Jump to content
Howard

New approach to gun laws

Recommended Posts

I have been having a discussion with an "anti" friend (I know I should not use those two words together).  He finally agreed that many of our laws are stupid and for debate said he would be willing to throw out all guns laws and start from scratch if I can up with a framework for discussion.  Here is what I plan to offer him, after I get some critic here:

========================================================================================================

Thank you so much for killing all these stupid gun laws Jay, as we all know there should be no laws regulating rights.  Having laws limiting gun rights is the same as having laws limiting religious rights or the right to vote.  So, we are now done.  J

 

All kidding aside I think we do need laws to protect our society within reason.  So, before we do anything we have to require government issued photo ID before anyone can vote, as that is the most important right in our society as everything else is based on that.  Given that we have that, and we fully secure the boarders then we can discuss how to protect society from bad people with guns.  I offer the following given that you stipulate to all the above, if you renege on that then all bets are off the table.  These rules are to be on a national level with no additional or different laws allowed by any state or other geopolitical entity.

In order to own a gun you should have to be of the age to vote and submit your voter ID card so that a background check can be run to make sure you are not a violent criminal or mentally ill, as our goal is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or others that don’t have the mental capacity to use them in a safe manner.  The mental issue is a difficult one because while we want to protect people we don’t want to give the government too much power to arbitrarily take away people’s rights.  So, this will require future discussion as how to balance this issue.

Once you have been proven to not be a criminal and not be mentally defective you then receive your gun endorsement on your voter ID card which lets you purchase, own and posses your gun(s) in your possession at any time and place of your choosing.  This is no different than allowing you to drive your car on any road at anytime of your choosing.  Notice we use an innocent until proven guilty approach like in any other law in this country.  Possession of a gun without an endorsed voter ID card would entitle said person to a minimum term of one year in jail, and loss of voter ID card for a period of four years which would not allow said person to possess a gun or vote for a period of four years.  Any violation, including illegal voting, would earn the person one additional year in jail.

The next step is comprehensive non-negotiable penalties for dangerous or deadly use of a gun in any manner other than justifiable self defense or defense of others including the defense of your home or business.  Thus, if you are caught shooting at someone’s house, or car or other property there needs to punishment.  That penalty should be forfeiture of your right to use a gun for some period of time with violation of that suspension receiving harsher penalty which might be a large fine or jail.  Said person would also have to receive counseling to assure us that they understand the safety issues and don’t take such actions a second time.  A second offense within five years would require surrender of voter ID card which would not allow said person to take a gun out of their home or vote for a period of four years.  Any violation, including illegal voting, would earn the person one year in jail.

 

The next step would be harsh jail sentences for possession of a gun while committing a crime, a violent crime, shooting at a person in other than self defense or defense of others and killing a person or persons in other than self defense or defense of others. Any person(s) brandishing a gun while committing a crime would receive a minimum three year jail sentence.  Anyone firing a gun at a person with the intension of causing physical harm or death (aforementioned defense exclusions apply) would receive a mandatory ten year jail sentence.  Any appeal of sentences would only be done through a six judge panel (Federal Judges) of which at least four must agree to any reduction – no plea bargains or deals by any other entity allowed.

 

Killing another person outside of the stated exclusions would receive a jail sentence of twenty years but would be increased to thirty years if in the commission of another felony.  These punishments would be based on normal jury trial with normal rules of evidence.  Since this or these persons had deprived another of life these jail terms would be served in a facility at least 1,000 miles from the person’s home town with no visitation or contact with family allowed for the full term.  Only fair since they took away such contact for the victim’s family.  In such cases where there was proof positive of killing a different penalty would apply.  This would be reserved for public shooting where more than twenty witnesses provide certainty as to the identity of the shooter or where there is video proof positive of the identity of the shooter.  In such and only such cases the shooter would receive the death penalty.  The only possible appeal of these sentences would be by the aforementioned six judge panel, four votes required to reduce sentence to a minimum of 20 years.  The death penalty would be carried out 30 days after the six judge panel finished their review – no extensions.  Execution would take place by hanging in a public square and broadcast on the 6pm news for deterrent value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also voiced the idea that the gun rights should be coupled with the voting rights. If you're a US citizen, and you're not prohibited from voting (e.g. as a convicted felon or mentally incapable) - this should be enough in itself to exercise your 2A rights. Legal residents (non-citizens) should go through a different process, maybe similar what we have now in NJ, with recommendations from citizens.

