Step 1: ban the manufacture of handguns

[XemaSab]

Step 2: ban the import of handguns

Step 3: mandatory registry for existing handguns

Step 4: imprint handgun bullet casings with an ID number traceable to the box

Step 5: mandatory ID for sale of handgun ammunition

Step 6: no tax on handgun ammunition sold and fired at a licensed range; $20 a box tax on handgun ammunition taken off the range

Step 7: tax proceeds from the sale of ammunition will be used for handgun buybacks

Step 8: handguns surrendered during buybacks will be destroyed

Step 9: if you're caught with a handgun or ammunition that isn't registered to you, it's a mandatory felony

[Gregorian]

1. Prohibition doesn't work.

A healthy society is one where people can look at things like alcohol without killing themselves with it.

It's like trickle down.

This shit only works from the bottom up.


But having said that, in situations like the one we're in, alternatives to the best way may be needed. I honestly think there's no going back now. And I'm not even going to repeat myself because my answer to most of our problems comes back to the one thing I mention most. Rats in a cage.

Also, if I were faced with fixing the problem, I'd start with the things Bernie Sanders is talking about:
Income equality
Free tuition
Health care for all

This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum.

[salib]

34. I do not see the ideas proposed in the OP as "prohibition".

Very strict regulation, yes.

But one can still own and use handguns with the proposal.

Let's not straw man this one.

[Gregorian]

42. I see your point. It's probably good to work both ends of this, too.

I saw it as coming from the wrong end. But there really is no reason to make it easy to get guns.

I think the idea is that there is an immediate problem, and also one that takes generations.

[LittleBlue]

2. Second Amendment

The courts aren't braindead. That is constructively a ban on guns and a violation of the 2A.

Public opposition to handguns ban at record high 74%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/165563/remains-divided-passing-stricter-gun-laws.aspx

[theycallmetrinity]

3. Would they still be manufactured for police forces ?

[rdking647]

4. unless the 2nd is repealed

it cant happen

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. Which of those steps actually violates the second amendment? nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. An effective ban on guns is unconstitutional the same as

prohibitively expensive taxes on printer's ink.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

11. Where's the effective ban?

There are what, something like 250 million guns in the country? Even if no new guns are made, no new guns are allowed into the country, with fewer individuals actually wanting guns, it's going to be a looooong time before you get any where near an 'effective ban'.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. You can play coy little semantic games but that's al they'll ever be.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

13. "OMG! We're limited to a maximum of 250 million guns!!! That's an 'effective ban'!!!!

Yeah, coy little semantic games.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. So, as soon as the number of guns dips below 250 million you'll lift the restrictions?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

16. Nope. At the point at which gun stores run out of guns to sell, though,

you could let one gun be imported into the country for every person who doesn't own a gun but still wants one and can't get it any other way. Make it an effective 'one per customer' policy, if you want a new gun, you have to turn in your old gun.

So everybody who wants a gun can still get one, but only one.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. Why only one? Different types of guns serve different functions.

Of course the more you write the more it betrays the fact you're trying to institute a ban.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

20. The vast majority of people don't need 'different functions'.

People collect them like they're toys or china, but most people who own one don't use 'different functions'. In rural areas, people use shotguns or other long barrel guns. In cities, handguns. So you could 'trade' your current gun when you need a 'different function'. Want to go hunting? Take your handgun to a licensed armory, put it into storage while you borrow a rifle. Get done, come back and return the rifle and get your handgun back.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. Neither you or anyone else is the arbitrator of what other people need.

You want to ban guns. You can't ban guns. Your semantics are just that.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

23. It's amazing how poorly you read.

I write that everyone who wants a gun should be able to get a gun. That if the gun they have at any given moment doesn't 'serve the functions' they desire from a gun, they should be able to swap out for a gun that does 'serve those functions'.

And what you read is 'I want to ban guns'.

You really need to brush up on your reading skills.

