the black market.

Penalties for possession of a stolen gun need to be high enough to dissuade lower level criminals. The girlfriend who agrees to "hold" her boyfriend's illegal firearm needs to know that she's looking at several years in jail if caught.

Suggestions to help fund a buyback this:

1) When a gun returned to the rightful owner, that owner has to pay the cost of processing/returning the gun. This will go to pay for the manpower required to trace the gun. The tracing would only include checking for the serial number in police reports of stolen guns, not trying to follow the gun's history through sales. If it was not reported stolen then tough.

2) The police and government should be able to keep and use any guns they can make use of (lowering the cost of procuring guns) provided that no lawful owner exists or can be found, and that the gun is not wanted in any crime (ballistic fingerprinting, if that is still a valid thing or easily searched. etc) If people voluntarily turn in a gun that the police can use, why not let them use it? or other branches of government. Guns that are siezed, rather than voluntarily surrendered, would have to be returned to the lawful owner or destroyed - don't want to set up a system when the police can think; "That guy has a nice rifle, let's seize it on a pretense and keep it!"

3) The destroyed guns would be recycled and the scrap would help fund the program.

1) the mother fucker that stole the gun should pay. Not the owner.

[jbot]

i have no false pretenses that any idea that might be generated out of any discussion here would make a difference, but unfortunately, i think some laws (useless, reactionary measures) WILL get passed, and i'm trying to see what people would come up with the basis that if something had to be passed into law, what would it be?

my thinking is, if SOMETHING had to be passed, instead of looking at it from point of view where we're making it even harder for regular citizens to purchase them legally (and not impacting illegal sales), I'd approach it with a point of view where we're going after those who are actually committing crimes/felonies.

like it was pointed out, it's already illegal to make a straw man purchase, and already illegal for an FFL to sell to those who are not eligible to own/possess guns. so what else can be done that makes sense?

i'm not for passing any new laws on this, so don't get your panties in a bunch or anything... more of a theoretical question of: if tomorrow, we had to pass SOME/ANY law to help bring down crime with fire arms (even if it IS a small number), what would your idea be? and trying to keep it realistic while we're at it, not something like "cut their fucking heads off"

[swingset]

Would not be for private party sales as in face to face. I would suggest only gun show sales be regulated.

Gun show sales (dealer to customer) are already regulated and require NICS check.

The rest is just face to face private party sales - and to differentiate between a gun show and the parking lot, or between two people who arrange a sale in a newspaper, or on this board, or whatever is silly. I meet you in the gun show, you wanna buy my gun? If we can't do it in the show, we'll just arrange to meet at the McDonald's across the street. It's unworkable, and silly.

There is no "gun show loophole".

There are private party sales, and FFL sales. Period.

[Pokey]

I am guessing that all gun shows will be gone, and any personal sales must go through the local Sheriff's department "some states already do this". The whole thing about somebody buying a gun for you, whether they get a better discount or simply because they don't want the gun to be registered to them. Doesn't it already state on the registration paperwork, that if you are not the actual buyer/owner of this gun, that you are breaking the law?

Oh and by the way.....nothing is gonna work to avoid another gun related tragedy, even if all weapons were "tried" to be confiscated. There are so many older guns out there that don't even exist beyond the owner knowing about it, so those weapons could easily be hidden if the Feds come after registered firearms. I feel that BHO and his cronies realize that nothing is going to be a viable solution, but they must do something for nothing.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Pokey

[swingset]

Illegal firearm crime is insignificant against illegal drunk driving accidents/death. Why do we even give a damn about this' date=' at all? There are far graver dangers out there than guns. Why is this an issue to any of you? You're more likely to be killed coming home from work than you are to be attacked by a gunman.[/quote']

Because guns are vilified, feared and politicized. They're viewed as different from cars, because 600 years ago they were designed for war and thus all of them are imbued with evil spirits. They compel people to be violent when in their presence.

See: Magz

[Scruit]

Illegal firearm crime is insignificant against illegal drunk driving accidents/death. Why do we even give a damn about this' date=' at all? There are far graver dangers out there than guns. Why is this an issue to any of you? You're more likely to be killed coming home from work than you are to be attacked by a gunman.[/quote']

Nobody is currently attacking our ability to drive cars.

When attacked, we defend, or we lose.

[Pokey]

Nobody is currently attacking our ability to drive cars.

When attacked, we defend, or we lose.

I am attacked by somebody every single day on the public roads, so yes I am under an attack for my ability to drive safely. And isn't that a big reason why you video pretty much everything when you drive/ride?

[Scruit]

1) the mother fucker that stole the gun should pay. Not the owner.

