One Man’s Ideas For ‘Gun Control That Works’

The Truth About Guns ^ | 04/28/18 | Dan Zimmerman

[Who is John Galt?]

"you have the makings of a straightforward, effective system for keeping the most lethal class of weapons out of the hands of bad actors"

I don't think he knows how lethal a man with metal working tools and a little knowledge of chemistry can be... and all without any kind of licensing required.

He also seems to think that a Ruger 10/22 is somehow more "lethal" than a Remington 870. His 'idea' might work well in a fantasy land, somewhere, but the real world is something else...

[Lazamataz]

Here’s my big idea; No background checks. Just redefine who is a “prohibited person.” A prohibited person is anyone who has a violent or serious conviction, including drug sales.

You just banned millions of people with disorderly conduct misdemeanors or ordinance violations.

Not good.

You just totally erased the distinction between felons and misdemeanants.

Not good.

People found armed and drunk or on drugs have firearm(s) impounded for 30 days

Most drug-consumption is a felony, excepting marijuana. Furthermore, you just confiscated the at-home drinker who has firearms, even locked or in another room.

I know you and like you, but you have not thought this through.

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

We need guns in order to protect ourselves from fascist a**holes like this scumbag Jon Stokes.

[Georgia Girl 2]

If you have a CCL you don’t have to get a background check now to buy a gun.

I don’t even want to hear the words Federal Gun License. Seriuosly? What does this moron think “shall not be infringed” means. I

Gun license means gun registry and gun confiscation. Who’s going to decide what the criteria is to get the license? Who’s going to stop the govt from changing the rules til nobody qualifies?

Gun licensing is what they have in Canada and Europe.

[Iron Munro]

No compromise!

Every compromise moves the liberal agenda ahead and is a loss to conservatives.

Liberals are perfectly happy to win a small compromise now and another one later on because eventually they attain their goal .

[ealgeone]

WE THE PEOPLE already have a license to keep and bear arms....it’s called the Second Amendment.

[Iron Munro]

Who’s going to decide what the criteria is to get the license?

Sooner or later it will be people like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, Andy McCabe, etc.

Don't forget how easily Lois Lerner abused the power of the IRS to discriminate against conservatives.

And got away with it.

[GreyFriar]

Regarding: 1) A “semi-automatic” firearm is one that fires a single round for each pull of the trigger, automatically reloading in between each shot until the ammo is depleted.

I can see anti-gun opponents using the part of that definition the precede’s the comma “A “semi-automatic” firearm is one that fires a single round for each pull of the trigger....” as including double action revolvers in the definition. And the movement of the cylinder holding the bullets as “automatically reloading.”

Also, a bolt and/or lever action rifle could be included by those who want to “creatively stretch” the definition.

[Don W]

The ONLY thing that could work in this sense is an NRA “Eddie Eagle” style firearms safety program in every school in first, fourth, ninth and twelfth grade.

Passing mandatory before graduation might be an option, too.

It’s at least as important to know firearms safety as it is to know quadratic equations, isn’t it?

Actual federal licensing of ownership is a complete non-starter. It doesn’t work that well up here in Canaduh, and having to renew one’s licence every 5 years is nothing less than a tax grab.

[oldenuff35]

BS, this wants gun owners and 2A supporters to “bargain away” their constitutional rights!!!

NO WAY IN HELL DOES THAT EVER GET MY SUPPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those rights are mine, given to me by God and affirmed by our constitution. I also earned each and every one of my constitutional rights by serving our nation for over two decades.

I have one question to ask all of those who think they will take my legal constitutional rights from me.

I know what I will do and how far I will go to protect and keep my rights.

Are you willing to make the same sacrifice to take my firearms away from me that am willing to make to keep them?

Are you willing to die in the attempt to take my guns?

Just something for the gun grabbers to think about. They always seem to think that others will be held responsible for this gun confiscation.

What happens when you, the individual liberal, is personally held responsible? Are you willing to pay that price?

Do you really think that you can outlaw and confiscate guns in this nation and the result will be peaceful? You really can not be that stupid.

[NY.SS-Bar9]

I have a better idea:

• You pass a NICS check
• You are given an ID card that shows you have passed
• You can buy, sell, and carry any firearm you want, anywhere you want.

No registration, no permits, no restrictions.

Now there is common sense.

[Simon Green]

I can see anti-gun opponents using the part of that definition the precede’s the comma “A “semi-automatic” firearm is one that fires a single round for each pull of the trigger....” as including double action revolvers in the definition. And the movement of the cylinder holding the bullets as “automatically reloading.”

Someone pointed that out at Democratic Underground. The reaction? "Fine, ban revolvers as well".

[Dr. Zzyzx]

You know, you could change the first line of the Second Amendment to just about anything you want: Because the sky is blue. Or, because birds eat worms. The reason given in the first line really doesn’t matter, because the second line trumps it: The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Plain and simple. Any sort of licensing is really infringement.

[Twotone]

We can make it simpler than this. If you’ve had any reason to undergo a background check & have been cleared, you get a card that states that simple fact. You can buy guns without a further check (NO RECORDS KEPT) at either a gun store or private sale. You can also go thru the Pre-check line at the airport. One fee, one card & that’s it. The gov’t will be required to keep a database of those that were cleared & issued a card so you don’t have to pay another fee & get another check every five years or whatever. If you are arrested or charged with a crime, that goes to the gov’t that checks if you’re on the card database. If so you are required to hand your card back to the gov’t.

I’d accept it under these terms.

[Simon Green]

I have a better idea:

You pass a NICS check
You are given an ID card that shows you have passed
You can buy, sell, and carry any firearm you want, anywhere you want.

No registration, no permits, no restrictions.

Now that's government regulation I could live with.

[Reily]

Needs to be severe penalties for counterfeiting the card.

[NTHockey]

A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

What part of that do you not understand? No to licensing or registration or permission or any other spin words. Not now, not ever.

[Brilliant]

Here is my plan for gun control that works. Put the criminals in jail and keep them there. When they are in jail they they won’t have access to guns.

[TexasGator]

“Besides, those who have a CHL are not required to go through a background check anyway.”

In Florida we do. Eight bucks worth. Which state are you in?

[alloysteel]

What we have here, is a failure to communicate. The Second Amendment only makes sense that cannot be challenged if the citizens of a nation are FULLY informed, and not merely indoctrinated.

The simple possession of a means of self-defense is meaningless unless the necessary skills and knowledge to implement that self-defense are also made available to the individual. This would include the basic care, feeding, grooming and some degree of familiarity with the means of self defense, be it an attack dog or a firearm.

For the instance of firearms, I would submit that ALL youth receive, as a basic part of their instruction in life skills, the proper respect for, and the acceptable handling, of firearms, from understanding the basic mechanics involved, the ability to accept basic instructions in safety and maintenance of the weapon, to the proper means of selecting and framing an appropriate target, aiming, and firing, developing a reasonable of accuracy and the ability to do this repeatedly. This would have a two-fold advantage - first of all, it would greatly increase the number of potential recruits for both law enforcement, and for military service. And secondly, those, who by temperament or basically poor regard for such instruction, would be identified quickly, as potential threats should they ever come into possession of a weapon.

Then there would be for those who, for whatever reason, cannot shake off their superstitious dread of firearms, a secondary course in how to avoid, evade, escape or directly confront an active shooter with malice intent. Of course, it would also be obligatory to have tattooed somewhere on the body of the individual member of this classification, the name and Social Security number, to make identification quicker in the worst case scenario.