this time ..its different...I solemnly swear to keep up the fight

[srican69]

Till all guns use is severely curtailed..


There can be no middle ground...guns easily available for sport can just as easily used for other purposes...

1.Guns need to be licensed and registered to each individual
2.the registration needed to be renewed each year just the same way they are with cars.
3. The license holders should be subjected to periodic mental exam before their license to operate a firearm is renewed.
4. Ammo purchase is limited and is entered into database of each registered firearm.

Nothing less will do.

[Skidmore]

1. And

The gun show loophole must be closed. Guns used for illegal purposes must be removed from circulation and destroyed.

[Atypical Liberal]

17. Please use the correct term for this.

What needs to be fixed is that all private sales need a background check.

Calling this a "gun show loophole" greatly diminishes the scope of the problem and misleads people into thinking this is something related to gun shows. It isn't.

[Skidmore]

19. I didn't realize that there is now a "correct term" for what I was trying to say.

So sorry to offend you so.

[Atypical Liberal]

21. Not offended, but yes, there is a "correct term" for it.

The "gunshow loophole" that people talk about is really the fact that private individuals do not have to run background checks on buyers. In fact, they are not allowed to use the NICS system if they wanted to.

One of the biggest problems we have is that while anyone who buys a gun from a dealer goes through a background check, any private citizen can buy a gun from another private citizen without a background check. This isn't just at gun shows, which is just a tiny portion of private sales - it's places like gunbroker.com, gunsamerica.com, or any local newspaper classified ads in the country.

Again, people need to understand that this is not a "gun show" problem, it is a private property problem. The federal government cannot currently regulate the sale of property within the states. This has to change, or all the states need to be compelled to pass laws to fix it at the state level, but it needs to be fixed.

Personally, I would prefer universal licensing like Illinois does. If you want to sell privately, you have to record the buyer's license info for 10 years.

[Politicalboi]

26. Thanks, I had no idea

What it was all about. I thought it only involved gun shows. People can't sell cars without a pink slip, so it only makes sense that the same would go with guns. But we need more regulations for guns.

[aandegoons]

2. Ammo should be taxed at twice the rate of cigarettes.

I also promise.

[cantbeserious]

3. This Is A Good Start - Thank You For The Suggestions

eom

[Hoyt]

4. Agree. I would like almost total restrictions on public toting.

If nothing else, we need to reduce consumption of guns. Yes, there are a lot out there now, but why allow another 100 million on the streets over the next decade. Sooner of later, the issue is going to have to be handled. Why make it tougher for future generations?

By prohibiting assault type weapons -- defined as weapons manufactured/marketed to appeal to a yahoo's baser instincts -- the legal gun market would all but evaporate because the prurient interest would not be piqued.

I'd also prohibit sales of privately owned guns after a 5 year period and require all sales in interim must go through a federally licensed gun dealer to complete/keep proper paperwork (I guess computer work, nowadays). Guns should be registered if for no other reason to trace them to the original owner in event of a crime. You sell a gun without background checks, etc., you go to jail for your choice of a "hobby."

I know the gun cultists will scream, but they should have been screaming a long time ago rather than cheering the proliferation of lethal weapons. Screw them, they've never been responsible as a whole.

[srican69]

5. you can do nothing about the guns already out there...but

You can do a ton on ammo...

Restrict to holding 15 rounds at given time across all guns you own...this can be done using the database above and fresh bullets being sold in exchange for the used cartridges.... The dealer is responsible for destroying/recycling the used cartridges... I swear gun violence will comer down big time....

This my friend is called a SOLUTION...

its mathematically feasible...its our job to maker it happen..

[HockeyMom]

27. Yes

Because the assault weapon will do nothing about the gun already out there, BUT if their owners cannot get the ammo for them, these guns will be useless.

I know my husband has this "problem" with ammo for one of his guns. Don't know what kind of gun, but he says he as been to gun stores, gun shows, looked on Net/Mags, and NOBODY has it. Hmmm?????

[Bake]

28. Turn in your spent cartridges ... oh, yeah, that'll really work.

You people must never want to win another election. Ever.

Honestly, this is some of the looniest shit I've ever heard.

Bake

[srican69]

6. the only exception is the firing range..where you can buy rounds for practice..

But you have to discharge all rounds before you leave the facility.

[jsr]

13. Nah, alcohol tastes better when you're armed and ready:

[Hoyt]

23. He resembles most of the toters I've known. eom

[Atypical Liberal]

18. But people with CCW permits are hardly ever involved in crime.

And not surprisingly. These people are jumping through the most restrictive, voluntary, gun control laws we have. Not surprisingly, this weeds out most of the bad apples.