If you lose your right to vote, you lose 2A rights, and vice versa.

Not going to discuss punishments, except that I oppose public executions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flawed premise. You both agree that the laws our lawmakers make are broken, but want to start from scratch without replacing the broken lawmakers. You will get broken laws.

Fair enough, how do you suggest we go about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flawed premise. You both agree that the laws our lawmakers make are broken, but want to start from scratch without replacing the broken lawmakers. You will get broken laws.

 

^^^YEP!

 

As long as we have to deal with Charles "Big Booty" Mainor, Loretta "Confiscator" Weinberg and Cryin' Cryan, we'll be dealin' with Idiots who can't see the trees for the forest!  After watching you and Matt and others give testimony last year, all I can say is "you just hit it outta da park"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, how do you suggest we go about that?

 

Convince people that the system is broken and not serving them. Stop thinking left vs right, stop thinking liberal vs conservative. Realize that both sides want nothing more then enslave you while preaching "freedom". Adopt the live and let live mentality of the libertarian, and convince as many people as you can that the answer to "there ought to be a law" is "hell no". 

 

When enough people realize that government and laws are designed to make us all a minority of one that can be prosecuted or fleeced at will by a 51% vote then you will probably see massive civil disobedience and the start of real change. 

 

Until then, you tread water.

 

Don't make the argument about guns, make the argument about self determination, Independence, and the complete failure of government whenever it actually matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Convince people that the system is broken and not serving them. Stop thinking left vs right, stop thinking liberal vs conservative. Realize that both sides want nothing more then enslave you while preaching "freedom". Adopt the live and let live mentality of the libertarian, and convince as many people as you can that the answer to "there ought to be a law" is "hell no". 

 

When enough people realize that government and laws are designed to make us all a minority of one that can be prosecuted or fleeced at will by a 51% vote then you will probably see massive civil disobedience and the start of real change. 

 

Until then, you tread water.

 

Don't make the argument about guns, make the argument about self determination, Independence, and the complete failure of government whenever it actually matters. 

Yes, but we are a nation of laws and what you are suggesting is beyond what is ever going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun laws are not the issue.... Violent offenders are... Regulating guns is not the answer... Controlling criminals is...

 

You really don't need much in the way of gun laws... But when some scumbag hurts someone with a gun or not... They go to jail for a long time... If someone commits a murder we put them to death...

 

That will create a safer society...

It has been proven time and time again that laws do not prevent criminals...

Laws should be used to punish criminals to the extreme... Because if that doesn't function as a deterant it will at least remove violent criminals from the street...

 

The end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but we are a nation of laws and what you are suggesting is beyond what is ever going to happen.

 

I think both those statements are false, if well intentioned.

 

We are not a nation of laws, the legal system is being ignored at every level, from the president on down to the lowest person on the street. This is increasingly so, if for no other reason that no one knows what the laws are, and even if they did it would be nearly impossible to live your life without breaking them

 

Why is it beyond what is likely to happen? Every nation, this one included has had considerable shifts in legal formats. In the US version of the story there have probably been 3 to 4 major shifts, lets say revolutionary war (really a war of independence), the civil war (really a war of Independence), the massive shift to a socialist format in the 30's during the depression, and the current shift to what is probably best described as classical fascism (not the nazi kind, that was ONE kind of fascism).

 

Just because people keep on saying we have one legal system for 250 or so years, it doesn't make it so. A person transplanted from any of those eras to a different one would probably not recognize it as the same form of government.

 

I don't think we should assume it can't happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun laws are not the issue.... Violent offenders are... Regulating guns is not the answer... Controlling criminals is...

