My question to those who want to ban guns: How do you plan to "bell the cat?"

[Taverner]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by SunsetDreams (a host of the General Discussion forum).

You remember the old Aesop's fable, a bunch of mice are sick of being stalked by the cat. So they form a committee and decide if they put a bell on the cat, they could hear him coming and run away in time. They put it up for a vote, and it passes unanimously. They all cheer, except for one who approaches the podium and asks "Who will bell the cat?"

So let's just say we do like the UK - ban all guns unless you need one. At that point, existing gun owners will go underground and hide their guns. Every single transaction involving a gun will be black market, and thus we will have no idea how many guns are really out there.

You can also make your own gun - I have a friend who makes "semi"-auto weapons for fun. I use quotes because the guns have a switch that let you shoot 2 at a time, or go full machine gun.

You would be surprised how easy it is to make guns and ammo. Yes it requires a little chemistry knowledge but so does meth. And of course outlawing meth took THAT stuff off the streets, right?

[Junkdrawer]

1. Boy, the effort to ban/strictly control Tommy Guns was a complete flop too....

[ManiacJoe]

12. Tommy Guns are not banned.

Not at the federal level, any way. But they are tightly controlled (since 1934), and now very expensive since no more can be registered.

They are fun to shoot. Pricey to feed though. If you want one, fill out the paperwork and pay your $200 tax...

[gregoire]

26. Considering the last crime with one was before the ban in 1934...

It shows that the ban works damn well.

[rustydog]

2. I'd rather see a discussion on what can be done rather than the tried and true

"Ban the guns" meme. that only starts flame wars and gets us nowhere fast.

Isn't it somewhat frustrating that from (I believe 2003 to 2010) annually 30 thousand people die in America by gun violence while to the north in Canada, (Where there are banned guns) 8 thousand people died in the same time frame by gun violence ?

Is 30 thousand deaths annually acceptable? What number deaths is acceptable? If something can be done to reduce those numbers, are we able as a nation to come together and do it?

[CTyankee]

24. rusty, by now you know that no amount of slaughter of Americans in the streets, homes and

now family movie theaters of America is too much for the 2nd A crowd. They simply accuse you of trying to have the gummit go door to door collecting your guns and depriving you of your god given right to have as many guns as you damn well please in the name of personal liberty.

Civilian slaughter is too bad, but necessary to insure the freedom of our citizenry to resist tyranny. Or something.

I thought you knew that...

[rl6214]

34. "gummit"? You do know how idiotic that sounds don't you?

No, I guess not.

[Fumesucker]

44. Sure they know how stupid it sounds..

That's why they used the term that so many RKBA types use...

Usually it sounds a bit more like "Gummint" though, not "Gummit"..

[CTyankee]

60. It's been a while but I think you are right with "gummint." I was recalling the old Pogo

cartoon strip.

[rl6214]

71. So you're getting your material from old comic strips now?

[CTyankee]

72. Pogo had some good ones. "We have seen the enemy and they are us" was his most famous.

He was certainly ahead of his time.

[michreject]

37. Of that 30K figure

18K were suicides.

11K were homicides, which included justifiable homicide in self defense.

[spin]

55. Canada has a population of 34,844,096 and the U.S. has a population of 314,034,363 million. ...

That means the U.S. has 9 times the population of Canada. Therefore if the two nations had similar sized populations and the same rate of gun violence (using your statistics) there would be 72,000 deaths in our northern neighbor.

(Ref: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ig-gi/pop-ca-eng.htm
http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html)

Here's a hint. Recheck your statistics on gun violence in Canada. Also remember your 30,000 deaths figure for the United Sates included suicides.

How many gun deaths are in the US every year?

Answer:

Per the Center for Disease Control, latest figures (2005) show 30,694 firearm deaths (all races, all ages, both sexes) in the United States.
Since a firearm is an inanimate object, it can not be the sole creator/ root cause of a death as it must be handled by a person in order to be fired.
A more accurate description is approximately 16,000 suicides using a firearm
Approximately 12,252 murders by firearms 80% of which are caused by felons/career criminals/gang member activities. USDOJ National Gang Threat Assessment annual report 2009
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_gun_deaths_are_in_the_US_every_year

That would mean that in 2005 there were approximately 2450 murders where the shooter was not a criminal or gang member and 9800 that resulted due to criminal activity. Considering an estimated 80 million Americans own 300 million firearms this figure while tragic is an amazing low number. It's rare when an honest gun owner misuses his firearm to commit a murder.