[rdking647]

25. the right to bear arms shall not be infringed

that means if i want 100 guns i can have them. until the 2nd amendment is repealed thats just the simple truth

[Nuclear Unicorn]

38. You want to ban guns, you just lack the courage and integrity to admit it.

Self defense is a right. I have no doubt that if someone were to propose people be restricted to one book, newspaper or field of religious inquiry it would be considered tantamount to a ban.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

15. Checkmate.

[Lizzie Poppet]

26. "no new guns are allowed into the country"

Just look how well that works with drugs!

[former9thward]

75. " with fewer individuals actually wanting guns"

There were 21,093,273 background checks processed through the NICS in 2013. That number has been increasing every year. More people want guns, not less.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2013-operations-report

[Recursion]

96. I think the 2nd Amendment argument for a handgun is weaker than for an AR-15

Infantry in general don't get issued handguns.

Plus from a crime perspective handguns are the actual problem.

[edgineered]

5. Whoa, you really need to check out this post

It directly asks people to be honest about their opinion on something directly related to your OP. I didn't see your response to it - so here's the link being that you've shown interest -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026877282

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Shakes head

realize that many hobbyists do make their own bullets. It can and it is done at home often.

Also, much ammo in circulation is old.

And I am not going to get into any kind of a discussion here. I expect to be called nasty names, so I will not bother to discuss nothing here.

[Cheese Sandwich]

45. New technology like 3-D printing will be even easier for making guns and ammo at home

It will be hard to ban.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=3d+printed+gun

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. Yup

[-none]

80. Register every gun.

Make a home made gun? Get a permit for it first, then after you make it, take it and the permit to a federally registered gun shop/gun smith and register it and get a serial number stamped on it. No serial number and get caught in public with? That is a felony. At the time of registering it, have it checked for safety too.

There are currently too many people that have guns that should not be having them. Where do they often get them? From the people that supposedly are the good guys that can pass the background check. Make gun harder to get and the good guys will be less inclined to sell/give theirs away.
There are lots of ways to help get our excess gun problem under control. This is but one.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

89. "Where do they often get them?"

Probably the same way they get illegal drugs.

From the people that supposedly are the good guys that can pass the background check. Make gun harder to get and the good guys will be less inclined to sell/give theirs away.

First, straw purchases are illegal.

Second, a solid remedy would be to open NICS to private sellers who sell in good faith.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. I saw a broadcast TV ad for firearms last night

What ís WRONG with the US?

You have a good path yo sanity there.

[aikoaiko]

8. This is so screen shot worthy.

Thank you Xemasub.

Its never, ever going to happen, but your OP will be useful when gun restrictionists say that there is no one serious about banning guns.

[Lurks Often]

17. Seriously? What you suggest has ZERO chance of passing

and even if hell has frozen over and swine fly and it passes Congress AND is upheld by SCOTUS, what are you going to do when a bunch of states and a lot of police departments tell the Federal Government to fuck off and die and refuse to comply?

[LAGC]

19. "No one here wants to ban guns, we all just want reasonable restrictions."

[Duckhunter935]

30. I know, right!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

60. Banning guns *is* a reasonable restriction.

Most American advocates of gun control don't want to ban guns, it's true.

But "banning guns" is not an unreasonable caricature of what we have here in the UK (some guns are legal, but most aren't), and I'd say it's about the right approach.

[sarisataka]

21. I'll wait

[Lulu Belle]

24. This is exactly why

Folks have been buying and hoarding ammunition and reloading materials for the past 7 years.
I have heard of some individuals who have several hundred thousand rounds (per caliber) stashed away just in case these type of laws are passed.

[Locrian]

51. exactly

Anything like this would require nothing short of a door to door search (with the associated consequences), complete nationalization/elimination of gun manufactures, ammo imports, even more militarized border control, etc - along with an entire house, senate, etc.

In the meantime - it only serves to create even more demand and hoarding....

[Nuclear Unicorn]

67. "Anything like this would require nothing short of a door to door search..."

