Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: those who can - DO; those who can't - KVETCH

Posted 1 year ago on Dec. 19, 2012, 8:11 a.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

DO
If you agree, please edit this a bit and sent it to
your congressperson & Biden & Obama & anyone else who can send it on!

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Here is my proposal for a NATIONAL gun law for all guns & owners:

My four points are SIMPLY based on seeing a parallel between cars & guns.

1
all gun owners must be licensed and tested with all guns that they own and pass a written test

if you own a motor cycle, a dump truck, and a car - you are tested in each
written gun test - to guarantee the owner's understanding of gun laws being forced to know the law - via the test - means the police know who you are - and you may be less likely to commit a crime

2
every year, you must prove that you have gun liability insurance & be background checked and prove that your gun is properly locked when not used .

insurance should be at least as high as car insurance [ I would like $1,000,000 ]
you must prove your car insurance
annual back ground check to verify your suitability to own guns
every gun must be locked in a gun case or have a trigger lock

3
as the owner of a gun, you are legally responsible for what is done with it.

you are required to report if your gun is missing within 48 hours the owner will be much less likely to leave a gun accessible to a family member or thief

4 every gun must be registered and tested - and sample fired bullet stored

knowing that your gun & its bullets are so easily traced will make you think before using it

peripherally-

if we legalize drugs, we will clear out jail cells to fill with gun law breakers and free up police "time" for real crime investigation
penalties must be very high in money & jail time - especially after the first offense
no citizens ( except dealers & real collectors ) need more than a small number of guns
Gun fees should be higher for more guns.
Gun fees should be high enough to create a very substantial gun buy-back program
The nra fighting against this - will be balanced by the insurance companies fighting for it
But the nra may be in favor of this when the gun companies understand that a gun owner can get
paid to turn in their gun and they will be able to buy a new gun - with an INTEGRATED lock.
I am fundamentally NOT opposed to confiscation, but we WILL get higher compliance and lower opposition to high fees & buyback - take a position of reducing guns like assault weapons such as semi-automatic rifles - rather than punishing a gun nut who spent $10,000 on an armory.

19 Comments

19 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Many if not all of these shooters have a death wish. Traceability will have them shooting corpses AND more Vics.

End prohibition!

Begin a moratorium!

We're trying to modify/paint a speeding out of control train!!!

Put on the brakes!! Shut it down!! What is the hurry or the harm??

Let's dry-dock it and do an overhaul!!

Nothing good comes out of frenzy.

So stop with the kvetching, already!!

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 1 year ago

Why not add a DNA sample from every member in the household as good measure. Perhaps one from each family member.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

You just can't seem to wrap your mind around the fact that guns are a Constitutional right where as cars are not.

Your micro regulations and restrictions would not have prevented Lanza from acting out. All the gun laws in Conn. did not stop it.

Gun laws don't work. Making laws more restrictive and punitive for all the law abiding Americans won't change what happened and won't prevent another mad man.

GUN FREE ZONES ARE THE PROBLEM!!!

You're not thinking clearly or intelligently about this whole subject.

You are wrong as well as all the rest of the knee jerk emotional pseudo solutions that are spewing forth from this Forum.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Thank you, Mr. LaPierre

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

If defending your ideas in a meaningful way is too difficult for you perhaps you should not propose them in the first place.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Great Ideas. Insurance, & yearly inspection/registration. This will minimize the loss through theft of guns & the resulting massacres.

[-] 0 points by ChemLady (576) 1 year ago

I don't mind stricter gun laws, but it's only creating the illusion of safety. Your laws and regulations protect you from the normal people that for the most part are not the problem. Certainly more regulation may result in fewer guns and fewer accidental deaths.

In this most recent event the shooter took the guns illegally and killed the owner. In any of the mass shootings I can think of the shooter(s) don't ever seem to care about consequences. They are jumping right to the top of the crime pyramid by disregarding the laws about murder.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

we now have around 300,000,000 guns
would there be fewer gun deaths if there were only 200,000,000 guns ?
would there be fewer gun deaths if there were only 100,000,000 guns ?
would there be fewer gun deaths if there were only 10,000,000 guns ?
would there be fewer gun deaths if there were only 1,000,000 guns ?
would there be fewer gun deaths if there were only 1,000 guns ?

[-] 2 points by WSmith (5271) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Hell yes!!

What's-a-matter-U?

So stop with the kvetching, already!!

[-] 1 points by ChemLady (576) 1 year ago

We'd see fewer deaths with no guns available. Unfortunately that isn't likely to happen. Fees, registrations, required safety classes, safety features might reduce the death tole, at least from accidental shootings, and that's positive.

It won't save us from the next person with serious mental problems that wants to kill a lot of people before committing suicide. It won't stop the shootings in cities like Chicago, which is suffering through a much higher level of gun violence then Connecticut is.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

No.

[-] 0 points by shooz (26668) 1 year ago

Yes.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

No guns should have been accessible to him because he was mentally unstable. That should be part of any gun safety law as well.

[-] 2 points by ChemLady (576) 1 year ago

I don't see how you could deny the mother her constitutional right because her son had a mental problem. Yes she should be required to exercise a greater amount of caution, but if you're going to allow citizens to hold guns this type of thing is going to happen. It doesn't really matter what is legal, the people that commit murder don't have any regard for the law in the first place.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You "don't see how"? Simple, you pass a law that says 'no guns shall be accessible to the mentally ill. Any dwelling that mentally ill enters will be weapons free. Any one found breaking this law and/or training the mentally ill in gun use will be prosecuted and subject to no less than 10 years behind bars'

A gun enthusiast may keep their guns at a shooting range, or keep the mentally ill out of their home if the MUST enjoy the right to bear arms.

See how easy. Can you see it now?

[-] 1 points by ChemLady (576) 1 year ago

Any law that leaves guns available to people is simply words on paper. Words are powerless against the criminal or the criminally insane. These people don't care, they will lie use force, whatever it takes to get what they want.

The kid killed his mother to get the guns. I don't know if he would have been deterred by a drive to a gun club instead. Get rid of hand guns completely, if you're going to do something at least to it right.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

"getting rid of guns completely" is extreme and unnecessary.

Identify, monitor, and keep guns away from the mentally ill will go a long way to minimizing these atrocities.

Also closing the gun show/private sale loophole will help. Annual licensing, insurance, keeping track of every gun, & long prison terms for breaking these laws.

[-] 1 points by ChemLady (576) 1 year ago

Try to make whatever laws you think would work. I know my position is extreme. I see increased regulation as just a step in the process toward eventual elimination of guns, so I have no problem supporting it.

It's likely to cause some to give up their guns and drop murder rates because of that, but I don't believe we'll stop mass murders from killing.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

We must attempt to reduce these tragedies. Always reduce. And we WILL find one day that we HAVE eliminated them.