I would suggest that it would be wise to work on our mental health system in order to reduce suicides and to concentrate law enforcement and community activities to fight criminal gangs. It might also be a good idea to reevaluate our failed War on Drugs. We should consider the legalization of some drugs in order to reduced the profit motive for drug dealing.

I am also not against improving our existing gun laws. The improvements should be largely focused on preventing firearms from getting into the hands of criminals. One idea which might help is to require an NICS background check for all sales of firearms including private sales. Another is to increase the penalty for the straw purchase of a firearm. I feel that anyone convicted of engaging in such an activity could be charged as an accessory to any crimes committed by the firearms they bought. A few people sent to jail for 20 years or life as they were considered to be an accessory to murder might help stop the practice of buying a firearm and knowingly selling it to a criminal who could not pass a background check.

[MrDiaz]

57. well for one

canada population is 34,482,779
usa population is 311,591,917

im sure the population difference has a pretty BIG effect on these numbers you have posted...just sayin

[GObamaGO]

65. I would like to see stats of the annual deaths

As a percentage of the country's population not the raw 8,000 versus 30,000. That would be a more fair comparison.

On edit, I see that others have answered my question for me.

[upaloopa]

3. I think you are using absolutes that don't exist to make an argument.

First, I doubt that anyone wants to ban guns. People are smart enough to understand that you can't ban all guns.

Second, we can't make a perfect law. All laws are disobeyed by various people.

So no one can answer your OP I think.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

10. The Brady campaign, in their heyday, actually express such sentiment:

This is from 1993, so it's not new, though it's the same Brady group. Excerpts from internal memos outline their multistep strategy for legislative success/activism. It's the shit like this that makes MANY gun owners opposed to even simple registration - because as history has shown, reistration can turn into confiscation lists.

So when people say no one actually wants to "ban guns" or that is a hyperbole represenatation of an extremist position... just remember that not only does the #1 Gun Control organization WANT to that, other countries have actually done it.

...
(NOTES AND MINUTES OF MEETING OF FRIDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1993)
ROUGH DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR INTERNAL MEMO AND FIVE YEAR PLAN
(OF HANDGUN CONTROL INC.)



WHAT IS PENDING NOW AND CAN BE LAW IN 1994

* Ban of all clips holding over 6 bullets.
* Ban on all semiautos which can fire more than 6 bullets without reloading.
* Ban of possession of parts to convert arms into miliary configuration.
* Ban on all pump shotguns capable of being converted to more than 5 shots without reloading.
* Banning of all machine guns, destructive devices, short shotguns/rifles and assault weapons.
* Banning of Saturday Night Specials.
* Banning of Non-Sporting Ammunition
* Arsenal licensing (for possession of multiple guns and large amounts of ammunition)
* Elimination of the Department of Civil Marksmanship.
* Ban on possession of a firearm within a home located within 1000 feet of a schoolyard.
* Ban on all realistic replicas/toy guns or non-firearms capable of being rendered realistic.
* The right of the victim of gun violence to sue manufacturers and dealers to be affirmed and
perhaps, aided with money from government programs.
* Taxes on ammo, Dealers licenses & guns to offset the medical costs to society.
* The eventual ban on all semiautomatics (regardless of when made or caliber).

WHAT WAS ONLY A DREAM TEN YEARS AGO CAN
BE REALITY AS EARLY AS THIS YEAR

(After the meeting the following ideas were the result of a brainstorming session to guide
the focus of gun control initiatives over the next five years. These may not be politically
feasible for 1994, but we are confident that with continued pressure we can achieve most if
not all of these goals within the next five years. The following list is condensed from our
meeting in which we considered the best ideas for public safety expansion. The time is
right for action.)


FIVE YEAR PLAN

LICENSES:

1. NATIONAL LICENSING OF ALL HANDGUN PURCHASES
This is at the top of our list, however, the political climate may be right to initiate this step
immediately. Please refer to our memo outlining our ideas on how this should be executed.

2. LICENSE FOR RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS
We should take our cues from Great Britain. Strict licensing should be mandatory -- for all
firearms whether handguns or not.

3. STATE LICENSES FOR OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS
We want to take a workable idea from Great Britain, whereas, we should require the states to
issue strict licenses for possession and require the licenses to be signed by at least three public
officials --i.e., the police chief, city attorney and mayor, for example, to eliminate ownership by
dangerous individuals. It is reasonable to require that all individuals must prove to the signers
that they require a firearm. This should be attached to any legislation requiring purchasers to
show a need for a firearm.