If you can find said M-F then go for it. I offer that as an alternative to having the taxpayer foot the bill (or not being able to fund the buyback)

[imprez55]

If we are going to get practical about this issue, than we need to get at the heart of both WHY and HOW these people go through mass shootings (mass and high profile shootings are the only thing that get the public riled up, so I think we can restrict it to that). The major response to WHY is that these people are mentally unstable. Our country has a piss poor system of acknowledging, responding and treating mentally ill patients. We have it in our laws that those who are mentally unstable may not have a gun, but how often is that actually used? The media then treats these shooters as famous celebrities; telling you their entire background, when they are going to court next, how they looked in court, did they have compassion, what did they say etc... Someone who is mentally ill with no social network would see this as a way to become famous and would try to 1-up the last person. Can you name 5 total victims from either the batman or CT shootings? Chances are that you can't, but I'm sure the shooters' names are a lot clearer. We have already repeatedly stated and shown in this thread that guns are not the problem. You cannot convince someone that guns are not the problem if they believe they are, instead give them an alternate reason and something else to regulate. People want to do something to prevent shootings, the only thing that comes to most people's mind is laws and regulation, so give them something else to regulate.

I would also like to touch on the point that felon =/= bad person. It doesn't mean they are in a gang, it doesn't mean they joined one in prison, it doesn't mean they are violent, it doesn't mean they will commit crimes and it doesn't mean they are irresponsible with firearms. It means they committed a felony, then they served their time and are square with the state. This is a whole different issue of "rehabilitation" and our inability to see those who went to jail as normal people again, which I will not touch on. But lets not group those who committed copyright infringement, vandalism (on federal property) etc. on the same pedestal as violent, repeat offenders.

[Pokey]

Like I have said in many other posts.......the MEDIA is responsible for so many of this country's issues. Take somebody that just isn't quite right in the head and make them a celebrity after a mass killing "whether they live or die" they become famous. I hate the media.....I loathe the media. Their sole existence "now" is to get the natives riled up, plain and simple.

[max power]

I am attacked by somebody every single day on the public roads, so yes I am under an attack for my ability to drive safely. And isn't that a big reason why you video pretty much everything when you drive/ride?

[Scruit]

I am attacked by somebody every single day on the public roads, so yes I am under an attack for my ability to drive safely. And isn't that a big reason why you video pretty much everything when you drive/ride?

Driving is not under attack until someone like Feinstein says she's going to introduce a mandatory buyback of cars.

[Anden]

Driving a car is a privilege. It is not a right granted to you at all.

Some one else touched on another thought I had. Make gun owners responsible for thier guns. Properly stored and what not. So if anyone gets ahold of a gun that doesn't belong to them the owner is held accountable also. So if your shit is stolen you get fined. Call it a criminal activity buy out.

[swingset]

Lots of guns that are stolen were locked or secured, btw, even a vault can be opened or broken into. Are you guilty if you put a lock on your gun and a burglar steals it? BTW, locked guns are pretty fucking useless in home defense. So, readily-accessible equals criminally negligent. The antis are gonna fucking love that.

This whole thing is again pushing blame away from people who harm, and putting special focus on an object and imagining that it is somehow more evil than another, even when in some cases it's responsible for far less death or used far less than other tools to commit harm. Guns aren't worthy of more regulation than a set of car keys, they're just not.

Let's just hold criminals responsible for crime, and leave our civil liberties intact shall we?

Edited January 2, 2013 by swingset

[OsuMj]

That's fucking ridiculous. Would you fine me if my car was stolen?

I'm gonna have to agree with IP here... that's ridiculous. There is a certain amount of accountability that gun owners should have - but since when should we be responsible for the acts that criminals take against us?? I agree that securing your gun is VERY important, but if a CRIMINAL breaks into someone's home, STEALS a weapon, then COMMITS A CRIME, how is that the gun owner's fault??

[4DAIVI PAI2K5]

Driving a car is a privilege. It is not a right granted to you at all.

Some one else touched on another thought I had. Make gun owners responsible for thier guns. Properly stored and what not. So if anyone gets ahold of a gun that doesn't belong to them the owner is held accountable also. So if your shit is stolen you get fined. Call it a criminal activity buy out.

Had someone tell me this the other day. My response was. I lock my house, I lock my gun safe what else am I supposed to do? I am the victim of a crime! If that mother fucker hadnt stolen from me they wouldnt have been used in a crime.

That's fucking ridiculous. Would you fine me if my car was stolen?

Agree

[Scruit]

So' date=' your idea of defending your right to own a gun is more legislation? Either I smoked the wrong shit this morning, or you aren't making any goddamn sense. [/quote']

Yep, wrong shit.

You asked:

Illegal firearm crime is insignificant against illegal drunk driving accidents/death. Why do we even give a damn about this, at all? There are far graver dangers out there than guns. Why is this an issue to any of you? You're more likely to be killed coming home from work than you are to be attacked by a gunman.

