Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Sancho

(9,205 posts)
25. Exactly...
Tue Oct 24, 2017, 08:18 PM
Oct 2017

People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Fascinating and horrible. The tracking of other mass shooters is not surprising. underpants Oct 2017 #1
The obviously deranged should not be allowed access to weapons alphafemale Oct 2017 #2
In this case his mother was the gun owner, but he lived with her. CBHagman Oct 2017 #29
He killed her first. alphafemale Oct 2017 #35
I thought the guns he used were locked up ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #30
Considering he killed her by shooting her, obviously that is not the case. LisaL Oct 2017 #55
He may have killed her with one gun to get the rest of the guns, he could have used a hammer Not Ruth Oct 2017 #65
By obviously deranged, do you mean Aspergers? Not Ruth Oct 2017 #43
I remember alluding to this back in 2012... ck4829 Oct 2017 #3
No, we can do nothing gratuitous Oct 2017 #6
Exactly... Sancho Oct 2017 #25
Which of those proposed laws ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #31
Several of them... Sancho Oct 2017 #36
Actually, none of them ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #37
None of those guns would be in the house... Sancho Oct 2017 #39
How so? ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #45
Lots of things...but just for one... Sancho Oct 2017 #46
So you want to deny guns ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #47
Absolutely...if they don't take action to prevent killings!!! Sancho Oct 2017 #51
Yes. n/t Crunchy Frog Oct 2017 #57
Try getting auto insurance if your adult roommate has had a DUI stevenleser Oct 2017 #61
Mental illness, a love of guns and testosterone are the elements BigmanPigman Oct 2017 #4
So much pain. It's heartbreaking. WhiskeyGrinder Oct 2017 #5
The day of Sandy Hook is probably the hardest i have ever cried in my life. alphafemale Oct 2017 #7
It was a heartbreaking event ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #32
This article has lots of tidbits, but I don't think it's helpful (from a clinical perspective) janterry Oct 2017 #8
Thats a fucked up Newsweek headline. PdxSean Oct 2017 #9
+1 Lucinda Oct 2017 #14
As far as I can tell he spend most of his time in his mother's basement and wasn't around any actual LisaL Oct 2017 #15
Newsweek has been unrecognizable lately. EL34x4 Oct 2017 #41
I had to read the lede three times. cagefreesoylentgreen Oct 2017 #42
agreed and.. RayOfHope Oct 2017 #72
I doubt he could have acted on it RhodeIslandOne Oct 2017 #10
But Mom Was A Responsible Gun Owner nt SoCalMusicLover Oct 2017 #11
Right up until she was killed, and her firearms stolen. ileus Oct 2017 #23
Conspiracy 'nutz' say Sandy Hook never happened. left-of-center2012 Oct 2017 #12
Asperger's is a syndrome, not a disease. Ms. Toad Oct 2017 #13
I agree. I find this article marybourg Oct 2017 #38
Likewise. WinkyDink Oct 2017 #50
Thank you. WinkyDink Oct 2017 #49
rape victim. mopinko Oct 2017 #16
You'd lose your bottom dollar. LisaL Oct 2017 #17
no, there usually isnt. mopinko Oct 2017 #26
Suicide would have saved them lame54 Oct 2017 #18
The headline is very misleading. LisaL Oct 2017 #19
I'll stand by my post lame54 Oct 2017 #20
He did actually kill himself after he killed the children. LisaL Oct 2017 #21
I'd have reversed the sequence maxsolomon Oct 2017 #27
A really tragic life. milestogo Oct 2017 #22
There is no "Aspergers medication". mn9driver Oct 2017 #24
Yep, and it's also not a "disease" Spider Jerusalem Oct 2017 #33
Which causes me to question marybourg Oct 2017 #40
Thank you! Irritating as fuck. Crunchy Frog Oct 2017 #54
And the online acquaintance didn't report him? Honeycombe8 Oct 2017 #28
What did the mother do ClarendonDem Oct 2017 #34
She is indirectly responsible marylandblue Oct 2017 #58
Umm, stockpile massive numbers of weapons where he could easily access them Crunchy Frog Oct 2017 #62
Yes, she's partially to blame. Honeycombe8 Oct 2017 #68
I do not believe that the father was a part of his life Not Ruth Oct 2017 #44
She was divorced but Adam was already 17 when divorce took place. LisaL Oct 2017 #52
Exactly. As I recall, the father had little to do with his son, and had always been that way. nt Honeycombe8 Oct 2017 #69
Most people with (xxx) do not commit mass murder Not Ruth Oct 2017 #63
The marks were there. Honeycombe8 Oct 2017 #70
The FBI's "conclusion" is EXTREMELY specious, given that there is no attendant action on Adam's WinkyDink Oct 2017 #48
What is an attendant action? Not Ruth Oct 2017 #53
He didn't commit any pedophiliac deeds. The FBI is now into mind-reading. WinkyDink Oct 2017 #73
Yeah, correlation and causation are 2 different things n/t TexasBushwhacker Oct 2017 #59
So he was "Catcher in the Rye's" Holden Caulfield if Caulfield was a homicidal pedophile? stevenleser Oct 2017 #56
Or a product of divorce Not Ruth Oct 2017 #60
I wasn't speaking of his motive so much as who he was as a person, his worldview/lifeview. stevenleser Oct 2017 #66
Oh boy..cant wait to see what the FBI comes up for paddock 4 years after... Tikki Oct 2017 #64
This seems sketchy because there is no Asperger's medicine. However, there are medications pnwmom Oct 2017 #67
Wish momhah had done a hip check on a busy street with that one alphafemale Oct 2017 #71
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sandy Hook Gunman Chose S...»Reply #25