Your Idea for Gun Control

[Art Eatman]

Does anybody have an idea on how to control acquisition of firearms by "Bad Guys" IN ADVANCE of a sale?

Sure, we have all manner of "janitorial law", to punish illegal acts.

To give the pro-gun-control people a smidgin of credit, they want to find a way to prevent a problem. (I'm not talking about the disarmament gang.)

Now, I see no way for prevention in a one-to-one sale. Physically impossible. I'm talking about gun-show situations, for non-dealers, I guess. Also, a least-hassle concept...

Given the power of the computer, and how little time it takes Mr. Visa to check your card's validity, it seems to me that if we're going to have something like NICS, we are owed the duty for a system as efficient as Mr. Visa's. (Brand name, Model #, and Serial # is not needed by a NICS system.)

So, what would YOU do, if you were in Clinton/Hastert/Lott's shoes?

 

[bruels]

Branding on the forehead comes to mind.


------------------
Bruce Stanton
CDR, USN-Ret.

 

[Keith Rogan]

I don't know of any way to prevent the purchase of a gun in ADVANCE.
Its a moot point since the vast majority of guns used in crime are not purchased from legal sales anyway. They use stolen guns - theres an entire black market industry involved here.
However, gun violence is a function of our judicial systems complete refusal to prosecute criminals in these cases. A perp sticks up a convenience store with a stolen Glock and he's looking at 50 years with the federal violations alone! Our local DA then allows him to plea down on the local charges and doesn't even allow the federal charges to get filed. Our perp is then back on the street in 24 months with a new gun in his pocket.
More laws that won't get enforced is not the answer!


------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan

 

[4V50 Gary]

Proper grip, sight alignment and trigger control.

Oh, I do agree that no violent felon, druggie, 5150 (nut case) should possess a firearm.

Bruel's suggestion of branding on the forehead was an ancient Chinese method of disgracing the criminal. Kinda like Islam's chopping off of the right paw which marks you for life.

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt

 

[BrokenArrow]

Not so sure about that "vast majority" of crime guns being stolen. Most recent figures I saw showed the majority coming from illegal sales, straw purchases, friends, etc. Less than half were stolen IIRC?

------------------
>>>>---->

 

[GLV]

I am sure most or all of the members of TFL have filled out a federal 4473 ( yellow Sheet ). If a person is willing to commit a felony and purchase a firearm for another, I am not sure what can be done. This is a federal crime, and the federal prosecutors do not seem to want to mess with these cases, any more than the feds will mess with the 300,000 felons that have tried to buy guns, another felony.

Until federal prosecutors take the lead and prosecute those that would vilolate current laws, new laws will be meaningless. GLV

 

[Grayfox]

Stop worrying about controling criminals access to firearms. Instead concentrate on controling the criminals. Kieth Rogan has the right idea. When the BG gets caught what should be done is to file charges based on every local, state and federal law he broke. Lay it on hard and heavy. No plea bargining. Lock the SOB away for a long, long time. Make the penalties so rough that even career criminals will start thinking about another line of work. That is how to solve not just the criminals with guns problem but, the criminal problem itself.
Until the liberals figure this out, there just ain't much that can be done.

 

[Bruce in West Oz]

Thought about this on the weekend while I was driving to the range. Taking into account the fact that our laws/background are different, this is what I came up with:

* Using a firearm in the commission of a crime -- 10 yrs min., 20 yrs max., no parole (I guess no "plea bargaining" for the US); firearm prohibition for life

* Misuse of a firearm other than in the commission of a crime -- (e.g. shooting up road signs; farmers' stock etc.) -- Fine: First offence min. $5 000 to max. $10 000 PLUS damages as assessed PLUS loss of firearms and withdrawal of ownership rights for 5 years
Second offence min. $10 000 to max. $20 000 PLUS damages as assessed PLUS loss of firearms and withdrawal of ownership rights for 10 years
Third offence min. $20 000 to max. $30 000 PLUS damages as assessed PLUS loss of firearms and withdrawal of ownership rights for life PLUS option of gaol term not to exceed 2 years

* Establishment of a "Register of Prohibited Persons" -- computer-based for "Instant Check". To include those instances above PLUS anyone convicted of crimes of violence PLUS those assessed (by independent medical panel) as being "medically unfit" to possess a firearm

* Shotguns: Age to use -- 12; age to own -- 16; no registration required

* Rimfire: Age to use -- 12; age to own -- 16; no registration required

* Centrefire: Age to use -- 12; age to own -- 18; no registration required

* Handgun: Age to use -- 12; age to own -- 21.
Required: Mandatory training (min. 20 hours) by recognised firearms club; 90% pass mark. This allows firearm for home defence and sports purposes, but NOT CCW.
CCW: Min age -- 25. Required: Mandatory membership of approved gun club for minimum two years, with advanced training above basic level (min. 20 hours); 100% pass mark required PLUS written support from gun club.

Well, there you go -- a lot of you are going to hate these, but believe me, compared to what we have here now, this would be Paradise!