That sounds like it would take a lot of guns to enact. I'll wager those cheering the OP won't be a part of any teams entering homes.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

68. Last I read there are about 90,000,000 residences in the US

It may take quite a bit of time.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

73. Post #54 is fine with waging war against US citizens.

I'll hazard a guess the military wouldn't be so quick to accept orders that countermand the Constitution, Congress and the USSC in order to kill their family, friends and neighbors who are more than likely as pro-RKBA as they are. Between defections and stand-downs there wouldn't be enough troops to finish a "Where's Waldo" activity book let alone search door-to-door for gunz!

[Locrian]

77. post #54

I saw that. It's my sarcastic steps (door to door search, change the constitution etc) taken as "why not?"

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

82. Thanks for the tip

Any irrational stupidity is due a measure of sarcasm.
BTW, I need a 'point-and-laugh' smiley.

[Township75]

27. How many new prisons are you prepared to build for inner city youth?

Step 9 is going to demand you build a lot more...and not just for inner city youth though since that is where most of the gun violence occurs, you likely will be filling them up and need more.

[HooptieWagon]

28. And throw open the doors...

To a huge, completely unregulated, black market. Trust me, it will be far worse than the current flawed system.

[Travis_0004]

29. a lot of ranges don't sell ammo

There are a lot of small ranges, and a lot of different handgun calipers.

Also, is a 20 dollar tax on ammo going to deter a murder. I'm sure they can come up with 40 dollars extra to buy ammo.

I own 20 acres, so I don't belong to a gun range. Why should I pay extra?

[Adrahil]

52. And those that do charge a fucking FORTUNE for it. For shitty ammo. n/t

[Duckhunter935]

31. I am sorry, but all I can say is this...

But give it a shot and see how far it goes.

[Sancho]

32. Add a license to possess guns to your steps....

People Control, Not Gun Control

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

[chemp]

37. Better than OP

My only issue is the licensing board in most states for safety certification, instruction, etc comes from the NRA. And Instructors have to pay the NRA for the cert. Take the money away from the NRA entirely. NSSF is less rabid and less political.

Also I have multiple certs. Food safety certs need regular re-certification. 8 hours of class time and retesting.
NRA Certs? Send money and instant renewal. NRA is all about the cash, and nothing about the safety. I have hired instructors who were idiots, but with ten years of certs. I had to step in mid instruction to prevent a real nasty slide bite because he couldn't teach proper grip, forget about proper gun handling skills.

But ammo regulation. Holds no bearing on the issue.

And gun safes and unattended firearms in cars are the greatest cause of stolen firearms. Mandate safes and penalize guns left alone in a vehicle.

[Sancho]

40. Maybe if a license was required for possession...

other trainers would find it profitable and a bunch of companies would spring up. Obviously, some would be better than others.

I would think a license would be renewable, so retraining or retesting would be automatic. Maybe not annually, but at least every 5 years or so unless there was an incident.

The insurance requirement is mostly to deal with gun security. They likely would charge more if you didn't have a gun safe, trigger locks, kids in the home, etc. Also, gun insurance might include liability coverage IF you kept the gun secure, reported it if lost or stolen, etc. Insurance companies would also be a great source of statistical data on gun accidents, effects of training, etc.

The idea of showing a license to buy ammo is to help with two things: one is the homemade gun, 3d printer gun, etc. Also, if you had a stolen or illegal gun, having to show a license might slow you down. Hard to say.

A license would help keep dangerous people from easily possessing guns. It would not catch everyone, but it's a start.

[-none]

85. Have the registration done by a federally supervised state agency.

The NRA is too biased, as they are a lobby for the gun manufactures.

We need uniform weapon laws in all states. It does no good for any, or even most states to have common sense regulations, if a few states still have lax weapons laws. The guns will still flow from the unregulated state(s) to the regulated states and the problems will continue.