 

You really don't need much in the way of gun laws... But when some scumbag hurts someone with a gun or not... They go to jail for a long time... If someone commits a murder we put them to death...

 

That will create a safer society...

It has been proven time and time again that laws do not prevent criminals...

Laws should be used to punish criminals to the extreme... Because if that doesn't function as a deterant it will at least remove violent criminals from the street...

 

The end

Bingo...  Ronald-Reagan-Gun-Control-Poster_zps9166

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you have been proven to not be a criminal and not be mentally defective you then receive your gun endorsement on your voter ID card which lets you purchase, own and posses your gun(s) in your possession at any time and place of your choosing.

 

I would have to disagree with having the "endorsement" on the voter ID card itself, or any other form of ID that is needed to prove identity in any other "non firearms" related scenario. No one should be "forced" to expose themself as a firearms owner to anyone else, unless they choose to do so. For example, voter ID is often associated with jury duty/service. If one is required to show voter ID to verify eligibility for jury service, the endorsement would make it known that the potential juror is a firearms owner. And this info. could, literally, be exposed even to the legal representation in a given case (I've personally had that happen to me in re. my P.I.I., as a juror in a different state). And, more fundamentally, an election official can ask for the voter ID card to verify eligibility to vote at a polling place. Some of these election officials can be one's own neighbors. In my own polling place, one of the officials was a guy that worked at my company and an internal IT business client of mine. It was enough that he knew my party affiliation, let alone firearms ownership.

 

Firearms ID should be its own separate ID card, as it is currently in NJ. You can certainly require/verify a voter ID as part of the qualification process, but no record/endorsement of firearms ownership should be part of the voter ID registration, or Driver's License, or any other ID that is used to verify personal identity to another party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HBecw2ithFn7 while I agree with what you are saying I intentionally made this linked to the Voter ID because I want this guy to accept that Voter ID is a must, and if he is not willing to require ID for the right he wants then I am not willing to require ID for the right I want - but I agree with your concerns.

 

Its funny I have never been asked to show a voter ID card for anything, not even to vote, and never for jury duty.  In my town I simply tell them my name, they open a book to my name which has my signature.  I then scribble something that does not even look like my signature and they let me vote.  They don't match the signature or ask for any form of ID what-so-ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need a government permit to exercise your First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, or Tenth Amendment rights...... so why should you need a government permit to exercise your Second Amendment right?

 

The whole notion of Firearm ID or Gun Owner Endorsement etc is attempting to create a 'white list' of allowed gun owners. This idea is repugnant to the definition of freedom. We should instead maintain a 'black list' of people who are NOT allowed to own guns*, and search the black list in a non-invasive way that DOES NOT LOG THE NAME YOU ARE SEARCHING FOR.

 

Craft a legal framework that does this, and you'll please both sides of the issue

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Bonus Question: People on the black list might include felons and the mentally ill.... but if these felons and mentally ill are so dangerous that they can't be trusted with the Second Amendment, why are they trusted with the other 9 Amendments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HBecw2ithFn7 while I agree with what you are saying I intentionally made this linked to the Voter ID because I want this guy to accept that Voter ID is a must, and if he is not willing to require ID for the right he wants then I am not willing to require ID for the right I want - but I agree with your concerns.

And that's perfectly fine. The person, when applying for an FID, can be required to provide their voter ID, as they must provide other things (mental health records, criminal history, etc.). I could even accept a requirement to show voter ID to an FFL for purchases, transfers, etc, *along with* the FID, DL, etc.  As long as there's no endorsement/stamp on the voter ID (or DL etc.), and no permanent record of it in the voter registration DB itself.

 

Its funny I have never been asked to show a voter ID card for anything, not even to vote, and never for jury duty.

I have had to show it. Not for Jury duty or voting (yet), but at certain venues where a "street address" had to be verified. Before I completed the FID bureaucracy, my DL and other IDs had my PO box on them. Only the voter ID had street address (by definition/necessity).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this " Criminals Beware" Today we the lawmakers of NJ have taken out the word justifiable need and replaced it  with shall issue to all law biding  tax paying hard working citizens of New Jersey .Now thats common sense law and public saftey all in one wave of a pen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to disagree with having the "endorsement" on the voter ID card itself, or any other form of ID that is needed to prove identity in any other "non firearms" related scenario. No one should be "forced" to expose themself as a firearms owner to anyone else, unless they choose to do so. 