4. REDUCTION OF THE NUMBER OF GUNS TO REQUIRE AN ARSENAL LICENSE

Right now the proposed Arsenal licenses which Senator Feinstein should be pushing for,
requires an "Arsenal License" for those people who feel they need more than 20 guns and 1000
rounds of ammunition. We feel that number is too generous, due to the fact that any number of
guns constitutes a grave threat to the safety of the community; we suggest Strongly that this
license limit be reduced to possession greater than 5 guns and 250 rounds of ammunition.

5. ARSENAL LICENSE FEES
It is not unreasonable to require a yearly fee for an Arsenal license to be at least $300, with a
cap of $1000. The money collected can be used to defray the immense medical costs directly
attributed to these deadly weapons.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. EVENTUAL BAN OF HANDGUN POSSESSION
This may be closer to reality than many of us think. Handguns are becoming increasingly
unpopular and we think that within five years we can enact a total ban on possession at the
federal level.

17. BANNING OF ANY AMMO THAT FITS MILITARY GUNS (POST 1945)
With the proliferation of high powered weapons, including semiautomatics and automatics from
World War II, we suggest following the lead of Mexico, by prohibiting the sale, manufacture,
possession or transfer of any caliber fitting a military firearm in service with a recognized
military force after 1945.

AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES:

18. BANNING OF ANY QUANTITY OFSMOK ELESS POWDER OR BLACK POWDER
WHICH WOULD CONSTITUTE MORE THAN THE EQUIVALENT OF 100 ROUNDS
OF AMMUNITION
With the bombing of the World Trade Center, it has been made clear that we must reinforce the
above proposed regulation with this additional notation. It is arguable that no one has any real
need to have so much dangerous material on hand.

19. BAN ON THE POSSESSION OF EXPLOSIVE POWDERS OF MORE THAN 1
KILOGRAM AT ANY ONE TIME
Gun nuts are notorious for circumventing the intent of the law, so we can reinforce the above
proposed regulation with this additional notation. This additional language can be useful in
preventing "bomb-makers" and other dangerous individuals.

20. BANNING OF HIGH POWERED AMMO OR WOUNDING AMMO
In addition to the banning of military calibers, there is a plethora of dangerous rounds which are
too high powered for sporting use. This includes the highest calibers of pistol and rifle
ammunition (of note are the monster calibers for rifles and pistols, like the .50 caliber Desert
Eagle Bullet). We should not forget the lessons learned with the insidious Black Talon Ammo.
Hollow points, Glaser killing rounds and other types of ammunition designed specifically for
maiming should be prohibited.

21. A NATIONAL LICENSE FOR AMMUNITION
This is an idea whose time has come. We should look at a Federal License for purchasing of
ammunition of all kinds. A special form should be forwarded to a new federal office to track
those who are purchasing too much ammunition. Remember that a gun is useless without
ammunition.

22. BANNING OR STRICT LICENSING OF ALL RELOADING COMPONENTS
Ammunition regulation laws can be regularly bypassed by home loaders, creating an
underground cottage industry of ammo manufacture. Possession or purchase of reloading
equipment and machines should be restricted and those who wish to use specially loaded
ammunition can go to a federally licensed reloader.

23. NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF AMMUNITION OR AMMO BUYERS
Fees collected from the national licenses should go toward a nationwide database of ammo
buyers with a possible background check to eliminate the purchase of dangerous ammo by felons
or mental patients.

24. REQUIREMENT OF SPECIAL STORAGE SAFE FOR AMMUNITION AND
LICENSING
Like the storage safe for guns, there should be a national requirement for special safes to store
ammo. These safes should be tamperproof and fireproof and be registered themselves so that on
the spot inspections can be held. Again, the costs for these inspections can be absorbed by the
license fees.

GUN RANGES:

25. RESTRICTING GUN RANGES TO COUNTIES WITH POPULATIONS LESS
THAN 200,000
The obvious threat to public safety of shooting ranges and stray bullets has been lost on many
states and counties. We can initiate a federal mandate or incentives to get states to prohibit any
kind of shooting range within a county with a population of more than 200,000.

26. SPECIAL LICENSING OF RANGES
Those ranges which conform to the previous requirement should get special licensing above and
beyond that which is required now. Additionally each existing or new shooting range must get in
writing the permission of all property owners within a radius of seven miles.

27. SPECIAL RANGE TAX TO VISITORS
Additional revenue can be a surtax on ranges, requiring the collection of a minimum of $85 per
visit per person. This can be in addition to required membership fees, upon which the state and
local governments get a sizable portion, to help defray the immense cost of gun violence.