[Liberal Veteran]

33. Step 10: Bundle it all together and call it "The 2nd Amendment Protection Act" -nt

[chemp]

35. Back to the drawing board

You sound as terrified as the rabid gun owners cowering (or anticipating) the imminent home invasion that I have to talk to every day.

Let me address the two silliest on your list.

4. Casing are reloaded. Many times by someone who did not buy the original box. Or by certified remanufacturers. Tracing ammo back to the original buyer will be impossible.
6. And how is this going to be enforced? At the range? $20 for 22lr or .308? box of 10, 20, 50, or 250? Buy a box, shoot half on the range... now what? And the hunter? $20 a box for hunting?

I have always liked registration. But will not be easy. CT has registration and half the gun owners have refused. I prefer gun SAFES. Guns locked up in the home are less likely to be stolen or used against the home owner.
I have never had an issue with buybacks, either. Cory Booker has a nice little use for them with his jewelry line.

[XemaSab]

39. Shotguns and rifles would remain under the existing regulation

Handguns would be severely restricted.

It's not gun-grabbing, it would make handguns expensive to own and use.

[Kurska]

49. So those evil poor people can't get them.

Only the rich should be allowed to own handguns, right?

[romanic]

36. Naive to the fullest.

[Shamash]

43. That's more charitable than how I would have described it. n/t

[raouldukelives]

41. Hear, hear. I've always despised handguns.

I think I brought this up before and got slammed for it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022001262#post15

Yep, turned out I was against women and GLBT's. But I still feel the same. I hate em.

Handguns! Not women or GLBT's! I like those.

[cherokeeprogressive]

44. Your step two made me laugh. We have what are essentially open borders, and 20,000 lbs of cocaine

come across them every year. Oh wait... that's just what gets confiscated. How much makes it through? 900 tons of cocaine are produced in South America annually. That's one million eight hundred thousand pounds.

http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=342471&CategoryId=14091

875,000 lbs of marijuana confiscated in 2014. On the Texas border. How much made it through?

Ban the import of handguns? LOL!

[Herman4747]

47. Initial Step (Step 1) Should be "ban the manufacture of BULLETS"...

...then what is currently listed as Step 1 ("ban the manufacture of guns&quot would proceed more readily. If gun-worshippers have to go to the trouble of making their own bullets, the value of having a gun decreases, and the subsequent steps would be easier to accomplish.

[Adrahil]

53. There are several problems with your position...

1) Many gun deaths are due to gun owners not getting ENOUGH practice with the weapon. Negligent discharges of various kinds are a huge problem. If you eliminate ammo production, that will get worse in the short term.

2) You will create a huge market in black market, bench produced ammo. This ammo will generally be lower quality and less safe than commercially produced ammo.

3) Such a law does not pass Constitutional muster.

[Herman4747]

66. let me retort...

1) Use a water pistol for your practice. No bullets left to harm the environment!
2) You allege that there would be a huge market in "bench produced ammo." How often do you produce ammo? Maybe never? Would you say that some might not want to do it at all? You state that it is "less safe." Could it also be less likely to fire as well?
3) Change the Constitution.Hey, if Japan and the U.K. can get by without guns, why can't we?

[beevul]

71. Um...

1) Use a water pistol for your practice. No bullets left to harm the environment!

Laughable.

2) You allege that there would be a huge market in "bench produced ammo." How often do you produce ammo? Maybe never? Would you say that some might not want to do it at all? You state that it is "less safe." Could it also be less likely to fire as well?

I produce it whenever I run low. Its technical, but it isn't rocket science to reload spent brass. Some of the modern reloading systems can pump out several hundred rounds an hour. I manage fine with a single stage press purchased at a yard sale for 15 bucks along with the appropriate reloading dies. Lots and lots of people reload now, and the equipment is out there all over the place, as is the technical information about how to do it properly.

And no, it isn't less likely to fire.

3) Change the Constitution.Hey, if Japan and the U.K. can get by without guns, why can't we?

Because far far more of us do not wish to, than the tiny little handful that wish to, and wish others to as well.

