OK… Here’s a place for discussion of plans to stop gun violence. Every time there is a shooting, then there are calls for the president and congress to talk about gun violence. The one thing I have never seen is a plan, even a half baked one, for stopping gun violence. So I’m going to offer a few thoughts that any plan for stopping gun violence must deal with. If we can come up with a plan, then I’ll be happy to promote it.
Issue 1: Getting rid of guns entirely is impossible
It’s not going to happen, just don’t even think about it. First, police are going to want to keep their guns. Second, the military is going to keep their guns. Third, legal precedent (regardless of what you think of the 2nd Amendment) is that US citizens have the right to keep their guns. Fourth, criminals will keep their guns, regardless of laws against it.
Issue 2: Defining characteristics of guns to be discussed
This is a major issue and one that is not often talked about. The government, in the past, has defined ‘assault rifle’ in a particular way… a way that made absolutely no sense and some states have followed (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey).
Take a look at this
This is a rifle according to the Federal Government
This is an “assault rifle” according to the Federal government.
What’s the difference? An assault rifle has ‘accessories’. Any rifle that is designed to accept two or more of the following: folding stock, pistol grip, bayonet mount, flash suppressor, grenade launcher. So, since the AR-15 has a pistol grip already (you can’t buy one without it), then all you need is a collapsible stock and it suddenly becomes a regulated ‘assault rifle’.
That’s STUPID. The important parts of the gun are the action, the ammunition, the rate of fire, the size… not whether it is designed for a grenade launcher (which, shockingly is regulated).
So, any discussion of firearms should include definitions and explanations of the types, qualities, and such of the weapons.
Issue 3: Don’t talk about defending ourselves from government tyranny
Look, I don’t care how many M14s you own, you are not going to stop a tank, attack helicopter, or drone loaded with missiles. So, just don’t go there. This really isn’t about defending ourselves from the government any more.
Issue 4: Hunting
Hunting is actually a fairly important aspect of wildlife management. You see, once humans have killed all the wolves and coyotes in an area, then the deer had no predators and did way more damage than the wolves ever did. Until ecosystems are restored and not interfered with, then game management (i.e. hunting) is a fairly significant source of wildlife control.
Issue 5: Enforcement of Regulations and Laws
Any discussion cannot be complete without a discussion of how these laws/regulations/etc will be enforced. This is something that the US government seems to be unaware of, creating lots of regulations and government agencies, then failing to provide for them in the budget.
issue 6: Discussion of Similarity of Prohibition
We all know the story of the 18th Amendment. Alcohol was banned in the US. The results were massive amounts of crime. Most people pretty much ignored the law. It was doomed to failure and could not be enforced. There was too much money in it. This touches on issue 1 and issue 5, but it should be directly dealt with. Any attempt to completely remove firearms is going to fail, there’s too much money in it.
So, how do we reduce gun violence without reducing the guns? I don’t know.
So, let me talk about some things that COULD be done and MIGHT be acceptable to the population of the US at large.
Idea 1
I would suggest taxing and licensing firearms just like automobiles. Every year, every person has to pay a small fee and get a stamp in their book that they still own the gun and it’s condition. This includes transfers of firearms, including between individuals. If a firearm is sold, traded, bought, whatever, then the parties have to file a report and pay a transfer fee. If a firearm is sold and not reported by the old owner, then they face criminal charges AND are directly responsible for any actions taken using that firearm. Antiques are not excepted.
The problem is that of setting up an entire division to handle this. There are probably more firearms than cars in the US. Perhaps let the county assessors just take care of it.
Yes, there will still be unlicensed firearms. Yes, this won’t stop sales or anything else, but it will help. The gun nuts may decide that they don’t need 70 weapons.
Idea 2
Gun buy back programs. This is going to be difficult as it will cost lots and lots of money. There are about 300 million guns in the US with an average value of several hundred dollars. As guns become more rare, then they will become more valuable. This includes actual price and street price. All it takes is one guy who wants a little extra cash in the buy back program and hundreds of guns could be flooding the streets.
The idea is that this will also reduce the number of guns in circulation.
Idea 3
Taxation of ammunition, just like gasoline. Unlike gasoline though, ammunition can be constructed from base materials just about anywhere. So, you also have to tax powder and primers. That might reduce legitimate use of guns (hunting, competition shooting, etc), but again not effect on criminal activity.
Idea 4
Increase the penalties for gun crimes… a lot. Make a crime that even has a firearm present a minimum of double the standard maximum for that type of crime. This might have an impact on criminal activities.
All of these ideas MUST be across the board, police, military, government employee, judges, etc. Did you know that the US Department of Education has a law enforcement arm and has officers that are allowed to carry weapons, including shotguns?
Here’s the biggest problem, with all of the above. They (and all regulations and laws) only affect those people willing to follow these laws. I would expect (knowing what I know about the gun culture and the people in it) that this will create an instant group of criminals, probably on the order of several hundred thousand. These are just people who are not going to register their weapons. They aren’t bad people, they just don’t think that the government has the right to monitor that.
So, now we have these regulations, which really isn’t going to do much to reduce criminal use of guns (or any events like what happened in Connecticut) and it will actually create a new criminal group out of people who, otherwise, would not be criminals.
I’ll also point out that none of this addresses the actual issues that are causing this kind (Connecticut, Colorado, etc) of gun violence. Look at the major shootings over the last few decades.
The vast majority of these incidents occurred by people who needed medical help. They either didn’t or couldn’t get that help. I’m not excusing them, and I’m not saying that if we had helped them (as a society) that events like these wouldn’t have happened. But there can be no solution to gun violence, domestic violence, child abuse, etc without a discussion of getting people the help that they need to function in our modern society.
Anyone who decides that they are going to kill a bunch of people have many, many avenues to do so. Guns are any easy choice, but there are a lot ways that would do more damage to more people in a shorter amount of time. When someone decides to take their own life and kill a bunch of people at the same time, it’s already too late. We, as a society, have failed that person.
OK, I’m ranting again, I’ll stop.
So, let’s here them. What ideas can we come up with that are both acceptable, legal, and effective for controlling gun violence?