I answered that we all care about it because our rights are under attack.

No right is absolute. Free speech does not protect libel. Freedom of religion doesn't allow you to sacrifice virgins. The right to bear arms should not allow mentally distrubed people to own guns.

The solution is going to be a compromise, or it's going to be an absolute on one end of the the scale or the other. If we refuse to budge on anything and the killing continue then we may even see the 2a repealed. Instead of that I'm trying to suggest laws/processes that actually have the potential to work while preserving 2a intact for law-abiding citizens.

I will also add that there's too many people on this site that will jump down your throat for making suggestions. If you don't like it, suggest something else. We're trying to have a dialog, and vitriolic rhetoric on either side is not going to help. We all want to see fewer gun crimes. We also seem to be unwilling to even allow a conversation on how to achieve that. Fine, that's your choice. With the political weight behind the gun grabbers right now you my find that "From my cold dead hands" might just come to pass.

[Scruit]

That's fucking ridiculous. Would you fine me if my car was stolen?

If you leave your car outside with the engine running... Yeah, you should be fined.

I think the AWB will do most of the work of safe storage laws - anyone who had an AR stolen will never be able to replace it, so you can be damned sure I'm upgrading my safe.

[Scruit]

Let's just hold criminals responsible for crime, and leave our civil liberties intact shall we?

That approach hasn't worked to date.

We keep saying there is no one single solution, but then shoot down suggestions unless they fix everything.

Safe storage is a good idea, and responsible gun owners already store their weapons in a secure manner. Guns stolen from lawful owners wind up in criminal hands being used for crimes. Higher gun crimes result in more calls for gun control. It's like a dog licking it's own arsehole.

Whether we do it by passing a law, or through a public education campaign, or some not-yet-suggested means, having guns stored safely will cut down on the number of new black market guns.

My safe allows me to access my guns in a couple of seconds. My carry piece is either is either in my holster or in my safe. I never leave any of my guns in a room I am not in unless they are locked up.

Again with the rhetoric. This is a discussion, not a soap box. Tell me how you would solve the problem of lawfully held guns being stolen and winding up in the black market.

[TSB67]

That approach hasn't worked to date.

Really? So your threshold for an acceptable amount of gun violence is zero? Sorry, but if that's the case the only approach that is going to work is to destroy all guns. Who goes first?

[swingset]

That approach hasn't worked to date.

As opposed to what? Holding ME responsible for what someone takes from me and uses for harm? Are you nuts? I shouldn't have to forego my individual rights because of the actions of someone else who takes from me, and then does harm. That's fucking nuts, and scary, and a slippery slope that is worse than the scary freedom we started out with in this country.

We keep saying there is no one single solution, but then shoot down suggestions unless they fix everything.

The solution isn't punishing the law abiding, period. That's morally wrong, on top of being utterly non-effective.

Safe storage is a good idea, and responsible gun owners already store their weapons in a secure manner. Guns stolen from lawful owners wind up in criminal hands being used for crimes. Higher gun crimes result in more calls for gun control. It's like a dog licking it's own arsehole.

What is safe storage? Under so much lock and key that it's inaccessible when I need it? Fuck that. And, who decides what is appropriate and enough? If I break into your house, and torch your safe, are you still responsible? Why not? How is that different than the lock on the door? I just fucking hate your mindset on this. Guns are so reprehensible they need special care and super secure storage...fuck that.

Whether we do it by passing a law, or through a public education campaign, or some not-yet-suggested means, having guns stored safely will cut down on the number of new black market guns.

No it won't.

My safe allows me to access my guns in a couple of seconds. My carry piece is either is either in my holster or in my safe. I never leave any of my guns in a room I am not in unless they are locked up.

And those couple of seconds might mean your life. You have no clue, none, how fast you'll need them or your ability to bring them to bear...but that's another topic. It's not up to you to dictate how I store my belongings, what's important is that the person who uses them for harm is punished, not me.

Again with the rhetoric. This is a discussion, not a soap box. Tell me how you would solve the problem of lawfully held guns being stolen and winding up in the black market.

I'm not out to solve that problem, you're confused. People will always steal and get what they need for crime. No stupid feel-good bandaid bullshit legislation is going to fix that. Hell, prisons are the most controlled place in our society and drugs, weapons and even guns can be had inside those walls. You think a law about safe storage is going to help?

Focus on the criminal, and punish them, and allow the rest of us who are good guys to keep and carry our guns. THAT has a track record of protecting people and reducing violent crime.

Now, off my soapbox that offends you so. I'm sorry my hateful rhetoric hurt your ears, Magz.

[OsuMj]

I never leave any of my guns in a room I am not in unless they are locked up.

Out of curiosity, if during this [THREAD], someone broke in and stole this firearm, is that your fault?