The "ban them" crowd is grossly outnumbered.

[Adrahil]

97. A water gun? really?

A water gun feels and acts nothing like a firearm. That's just silly.

And I actually produce my own ammo a LOT. Most of my guns are antiques, and ammo is not commercially produced (or is very expensive). I make it myself, or I can't shoot.

No, hand loads generally don't have a problem firing reliably. That's not the problem. The problem is overloaded ammo that overpressures the gun and causes what is known colloquially as a Kaboom, which can naturally injure the shoot and bystanders.

At the least we'll need to maintain ammo production for hunters. Otherwise, we'd be facing ecological disaster. Even the U.K permits hunting.

[oneshooter]

78. I have been casting bullets and reloading for over 30 years.

My ammo is cheaper to produce than factory, as reliable as factory and in my firearms more accurate than factory.

[Herman4747]

99. Sorry to learn that you believed that...

...you didn't have anything better to do with your time.
Think of the illustrious people who make the world a better place. Do they spend "over 30 years" wasting precious time on creating shit?

[Kurska]

48. "mandatory felony" Hooray our prison industrial complex is already salivating. EOM

[ileus]

50. Man sounds like you've got a great plan.

No Thanks....Like a true Progressive I'll fight to maintain my ability to keep my family safe.

[ecstatic]

54. We need something more drastic, immediate

Repubs will have overturned step 1 long before step 9 could be completed.

Step 1: The 2nd amendment needs to be repealed/overturned, and all guns bought back. Manufacturing of new guns ends.

Step 2: Any holdouts will need to have their guns removed by force-in addition to felony charges.

I know that things would get pretty bloody at first, as the militias would view it as war. Fine. It would be a war to remove the WMDs in our midst. Preventing the slaughter of 11,000+/year would be worth it, IMO.

[Travis_0004]

55. How do you propose we do that

First off, you would get nowhere near enough states to support repealing the second amendment.

Also, I doubt you could get enough police officers to agree to round up all the guns. Also, how do you know who owns guns, and what guns to look for. There is no national registration.

[Throd]

56. I own firearms which I inherited. There is no record of them.

I sure some posters would be fine with a full search of all properties to find them.

[Travis_0004]

86. I agree with you

There are several guns I have which there is no record of. Including two guns that don't have any serial numbers on them.

[ecstatic]

58. Generous financial incentives for anyone willing to

turn in/report the remaining hold outs. The people turned in would be arrested and charged with a felony. Again, I know it's very harsh sounding. It's an extraordinary solution to an extraordinary problem.

By the way, only 23% of Americans are gun owners. I have friends and family who own guns but I know they'd do the right thing when the time came to turn them in, as would the majority of the 23%.

One in three people in the U.S. know someone who has been shot.

On average, 31 Americans are murdered with guns every day and 151 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room.

Every day on average, 55 people kill themselves with a firearm, and 46 people are shot or killed in an accident with a gun.

The U.S. firearm homicide rate is 20 times higher than the combined rates of 22 countries that are our peers in wealth and population.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/about-gun-violence

[beevul]

61. You're forgetting paying fair market value for all those "non-hold-out" guns.

That's 300 million times 500 - 5000 bucks a piece.

That 'takings' clause would make it very expensive.


Plus theres the fact that if just one in ten gun owners decided to resist, you'd have at least 8 million PO'd people running around doing who knows what.

You haven't forgotten the effect that just 2 people with a rifle had in DC, have you?

[Travis_0004]

87. More people for the prison industrial complex!!!!!!

I have no doubt law abiding citizens would do the right thing, and turn their guns in.

I'm not so sure about the criminals though.

England banned a lot of guns, and saw a dramatic increase in gun violence, more home break ins. Also in Engalnd a lot more of home breakins are hot (meaning people are known to be home.) In the US, the vast majority of home breakins are when nobody is assumed to be home. Any guess why that is?