...

Firearms ID should be its own separate ID card, as it is currently in NJ. You can certainly require/verify a voter ID as part of the qualification process, but no record/endorsement of firearms ownership should be part of the voter ID registration, or Driver's License, or any other ID that is used to verify personal identity to another party.

Agree 100% about "exposing". I don't suggest that there should be "FID endorsement" on the Voter ID. The Voter ID itself must be accepted instead of current FID. That is, no separate FID for voters, period.

 

What about legal permanent resident aliens who are on the road to citizenship? Do you believe the Constitution is only for citizens? Some of your punishment ideas won't pass an 8A tesr.

In fact, something very important in the Constitution is only for citizens - the right to vote. That's why I suggest to keep a separate FID for non-citizens, because they can't have Voter ID.

BTW, I was never asked to show any form of ID for voting. Anyway, always show something, at least that voting mailer, at least to help them finding my long name...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree 100% about "exposing". I don't suggest that there should be "FID endorsement" on the Voter ID. The Voter ID itself must be accepted instead of current FID. That is, no separate FID for voters, period.

 

I'm guessing, the authorities would not go along with that. The FID might be "revoked," at some point, without necessarily revoking voting rights. Would they force the person to give up their voting card such that they can't use it in a LGS (resulting in, potentially, not being able to use it, if ever needed) to vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree 100% about "exposing". I don't suggest that there should be "FID endorsement" on the Voter ID. The Voter ID itself must be accepted instead of current FID. That is, no separate FID for voters, period.In fact, something very important in the Constitution is only for citizens - the right to vote. That's why I suggest to keep a separate FID for non-citizens, because they can't have Voter ID.BTW, I was never asked to show any form of ID for voting. Anyway, always show something, at least that voting mailer, at least to help them finding my long name...

The Constitution clearly states "citizen" where it needs to be a citizen and "person" or "people" elsewhere. Outside of voting and office holding the Constitution has been recognized to apply to anyone in the US. I'm not saying non- citizens should vote or hold office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is most legislators are lawyers. Most are self serving and write ambiguous legislation to perpetuate the ability to: argue either side of an issue, defend or prosecute the same person, and have lengthy trials & appeals. This is done to keep their livelyhood profitable should they be removed from office by voters or charges of misconduct.

 

Criminals should be made examples of. Public humiliation should be encouraged. Violent criminals that commit heinous crimes should be put down.

 

Locking people up does not rehabilitate them. I'm all for second chances, as everyone makes mistakes, but at some point a line needs to be drawn.

 

With that off my chest back to guns. I'm okay with a permit as long as there is no registration of purchased firearms. NICS and verifiable ID should be the only background check requirement.

 

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need a government permit to exercise your First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, or Tenth Amendment rights...... so why should you need a government permit to exercise your Second Amendment right?

 

*Bonus Question: People on the black list might include felons and the mentally ill.... but if these felons and mentally ill are so dangerous that they can't be trusted with the Second Amendment, why are they trusted with the other 9 Amendments?

Bravo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... You both agree that the laws our lawmakers make are broken, but want to start from scratch without replacing the broken lawmakers. ...

Thanks Vlad, now I know what I've said :-)

 

I'm guessing, the authorities would not go along with that. The FID might be "revoked," at some point, without necessarily revoking voting rights. Would they force the person to give up their voting card such that they can't use it in a LGS (resulting in, potentially, not being able to use it, if ever needed) to vote?

The authorities we have now would not go along with anything :-(. We're just discussing here what would be the right thing to do. How to get there is another question.

Next, maybe if a crime is not severe enough to revoke voting rights, it should not revoke "FID rights"? On the other hand, if a person can't be trusted with a firearm, can he be trusted with a more consequential (IMHO) voting rights?

 

 

The problem is most legislators are lawyers.

Exactly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...