28. WAITING PERIOD FOR RENTALS ON PISTOL RANGES
It has been suggested in the past that felons can acquire pistols and other automatic weapons
without a background check by renting a gun on a target range. Deranged individuals are
basically being given a license to practice hunting humans at these so called "sporting ranges."
We think that a national waiting period for gun rentals is yet another idea whose time has come.

ACTIVITIES WHICH PROMOTE GUN VIOLENCE:

29. BANNING GUN SHOWS
Illegal transfers and the sales of assault weapons and submachine guns is a common event at
these so called gun shows. A huge dent can be made in the illegal trafficking of weapons by
banning these shows altogether.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Attachment 1:

(Confidential Information for use by Lobbyists or Senior Officers ONLY!)

I. Proposed License Fees - 1994-1995 Gun Control Proposals

These listings and the documentation used to calculate these suggested fee schedules will be
made available to federal law enforcement authorities and U.S. Department of the Treasury for
review, when the time is right. Additional material will be made available to key politicians
when proposing any fee-related legislation. These suggestions will be instrumental in
determining thenature of future gun control legislation and proposals.

A) Handgun License Fees:
Year 1 to 2: $50-$75 annually.
Year 3 to 4: $150-$250 annually.
Year 5 to 8: $550-$625 annually.

B) Penalties for non-compliance:
(a) Failure to acquire license -- $1,000/6 months jail, revocation of ability to own
(b) Failure to maintain license -- $5,000/12 months jail, revocation of ability to own
(c) Failure to turn over guns for destruction after lapse of license --$15,000/18 months jail,
revocation of ability to own.

Failure to renew license or notify issuing authority of change of status would be considered a
felony. All firearms owned would be then considered contraband, and confiscated. State or
local authorities would be prohibited from retaining or re-selling any confiscated firearms.
Record of destruction to be issued to federal government not later than 60 days after
confiscation.

C) Rifle-Shotgun License:
Program begins at $30 or at cost to maintain federal records on ownership and registration. Fee:
$30-$148 annually.

D) State Licensing:
The Department of Justice for each state will initiate programs at state level, with fees
equivalent to federal.
Fee: $74-$150 annually.

E) Local Licensing:
The cost of annual license to reflect the cost of records-maintenance and enforcement.
Fee: $48-$113 annually.

F) Arsenal License: (20 guns or 1,000 rounds ammo).
Fee: $300-$1,000 annually.

G) Penalty for Non-Compliance of Arsenal Licensing Law:
$5,000/8 months jail, confiscation of all firearms-related property, revocation of ability to own
firearms. (Disposition to be determined by Department of Justice and the state/federal
legislatures.)

H) Safe License:
Fee: $228-$392 annually (based on calculations of set up of computerized records system,
enforcement, registration processing).

I) Ammunition Registration & License:
Fee: $55-$117 for license to buy ammunition (based on calculations of set up of computerized
records-keeping system, enforcement and registration processing).

J) Federal license for Re-Loading (or possession of re-loading equipment) .
Fee: $130-$175 annually.

K) Ammunition Safe License.
Fee: $55-$75 annually.

L) Range License (new federal license on target, outdoor/indoor ranges).
Fee: $12,100-$15,500 annually.

M) Range Tax (imposed on Federally licensed gun ranges).
Fee: $85-$100 per person, per visit.

N) Inspection License: (verifying records of guns and storage) To defray cost of inspection and
firearms safes in business or private homes.
Fee: $588-$678 annually.

...

[loli phabay]

40. first time ive ever seen that, its scarey if that is the end goal.

[sendero]

46. While some of this is entirely reasonable..

.... when you get down to the endless and onerous fee schedule for owning and shooting a gun you lose me.

What this proposal basically says is "we want only the rich to have guns".

FUCK THAT.

[guardian]

73. Let me see if I have this right

You only want the 1% to own guns? That what your post proposes. What else do you want the 1% to have or do that is prohibitive for the 99%?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

76. You have it wrong.

I was merely posting some internal memos from the Brady Campaign circa '93.

I disagree with the Brady Campaign... I'm actually a gun-nut.

I just wanted to illustrate to the poster that such "ban them all" sentiment DOES exist and it exists within the #1 gun control advocacy group. I was attampting to show that the "total gun ban" some gun-rights people argue against is not merely hyperbole or a straw man argument. That "total gun ban" senitment has been found to exist in US gun-control activist groups and other implemented in other countries. That's all.

I was not advocating those positions, myself.

[guardian]

77. Sorry

I missed that...was reading quickly. Cheers.