[NM_Birder]

57. Once, I "thought" I had read the most unrealistic,

unbelievable, ignorant of the Constitution, and just plain glow in the dark ridiculous comments.
Now I am positive I have. Bravo, it was a pretty shocking bar,...... but you sure vaulted way over it.

In three sentences, you advocate for repealing a constitutional amendment so you can unleash a fresh militarized police force and wage war on the American population. Acknowledging it "will be bloody at first", but taking peoples guns "BY FORCE" is in the best interest of all............. I'm speechless.

Did you lose your nerve in your post ? the only thing missing was advocating for cattle cars to transport GUN FELONS to re-education centers for societal benefit.

[Lizzie Poppet]

64. "all guns bought back"

Last edited Mon Jun 22, 2015, 05:01 PM - Edit history (1)

There are over 300,000,000 privately-held firearms in this country. Do you have any idea of how ruinously expensive buying all of them would be?

Any holdouts will need to have their guns removed by force-in addition to felony charges.

And just who do you propose conduct this forcible confiscation and arrest? The cops? Even if one assumed the majority of rank-and-file officers would obey such orders (a huge and probably unfounded assumption), they're not adequate to the task. Despite the recent (ghastly) militarization of the police, they would be grotesquely outnumbered. The military? Even if you altered federal law to make that legal, the military is even less likely to support such a measure than the police. In case you hadn't noticed, the military has become markedly more conservative than the general public and I don't think it's a stretch to say that the vast majority of serving military support citizen ownership of firearms. Do you actually think that orders to move against civilian gun owners would be obeyed? I certainly don't.

[ecstatic]

92. Then utilize tax credits etc. The current situation is not sustainable at all

We are witnessing a clusterfuck that will only get worse with each passing year. Your plan is obviously to bury your head in the sand/do nothing. At the end of the day, Americans had their chance to use guns responsibly and failed. Experiment over. Time to move on.

[Lizzie Poppet]

98. "will only get worse with each passing year"

That's in direct contradiction to the actual statistics on violent crime. Things have been getting better, and have been doing so for years.

"At the end of the day, Americans had their chance to use guns responsibly and failed. "

80,000,000 gun owners (probably a conservative estimate)
c. 11k gun-related homicides.per year
c. 85k total intentional gun injuries per year
c. 300k total gun crimes per year

American gun owners, in the overwhelming majority, prove the exact opposite, each and every day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

70. "the militias would view it as war. Fine."

I guess some body counts are more laudable than others. Be sure to contact your local US Army recruiter. Tell them you want to go infantry.

Preventing the slaughter of 11,000+/year would be worth it, IMO.

When do you plan on going to war against alcohol? Over consumption of alcohol kills 4300 under-aged drinkers annually. To put that into perspective that is 3.75 Sandy Hooks EACH AND EVERY WEEK WITHOUT CESSATION. And that's just over consumption; that doesn't count lives lost and crimes committed due to the influence of alcohol.

[tritsofme]

72. Your police state fantasy is very frightening.

May you never be trusted with any degree of public authority, you are scary.

[ecstatic]

91. More frightening than the inevitable daily/weekly massacres?

OK

[tritsofme]

93. We would all be much safer if we repealed the entire Bill of Rights

Police states are great at extinguishing crime, and liberty.

[ecstatic]

94. So the countries with strict gun control/bans are police states?

Many of the cops in those countries don't use guns either. Yet in this country, the cops are free to gun down unarmed citizens.

[tritsofme]

95. You made some specific proposals in #54, that's what I am responding to.

You propose that the police wage war on Americans that do not bend to your will, invade their homes, and get bloody. It would be a police state.

A disgusting homicidal fantasy.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

84. Step 3: Buy more guns for the forces being relied upon to accomplish steps #1 & 2, oh wait...

insert 'point-and-laugh' smiley here

[Matrosov]

59. No, ban the sale

I don't care if Colt, Glock, and Smith & Wesson, sell countless firearms to the military or even the police. The big problem with gun violence is that they also sell to the general public, at least through FFL holders

[Nuclear Unicorn]

74. You can't ban the sale of something that is constitutionally protected.

You might as well say you support the right to read newspapers just ban the selling of them.

