It is time for the majority of lawmakers to say,

[MineralMan]

"We're not buying it, NRA." While there is a huge number of people in the US who own firearms, only a very small fraction of them are NRA members. I own firearms, most which I used for hunting. I still have them. They're unloaded and locked away. I do not in any way support the right-wing reactionaries of the NRA, nor do I support the idea that people should own firearms to keep the government from becoming tyrannical. I understand some people's need to own firearms for household protection.

The tiny minority of Americans who are NRA members or who are adherents to some sort of belief that firearms in private hands will prevent tyranny is just that: a tiny minority. The rest of firearm owners don't have a problem with regulations that help keep firearms out of the hands of those who would break the law with them. We just don't.

It is time for our elected leaders to say to the NRA and the single-issue 2nd Amendment advocates, "Enough!" We're not buying it. We're not going to take your guns away, but we're going to regulate them in a way that helps keep massacres in schools and elsewhere from happening. We're going to deal with extended capacity magazines, ban truly military-style semi-automatic weapons, and take firearms from dangerous people.

If you beat your wife, your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.
If you commit a felony, your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.
If you post violent threats on the internet, your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.
If you threaten people in person or in other ways, your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.
If you use a firearm in a criminal act, your sentence will be tripled and you will be in prison for a long time.
If you acquire illegal firearms, they will be confiscated and destroyed, and you will be charged with a felony.

We should say that we are done with blustering firearms owners who demand that they can purchase any firearms they want, any time. No. We're going to regulate firearms purchases, and ammunition purchases, and make background checks more complete and tied to a national registry which is available to state and local officials at all times. Before a police officer comes to your residence, he or she will know whether you have firearms in your home. It's only fair, since you know that the police officer has firearms. If we come to your home for a domestic violence call, we will check to see if you own firearms, and will respond accordingly.

We should ignore the protests of the NRA and other organizations, and not allow their lobbyists anywhere near our legislators. We should stop paying attention to threats from such organizations to keep legislators from being elected unless they follow the dictates of firearms advocates. That's over, starting today. Those people do not get to decide for the rest of us. That's no longer tenable.

[Fresh_Start]

1. add if you allow anyone else to use your gun

either on purpose or because you didn't adequately secure your gun, your firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.
If someone was injured because you allowed someone else to use your gun, you will be held responsible and face criminal charges.

[MineralMan]

2. Excellent addition. I agree.

[BlueStreak]

3. Guns should be regulated at least as much as cars

We require every car to be titled and tagged. We require every owner to have a license and carry insurance.

In addition to the points you laid out, which I think are very reasonable, there are other changes needed.

1) Every sale should be through a licensed gun dealer. Two people could agree to a transaction, but they must take the weapon to a gun dealer to oversee the transaction. This should be a nominal fee. I'm perfectly happy as a taxpayer to fund that fee altogether if that is what it takes. Any transfer of weapons without proper licensing would be a felony.

2) This process must include a criminal background check, a waiting period at least as long as right-wingers think is necessary for an abortion, and a ballistics record of the weapon (test firing a bullet and entering its signature into a national database.)

3) Failure of a person to report a stolen weapon should be a felony. If a firearm is used in a crime, its REGISTERED owner should be held responsible for a felony, even if he was not present at the criminal act.

4) It should be illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess any firearm that can shoot more than 10 rounds between reloading, and illegal to own any firearm that can deliver 10 rounds in under 5 seconds. If a person wants to keep such a weapon for sentimental or collectible reasons, the weapon should be permanently disabled.

I realize there may be a very small percentage of our population that might have a legitimate hardship with these restrictions. For those, again look at motor vehicles. We have different classes of licenses. An over-the-road driver requires a special license, special training, and must maintain a very detailed log of activities. I could see something like that for people who have an occupation need -- private security firms, for example.

[Sivart]

4. Liability

Also, how about a bodily harm/injury liability insurance requirement, just like for operating an auto......?

[BlueStreak]

5. I think that is a very interesting idea

If we start with the premise that the registered gun owner is responsible for any harm that comes from the weapon (unless officially reported stolen), then there is certainly an argument that a person should have liability insurance. If the person is a "law abidin' citizen", I'd think such a policy would not be very expensive. If a person is a militia type, I'd expect the insurance company to either refuse coverage or else make darned sure the person wasn't a threat to others.

I doubt we will get to that point in the next 20 years, but I think the whole issue of responsibility is one worth having. Right-wingers love to talk about personal accountability. Well, then let's put that into the law. If a person intended to be personally accountable, the law would place no hardship on them whatsoever.