[Taverner]

17. Perhaps, but I don't consider a national gun registry to be "gun control"

I think it would be a great idea

Hell, even make it open to the public, like Megan's Law

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

56. I'm a gun owner (gun-nut, in fact) and l agree with you...

Given an altruistic foundation and operation, a gun registry would be great and would not infringe on any right to own, keep or carry a gun. The problem is that hyper gun etremists in the past have used such registration systems as a basis for gun confiscation. Some people who wanted to project their views of morality and protectionism onto society went and shit in the punch-bowl and ruined a good thing for everyone.

So here we sit today... where the mere mention of a registration system carries the connotations of mistrust and scheming. The gun owners looking to the past and seeing nothing but a tool for confiscation and the gun controllers looking to future trying to implement a quality system of keeping track of dangerous items. The sad part is that both sides are actually right and neither side trusts each other.

[hack89]

58. What other purpose would it serve?

don't you think that the threshold for giving up ones privacy should be pretty high? I take it you are blase about it because your name would not be in it?

[Taverner]

67. Cops, as much as I dislike them, should know if the occupant is armed or not

[hack89]

69. Since they have no way of tracking violent felons with illegal (unregistered) guns

there is a reason that cops are trained to treat every incident as potentially involving armed people.

[spin]

59. Do some research on Google about how Canada's national long gun registry worked out. ...

Or for a quick idea just watch this video.

&feature=related

[Taverner]

66. The Canadian Constitution does not have an equivalent to the 2nd Amendment

[JoePhilly]

4. So since meth laws don't get it off the street, we should drop those laws?

We have laws to stop white collar crime, but it still happens, maybe we should cancel those.

Hell ... laws get broken all the time, might as well repeal them all. Makes sense.

Or ... how about we create a graded system for gun ownership. Kind of like we do for drivers.

My driver's license allows me to drive any passenger vehicle, but it would be illegal for me to drive an 18 wheeler, or a comercial dump truck.

Certainly we could do the same for guns. Create a graded system. If you demonstrate proficiency, you can have gun you want. Hell, you can have a TANK. But you have to pass the legal requirements before you can legally purchase one.

Sellers would be expected to ensure that a buyer has the correct license.

Shooting clubs could obtain certification to teach people to move from grade to grade (how entrepreneurial).

Sell a gun to some one with the wrong license, you lose your license to sell. Be found in posesion of a weapon above your license, you lose your license for some period.

Not rocket science.

Won't stop all gun violence, but no law stops all crime. And if that's the standard, we might as well just scrap all laws now.

[Taverner]

18. I would say yes

But I am 100% anti drug laws

You might not want to ask me that question

[JoePhilly]

25. Would that include not supporting laws regarding driving while on various drugs?

Do those laws go away too?

[Taverner]

27. Nope because at that point it is not a victimless crime

Things change when it affects other people

[sendero]

47. Actually now that you mention it.

... ALL drug laws should be abandoned as they are a COMPLETE AND ABJECT FAILURE and are only there to protect moneyed interests at this point.

[Politicalboi]

5. Make owning a gun

Like owning 20 pounds of Marijuana. You go to jail. If caught with a gun a 20 year minimum would work. Build more prisons in anticipation for the hiders. It can be done if the punishment is harsh enough.

It's not a disease like drugs, so people know exactly what they are doing when they buy one illegally.

Hire hunters if needed for overpopulation, and let citizens who live in the wilderness areas be able to hunt for food. No handguns, just rifles and bows.

[Pholus]

7. Sure, why not give the Prison Industrial Complex some ideas....

Actually, giving somebody that powerful a financial motive to imprison a decent fraction of the population just might make it happen. I officially reverse my earlier opinion that total confiscation is completely impractical.

[Taverner]

19. That won't work either

I could find 20 lbs of pot right now if you wanted


Not hard to find in our fine state

[Posteritatis]

22. Any legal solution in the US that involves building more prisons is a lousy solution. (nt)

[MicaelS]

23. Fuck all that ..

You want to end much of the violence associated with guns? Legalize, regulate and tax all drugs. All of them.

Alcohol Prohibition was an utter failure, all it did was create a whole bunch of criminals.

Drug Prohibition is an utter failure, all it has done was create a whole bunch of new criminals.

So you propose to try failed policy it a third time, and create ANOTHER whole bunch of new criminals?

Fuck all Prohibition shit in Triplicate.

[sendero]

48. Exactly..

.. but like so many obvious facts nothing will happen because we have an entire public/private "justice" system that depends on docile drug users to feed it.