B

 

[bronco61]

Bruce, you were pretty much on target until you starting talking "Register firearms". Sorry, but I'm not looking for "Paradise". I'm looking to live under the Constitution as it was written and intended.

 

[Bulldog]

I like the branding on the forehead idea.



------------------
"Society is well governed when the people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the laws." - Solon

 

[Bruce from West Oz]

Bronco:

Mate, couldn't agree with you more ... 'cept we don't have a Constitution .. which is what I was alluding to in my intro to the piece.

Incidentally, my piece was probably poorly written (done in the office with the Boss hovering ), but I intended for there to be NO registration -- it's something I see no use for. I can't see where I said otherwise, but my sin is prob'ly an error of omission.

B

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Bulldog: Or a tatoo. Actually, I've suggested in another forum that people convicted of violent crimes be required to wear electronic tethers for the rest of their lives, with a severe penalty for tampering.

 

[Mike in VA]

I don't think you can control it without forcing all sales to go thru an FFL. On the post facto side, though, Operation Exile seemed to be working pretty well in Richmond, VA. It basically slams teh perp with Federal firearms charges that won't get bargained away, then they're sent to a federal prison, far away. It has cut gun-related crime significantly (detail available at NRA/ILA site). The answer becomes obvious - enforce existing laws.
M2

 

[leedesert]

First you can't keep guns out of criminals hands. There will always be a black market and if not they will steal them.
To prevent stupid criminals who try to by a legal gun even though they know they have a criminal record you have to enforce current law. If someone purchasing a gun turns up with a felony record in the background check the store clerk should have to immediatly contact local authorities. This should be done while the individual is in the store waiting so that before he leaves someone comes to escort him to jail. This kind of public display of enforcement will send a message to everyone.
The problem is Liberals always quote how many illegal gun purchases their background checks have discovered and prevented. Ask them how many they have convicted and you will hear silence.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16

 

[cornered rat]

On branding of criminals...bad idea!
<h1>Lousy idea</h1>
Who's determining the criminal/non-criminal status these days? Yep, govt. employees with Gestapo mentality. You, and I and lots of our friends run a risk of getting a brand on the forhead or a nice string of numbers tattoo's on our arms...

Worse yet, remember how the gun laws added legal disabilities retroactively? Look forward to lots more of that in the near future.

------------------
Cornered Rat, now at bay
ddb.com/RKBA Updated March 20
"Disarm, then past the barbed wire, into the oven and out of the smoke-stack..."

 

[Art Eatman]

For all that I am in accord with "branding", I think that points in BrokenArrow's and in GLV's posts are germane: For "Straw man" purchases or somebody willing to commit perjury on the "yellow sheet", there is no LAW which can help.

Bruce in West Oz offered some points I've considered through the years...

FWIW, I have been mumbling around with all this since somewhere in the '70s (1970s, Dennis) and just wondered if anybody could come up with something truly helpful...

Thanks, All

Art

 

[Paul Revere]

"Smigen of credit"????? Come on guys. Compromising is what the antis want us to do. Look at Dr. John Lott's study of the amount of guns in circulation used to commit crimes versus those in circulation. It's an extremely small number in comparison. It's the good guys who have the vast majority of firearms, not the criminals. Gun control has nothing to do with crime prevention...IT DOES NOT WORK! Each and every single gun law is an "INFRINGEMENT" to our second amendment rights!!! All of them are UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! We are the ones obeying the laws remember, not the criminals!!!!

Laws that are broken require jurisprudence. Swift and effective punishment.... PROSECUTION!!!

We cannot be a part of the antis' scheme to nitpick our rights away. We have a CONSTITUTION!!!! If the Constitution says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED", then there should not be any discussion about infringement. PERIOD.

 

[Paul B.]

Just a comment on the fud's(OOPS! Feds) not prosecuting felon who are caught in the background check. The powers that be, IE Klinton, Reno, Freeh, et. al. don't want to prosecute. They want the crimes to continue so they can keep calling for more strict gun control laws. They don't want to disarm crooks. They want to disarm US!
Paul B.

 

[Coinneach]

Just a comment on the fud's

Hmmm...

F***ed-Up Dips**ts?


------------------
"We are going to fight. We are going to be hurt.
But in the end, we will stand."
--Roland Deschain

 

[DC]

Read this again:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Just a comment on the fud's(OOPS! Feds) not prosecuting felon
who are caught in the background check. The powers that be, IE
Klinton, Reno, Freeh, et. al. don't want to prosecute. They want
the crimes to continue so they can keep calling for more strict gun
control laws. They don't want to disarm crooks. They want to
disarm US!
Paul B.[/quote]

100% on target folks...this crap about crime is total BS....its a new campaign issue and its a means of grabbing power, period!

1)172 amendments to the Juvenile crime bill...most have nothing to do with juvenile crime
2)World wide disarming of private citizens: Australia, Brazil, pressure on the Swiss

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"