[Hoyt]

22. Yea, but people who could get a permit but realize it is not in society's best interest, are even

less often involved in a crime.

I'm sorry, AT, but almost every gun "enthusiast" I've known -- particularly the toters -- never should have been allowed near a gun. A few never should have been allowed on the streets, even when unarmed.

[Atypical Liberal]

24. But they are already meeting a very high bar.

CCW permit holders have signed up for voluntary gun control measures that everyone is asking for:

Extensive background check.
Registration with the state.
Often mandatory training.

Isn't this the gun control you wanted? If that's not good enough, why not?

[Doodler71]

7. How about mandatory liability insurance

Maybe we should look at some of the vehicle laws as a model for gun laws/restrictions. Ownership has responsibilities.

In order to purchase a gun you must have qualified for and purchased liability insurance. Insurance companies could mandate annual renewals, fitness (including mental) exams, training, safe storage, higher rates or flat out denial for high risk owners. This would allow confiscation of weapons that are not insured.

After a couple of insurance companies have claims filed against them, they would assist in screening, licensing, and lobbying.

Tax bullets or purchases too, directing the revenue to mental health or victim reparations.

[srican69]

8. absolutely..being able operate a fire arm should be privilege..

I think we should draw from both motor vehicle and prescription drug regulations to draw the final legislative framework first the control of fire arms and ammunition

[Atypical Liberal]

20. It's cheap.

Most firearm owners are never involved in crime. When we bought our million dollar umbrella policy, they never even asked if we owned firearms. It's just not much of a financial liability.

If you were forced to buy it, it would be cheap, and you could probably get it as part of your NRA membership just like the insurance they already provide as a member benefit.

[Doodler71]

30. Cheap or not, the criteria for obtaining it could be controlled. (nt)

[Atypical Liberal]

31. Like, "pay your money, obtain insurance"? n/t

[lunatica]

9. What mental exam would that be, and who administers it?

[srican69]

11. I am not a doctor...but I am sure a basic check too weed out the most

Disturbed cases can be arranged ..essentially by having a mental health clinician at dmv...

Secondly by making the process so burdensome..fewer people would want to go through the hassle..which is the intention.

[lunatica]

12. Doctors interviewed in the last few days say there's no test

I believe them.

[Doodler71]

15. BS - that is like saying there is no predicting the weather

Will you get 100%, no. Will it catch more than sticking your ass in the wind, yes.

[Doodler71]

14. The MINNESOTA Multiphasic Personality Inventory would be a start

http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologicaltesting/a/mmpi.htm

If there is money to be had then there will be insurance companies and doctors to administer it.

The owners or want to be owners would carry the cost as part of the process to ownership. The constitution doesn't guarantee that the weapons be affordable.

[Hoyt]

25. Simple -- hook up electrodes and if someone gets excited over assault weapons, they can't have one.

That would cut gun sales 90%, put most manufacturers and retail outlets into bankruptcy, and send most of the gun addicts into treatment.

[Bake]

29. I'd guess a panel of DUers.

So there won't be many permits issued ...

Bake

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. We currently have an imperfect system of "barrel" fingerprinting...

Last edited Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:34 AM - Edit history (1)

The gun manufacturers should be required to develop a system for exact identification by 2022. The current system, modeled on the CODIS database, has only been implemented in some states (Maryland, for instance). It has been considered too expensive for its imperfect results by the police. Well, the gun manufacturers should be forced to pay for it, not the states. In Maryland, the cost was about 3 million a year. Suppose the average is 3.5 million, and we'd be at roughly $175 per year nationally. That should be paid for by the gun manufacturers. Suppose a closer-to-perfect system would be twice that: $350 million per year. Fine. Again, it's a $6 billion industry: the $350 million per year they pay for the upkeep of a CODIS like system for barrel markings is the least they can do. And if they pass the cost on to the gun fanatics? Too bad for them. They're like cigarette smokers. Pay the sin tax for causing a public health crisis.

Needless to say, the gunners scream that the science is imperfect (so all those shows and actual trials where you see a forensic scientist matching a gun? The gunners don't believe that!) for the cost. So make it perfect. There's really no logical reason for them to oppose such a project, except that it will roundly demonstrate the movement of legal guns into illegal acts, and show that it is the gun industry itself that is liable for this pipeline.

[Doodler71]

16. Yes, this is another good idea. Let us put them

Together with other suggestions and come up with a multifaceted approach for a complex issue. Nothing is ever perfect, but it is better than hand wringing or saying nothing can or should be done.