[spin]

62. Do you wish another civil war or a revolution? ...

You may feel that our nation could just pass such a law as you propose and most honest citizens would just decide to turn their firearms in. I would suggest that a significant percentage would not comply. A small percentage of those might decide to fight against what they perceive as a tyrannical government. Realize that many of that group are military veterans who have received excellent training from their prior service. Our military has always had a hard time fighting guerrilla warfare but "patriotic veterans" could easily adapt to using such tactics to create havoc.

Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or "irregulars&quot use military tactics, such as ambushes, sabotage, raids, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to harass a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare

You might feel that the police could simply raid homes and arrest those who had firearms. I know a good number of cops and few would ever wish to do this and many would simply refuse. This might not be true in Chicago or other very liberal cities but in the red states it is a fact.

So then you might believe that the military or the national guard could be called in to do the job. Unfortunately many soldiers and officers would simply refuse. Most members of our voluntary military forces are volunteers and are very patriotic. They value the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

In reality any such ban would require a period of time for people to comply. Even if a bipartisan effort that had large support from both parties led to the law, the following elections would cause those who voted for the law to loose their seats in Congress. Be aware that support for gun control is at an all time low.

October 26, 2011
Record-Low 26% in U.S. Favor Handgun Ban
Support for stricter gun laws in general is lowest Gallup has measured
by Jeffrey M. Jones








http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun-ban.aspx

Now I am not saying that the support for gun control might not grow significantly in the future depending on events, but I am saying that in our current political environment it is impossible to to implement your idea. To do so might well result in a "bloody disaster."

I live in Florida and when you hear a rattlesnake it's wisest to simply back up and walk away.

Reality is a bitch.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. I think such laws would concentrate guns in the hands of criminals who would use them.

Most gun owners (or owners of any forbidden product) will object to prohibition. A good deal, however, will abide by the laws because they don't wish to be caught in felonious possesion of contraband. Some will turn it them in to the government. The rest of the people's actions will be driven by the demographics that have the guns.

Other gun owners, not necessarily criminals, who will be bitter at the governemnet will give or illegally sell the guns to others willing to risk keeping them. Eventually, over time, the non-criminals holding onto guns will turn some of them in during amnesties or filter them to crimnials via the black market.

Others who are lesser criminals but don't want to risk the charges if caught won't turn them in to the police (c'mon, criminals it's obvious wont consort with and help police) but will instead give them to other more hardened criminals. They'll trade them for drugs or cash.

The hardened criminals is where most of the guns will end up. No one in this group will turn them in. They'll likely stockpile them or use them. The guns will be a source of power and black market income. This is where most of the damage from guns come to society today.

As you can see, at each demographic or exchange, some guns may get turned in and others get filtered towards the criminal element. Eventually, the concentration of guns in the hardcore criminal sect will grow... other demographics are merely transit routes as few non-criminals will hold onto them indefinitely. The number of guns the American criminal element has today (and uses to implement alot of our gun violence today) may grow 100-fold in the future. Imagine the gang violence then.

Keep in mind, that if only 10% of the outlawed guns reach the criminal black market... that's an additional 30,000,000 guns they have in their arsenal. And that's only 10%. My guess is that well over 40% of gun owners would be delinquent in fully complying with any sort of actual gun ban.

[justanidea]

8. Your friend is commiting a federal crime.

The machine gun registry was closed in 1986. Making a new one for civilian use is a felony.

[Zalatix]

14. So is making bombs, meth, etc.

And we know how nonexistent those are now.

[Taverner]

15. Yes he is

And you can see how well making a law against it works

[HopeHoops]

9. Belling a cat is easy. Doing it with a break-away collar is not.

Of our two kittens, the male knows how to unclip the collar with his teeth. Then he unclips his sister's collar. I give up.

[Taverner]

20. What if you're a mouse tho?

Although the idea of mice forming a committee is kinda bizarre - we know mice are more apt to hire proxy voters

[HopeHoops]

53. We get mice from time to time. They don't live long.

[Ken Burch]

11. Offer it a cheezburger?

[Johonny]

13. If we regulate wall street won't the traders just open up their own illegal market?

or will most investors just still use the regulated market and banking system... hmm

I imagine most gun owners will use the regulated gun market and those that go to the unregulated gun market will get what you expect from any unregulated market.

You can on your own make your own illegal over the counter drugs, but most people go to the doctors and get a prescription. If you go buy your drugs off the unregulated street meth and crack market you generally get what you expect from any unregulated market.

[Taverner]

16. Apples and Oranges

Keep in mind I have no problem with a national gun registry

To me that is not gun control

[Generic Other]

21. I predict an edict of Homeland Security will be used to come after the guns

I am not sure which party will be in office when it happens. Isn't it law enforcement's dream to get guns off the street?

