There is much discussion about creating gun control laws.
Here are some of my thoughts about gun control. I think these are reasonable proposals that reasonable people can agree upon.
What do you think”
- Weapons used at target ranges be kept at the range (exception for the police and other law enforcement officials)
- No automatic weapons sold or used for hunting
- No sale of guns at gun shows
- Restrictions on numbers of bullets sold to individuals
- Restrictions on kinds of bullet manufactured
- No guns sold to those convicted of violent crimes
- No guns sold to those with history of psychological problems
- Public gun clubs, especially for teenagers (who enjoy shooting things)
Arthurdobrin's Weblog 
There are already a number of laws like this on the books. Automatic weapons were banned for civilian use under almost all circumstances in the National Firearms act of 1934. The NRA and Brady Campaign came together to support NICS, the National Instant Check system, which is in place to ensure that convicted felons and those adjudicated mentally incompetent are not able to purchase firearms. It is a crime to sell to those individuals, and a crime for those individuals to own firearms. I also think it would be a good idea to have more safe gun clubs for young people, mostly so they know how to be safe around firearms. That said, there are bigger issues at play when it comes to restricting the civil rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment and upheld by the Supreme Court as an individual right in the Heller and McDonald cases. I suggest reading those briefs to see where the courts stand on the right to self-defense.
I also favor a constitutional amendment that makes clear that the Second Amendment refers to state militias, not individual rights. Until that happens, gun laws will be restricted by a Supreme Court that is inclined to read the Second Amendment differently.
In effect, that is a repeal of the Second Amendment. I can’t believe in repealing any aspect of the Bill of Rights.
Amendments/laws require interpretation. This was had been understood one way for a long time, and another way more recently. That’s why I think that an amendment that makes clear that it refers to the state militias, not individuals change the nature of the discussion.
I agree with most of your suggestions.
Can you clarify #2? Do you mean no automatic weapons sold for hunting (and only hunting, or do you mean they can be purchased for other uses)?
The mental illness restriction seems to me to be correct, but a potentially very ineffective rule–consider in Newtown it was his mother who owned the guns–she didn’t have a history of mental illness, but her son did. So would we have to expand the “no mental illness” to include members of the household, too? What about known drug/alcohol abusers? Remember that alcohol is a factor in almost 1/3rd of homicide. It seems like that could go down a slippery slope, but I’m just raising more questions to think about.
Public gun clubs for teenagers? Remember Lanza went to public shooting ranges with his mother to get target practice. Paintball should suffice.
When someone hunts, they should use weapons appropriate for the sport. Automatic weapons don’t qualify. So anyone using such weapons would be subject to criminal possession and jail time.
Mental illness should rule out gun possession. If a gun is taken from a home by someone mentally ill and misused, then the owner of the gun should be held liable for the crime committed.
Having been a boy, then a soldier, I can tell you that there is something inherently fun in shooting the real thing. Paint balls aren’t a real substitute. I think that making gun shooting at clubs a real option would make a lot of boys happy. At the same time they could learn about gun safety.
One thing I didn’t write about was what I think is the need for universal public service. The military would go a way towards getting the fascination with guns out of the systems of many guys. I also think that military service should be with the National Guard, but this all another story.
hmm, so you would allow automatic rifles to be purchased, as long as they’re not used in hunting. But there is the problem of why *anybody* except law enforcement, need automatic weapons. I would say a ban on such weapons should extend to non-hunting civilians too.
Another problem with mental illness–how would we define mental illness and what categories should be included in the ban. Depression would exclude about 50% of americans from getting guns (myself included, even though I would never hurt a fly), and, as has been frequently reiterated, issues like autism do not make a person more likely to commit such crimes.
I think it is sexist to say that only boys enjoy shooting guns (my sister and I both adored skeet shooting with a rifle) or that we should send all boys to do military exercises because that is what “guys” should do. Perhaps the equation of masculinity with aggression and guns is the problem to begin with.
No easy answers, thanks for getting us thinking about the questions;)
Some people like hanging guns on the wall or simply likes collecting them. I collect tea tins. Who knows? But I think banning their use in hunting would greatly reduce the numbers.
The mental illness definition is difficult and where to put the line will always be murky. This is worthy of an on-going discussion.
I’ve actually never known a girl who likes shooting guns. Or at least I didn’t know that I knew one until now. Anyone who wanted to be part of a gun club is welcome. Also, military service shouldn’t be limited to boys. I think it public service should be mandatory and people can choose which type of service they prefer.
My experience with raising both boys and girls and being the grandfather of both boys and girls, I think that there is generally a difference in what the sexes choose to play with. Also, having lived in a radically different culture than the US, I think those differences are found nearly everywhere. I don’t think there are essential differences between males and females but there are differences for most that are beyond acculturation.
Arthur,
You are confusing automatic weapons with semiautomatic weapons. Automatic weapons are “machine guns”; they fire continuously as long as you hold the trigger. Semiautomatics fire one round each time you pull the trigger, but you don’t have to cock them and you can fire shots very quickly.
I lived in Belize years ago and they had restrictions similar to those you suggested. I thought they were reasonable, but there is no way they could be passed in America today.
Thanks for making that distinction. I was in the army so many years ago I have forgotten the difference.
#6 and #7 were codified into federal law already, under the Gun Control Act of 1968:
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person – (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year (2) is a fugitive from justice; (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; (5) who, being an alien – (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26))); (6) who (!2) has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; (8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that – (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and (B)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or (9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
#2 was made law even earlier, in 1934, with the National Firearms Act, the text of which can be read here: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/laws/nfa34.htm
I’m also one of the millions of young ladies who enjoys target shooting as a sport. It’s a common misconception.
The FBI drops the ball on sales to prohibited persons all the time, but the laws are on the books. It’s reasonable to conclude that, therefore, the laws aren’t helping.
I would conclude that they haven’t been enforced.
Pingback: Fundamentally speaking…if YOU need a gun in any way, you are a pussy…that needs a gun….. « Sunset Daily
Pingback: Thoughts on Guns, Violence and the Law « All That's Evil
Pingback: Gun Control: What are the Issues? « ILLUMINATE AND ADVOCATE
Pingback: Melanie on Gun Control | Read it to absorb my awesomeness