[JCMach1]

62. Tax the hell out of guns and ammunition like we do alcohol and tobacco

and stop the importation of guns... American-made only.

If you can afford the tax.


Oh, and require licenses, and insurance, and sever penalties for anyone violating any of the above.

[Throd]

63. Make them so expensive that only the rich and priviledged can own them.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

69. Now your talkin'

[Glassunion]

65. Step 3 and 9 violate the 5th Amendment

If you are a criminal, or in illegal possession of a firearm, requiring a registration of said illegal device would violate your right against self incrimination. You would not be able to prosecute step 9.

[tridim]

76. I like the insurance idea better.

Firing or possessing an uninsured weapon is a mandatory felony. Insurance must be procured BEFORE any sale is made, individual and private. All older weapons that aren't insured are to be immediately destroyed.

Sorry gun folks, we have to do something. Our safety and tranquility, as guaranteed by the Constitution are being directly threatened.

[Duckhunter935]

79. The NRA will thank you

And the insurance would be very cheap as it does not cover criminal acts. Since 99.9% of weapons are not misused, the risk is incredibly small.

[Lurks Often]

81. Another idea that has no basis in reality

Explain how you plan to handle the following:

1. How are you going to get this passed in Congress
2. How do you think this will hold up to judicial scrutiny
3. How are you going to get ALL 50 states to comply
4. What are you going to do when states refuse to comply
5. What are you going to do when the local police refuse to enforce the law*
6. What are you going to do when people refuse to comply**

* CO, NY and WA police departments have publicly stated they would not/will not enforce the recent laws passed in those states

**While it is, for obvious reasons, impossible to get hard numbers, the laws passed in NY and CT have resulted in widespread non compliance with gun owners refusing to register the firearms and/or magazines as required by law.

[bigwillq]

83. No, thanks.

I'm all for gun control, short of a complete ban. I don't think it would work. Didn't with liquor; didn't with recreational drugs. I especially don't think this idea would work because it seems like this idea would allow those who already have guns to still have them in their possession. Don't think that would help eliminate gun violence.

[lumberjack_jeff]

88. Forget the 2nd amendment, it fails at step 2; wouldn't fly with NAFTA and GATT. n/t

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

90. Just between you and me...

...are you related to Sheriff Pat Mansfield 'cause you think like him?

Now about your steps, I just need to bring up certain issues:

- steps 1 and 2 - I assume local law enforcement, state law enforcement, FBI, National Guard, military, IRS, Secret Service, CIA, CSS, DIA, US Marshalls, DEA, Justice Department, CBP, ATF and the many other enforcement agencies that now own and procure arms will continue to do so. Maybe rethink those. If not those folks you're trying to relieve of their weapons may respond with hostility. Planning on sending quiche???

- step 3: There are some firearms out there without serial numbers. This deserves a bit more thought as well.

- step 4: Why? Unless you register every box, that seems like a waste. Registering every box seems like a bigger waste.

- step 5: Not all ammo is distinguishable for certain as usable solely in a handgun. I remember certain revolvers and lever action rifles were deliberately designed to share ammo.

- step 6: I presume the folks taking the thousands of new jobs generated by the creation of "Firearm Safety Administration" (FSA) will man the metal detectors at the range that you need to pass through to leave. Will it be only the live rounds they're looking for or spent brass as well since many shooters reload their own?

- step 7: Almost 200,000,000 handguns x a few hundred bucks each will be a really big number. That's billions of boxes of ammo.

- step 8: Sure, they're probably useless any how.

- step 9: So you do want to register the ammo. Well that'll be good for a ton of extra federal employees.

- step 10: Regain some perspective on this stuff. Have an iced tea (Long Island if required.) After some reflection and thought, ditch this brainfart of a concept.