[baldguy]

28. Are you insinuating that gun owners WOULD KNOWINGLY BREAK THE LAW?

Why, one of the prime arguments against gun bans which is always tossed out by gun worshipers is that gun owners are all fine, up-standing & LAW ABIDING citizens! And, now - here you are saying that they can't be trusted! Which is it?

[RC]

29. Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, look at Canada and their gun laws.

It works for them. Hand guns are very heavily regulated.
Here, long guns and hand guns are dumped together to obfuscate the truth about how many people are killed and injured by hand guns, over rifles.

[sendero]

49. And while you are at it..

.. ignore that FACT that the Aurora shooter did most of his damage with a shotgun and a rifle.

[RC]

64. Thanks for more proof we need to look at Canada for how they handle fire arms.

[MannyGoldstein]

51. Or Massachusetts

Massachusetts: nanny-state gun control FAIL

[SoDesuKa]

30. One-Person Activism

For some reason, the Aurora shooting was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. Since then, I've been talking nonstop about the need to get high-powered weapons out of the hands of murderous lunatics. Nobody disagrees about such a goal - how can they?

One way to challenge the NRA is to dispute their claim that gun ownership is family-friendly and socially positive.It's neither. Gun ownership is boorish and anti-social. I avoid getting drawn into an unpleasant argument with an NRA sympathizer. I tell them I support the Second Amendment as far as possible, recognizing the need to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of crazies. If they don't support that goal, then there's no point in having a discussion.

One-person activism is more powerful than people suspect! I'm having some good effect in changing attitudes from gun-neutral to gun-negative. There was a time when recreational drugs were chic, but now they're not. This change in social attitudes came about because of one-person activism. Each one teach one.

[and-justice-for-all]

31. I complely agree...nt

[loli phabay]

33. depends where you live i suppose. where i am i see families out shooting all the time

a lot of the social events are shooting matches and bbq. Not every gun owner hidesout in their basement all day long.

[SoDesuKa]

38. Social Change

Little by little we are making headway in changing people's minds about guns. There was a time when cocaine was considered chic; it's not anymore. A number of instrumentalities came together to create the present-day image of cocaine as criminal and anti-social. I'm very hopeful of accomplishing the same thing with guns.

I have to laugh at the image of guns and barbeque . . . it's almost at kitschy as guns and Jesus. The notion that guns are family-friendly is promoted by the gun industry. There hasn't been sufficient counter-propaganda, as there was with narcotics. We're making slow headway one voter at a time.
[center]


Jesus Loves Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
[/center]

[loli phabay]

39. I dont agree, probuably as i have a use for my guns as do my neighbours

our guns provide us with meat, protect our crops, and provide a focal point for the community in that we have shooting competitions and when i drive around i see a lot of other communities have the same thing ran by the local fire volunteers as fund raisers. I guess it depends on the state and county you live in but her in VA i dont see what you are wanting.

[snooper2]

74. recreational drugs aren't "chic" anymore? LOL, somebody forgot to tell

The Dallas metroplex

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. How about banning manufacturing them, selling them, or transporting them? It would be a start.

Kinda like the banning of the slave trade led to the end of slavery.

[michreject]

36. I can make a gun for under 10 bucks

Everything you need is at a hardware store.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

42. That assumes you have a bullet.

Unless you are talking homemade propellent, in which case you might as well make a slingshot.

[loli phabay]

43. theres enough rounds out there to last for years, i wouldnt want to guess how many rounds people hav

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. A lot of guns out there are just heirlooms and people have no interest in ammo.

Like great great granddad's old squirrel rifle over the mantlepiece.

[img][/img]

A lot of people who own guns go through boxes of ammo to the point where they do their own reloads to save money. You can only do that so many times before the brass wears out.

[michreject]

54. I have components to make thousands of bullets

I reload. I have 5 reloading presses in my basement.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

78. Then you know what I mean.

It's like refilling HP printer cartridges.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. "thus we will have no idea how many guns are really out there."

Like we know that now????

[ileus]

50. They're gun owners....who really cares what they think.

Most are just standing in the way of making our society a better place. If they do we steamroll over them and just keep going.

Get those guns out of civilian hands no matter what the price. It's for our future they're holding hostage...

Real progress can finally be made.

[quaker bill]

52. We would never get them all

It is not likely we would even get a majority of them, regardless of what you did within the bounds of due process. The black market is quite functional here, firearm prohibition would simply expand this black market and add a new commodity to the menu of options.

As best as I can tell, fewer people are into pot and meth than guns. We haven't done well banning either of those.

At one point in time, having a tan indicated that you were of the lower classes who worked outside for a living. People avoided the sun because pale skin was a sign that you were among the elite. Right now, it seems a fine or large gun collection, suggests manliness, patriotism, and in some cases wealth as a status symbol. At some point this will go out of style, they will become a stigma, and guns will go back into the lock box, where if you have one it might be fine, but talking about them or showing them off is simply a sign that you are not sophisticated. This could take a while as social trends often do.

[Shadowflash]

61. Brilliant!

Let's not make any laws because people won't follow them, anyway.

Great strategy.

So does that mean we should just trash all the speed limit laws because no one follows them anyway and enforcing them it time consuming and takes a lot of resources?

[Erose999]

63. Just ban assault style rifles. Exempt existing guns out there, but mandate as immediate of a halt in

production and a recall of weapons in stores and factory inventories as possible to prevent a buying spree.

Pass severe restrictions to limit places where weapons can be carried.

Flag and monitor gratuitous purchases of ammunition, magazines, body armor, etc.

[Taverner]

68. Pistols and shotguns are just as deadly as "assault rifles"

[belcffub]

80. how would you do this...

the reason the law was so wonky in the first place was the trouble in banning one type of rifle that is exceptional close to another...

examples
ban ar-15's - welcomes the new colt ar-16
ban derivatives of the ar-15 - welcome the new ar-17 with new look and new and improved trigger and gas impingement system

ban all semi-autos - this one will work but will never pass as it would ban many many hunting guns...

so how would you close the loopholes??? I am interested in hearing what you can come up with...

[Tommy_Carcetti]

70. Most people aren't going to advocate a total ban.

Rather, it would be increased regulation and enforcement, which is still the NRA's worst nightmare. Tightening up licensing requirements, prohibiting the most destructive and henious weapons to which there is no legitimate purpose other than to inflict mass casulaties, etc. That would go a long way. People could still hunt. People could still have a reasonable weapon in their home for protection.

I'm sorry, but I've never subscribed to the whole libertarian canard, "If you ban X, you'll only exacerbate the problem by creating a black market for it." There's a threshold to be crossed, and some things are just so destructive and unnecessary that they deserve to be banned, even if we cannot guarantee that some people won't try to circumvent that ban.

And high powered, high capacity weaponry outside the context of the military strikes me as being destructive and unnecessary and worthy of banning, I'm sorry.

Should we erase laws on murder just because making murder illegal has not stopped people from murdering others?

[LAGC]

75. There's a big difference between legislating against undesirable behavior vs. inanimate objects.

Are you a big fan of the War on Drugs as well?

You really think Prohibition works?

[aquart]

79. So gun owners are cats and people without guns are mice?

Gun owners are predators. Non-gun owners are prey.

Honey, you all don't need a bell. You need to be fixed.

[Taverner]

81. You're reading way too much into the example

Thin skinned much?

[retread]

82. Why "bell the cat"?? We have enough guns. Let's just shoot it!

[librechik]

83. no more gun shows. No more online sales. Purchase only from bonded licensed dealers with restictions

on buyers as follows: Test of safety and proficiency, liability insurance, age restrictions and mandatory background checks. No gun ownership with active DUI cases or violent incidents.
.
Pretty much just like owning a car.

[slackmaster]

84. Most of that is already the law

You can buy firearms online, but unless you have a federal firearms license you can't have them sent directly to you - They have to go to a licensed dealer, who will perform a background check.

There are already age restrictions - 18 for long guns and 21 for handguns.

People who have been convicted of certain crimes, including all felonies and misdemeanor domestic violence are not permitted to buy firearms from anyone.

[Taverner]

85. "liability insurance" - now that sounds like a good idea

And it won't have a chilling effect - since guns are already a toy for the rich as it is

[SunsetDreams]

86. Locking

Locking

Statement of Purpose

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.

Please consider posting in Gun Control & RKBA group.

Thanks for your understanding

SunsetDreams
GD Host


FYI Skinner announcement to hosts this morning.

Skinner (56,085 posts)

You can once again enforce the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

I think it is clear that members' interest in discussing Guns has died down, and we are now focusing on other issues. (Thanks, Mitt!) So you can once again start enforcing the prohibition against gun threads in GD.

Of course, if you do want to lock any threads about guns, you should probably discuss it in here before you do.

FWIW, my personal opinion is that some narrowly-targeted discussion of the tragedy in Colorado might still be on-topic for GD. But we no longer need to provide an open environment in GD for all gun discussion.