2nd Amendment friendly gun laws

[techs]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Every gun and the magazines for that gun should be registered with the government.

Every gun should have an RFID tag inserted into it that cannot be removed without some effort. The tag would also identify the owner, its type and the magazines that go with the gun.

Every gun owner must take and pass a gun safety test and do so at least once every three years.

Every gun owner must visually inspect each gun at least once every seven days to make sure it is not missing.

There should be a zero tolerance for being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while in possession of gun. Penalties should be severe.

All guns in a residence must be secured. Quick release retainers that open biometrically would still make guns readily availabe for home defense.



If I can be found by cell phone, then guns should also be. If the Sandy Hook school had readers surrounding the property the police would immediately have known there was a gun on the premises and may have arrived before the shooter finished his deadly task.

Registering guns clearly falls under the "well regulated militia" proviso.

These rules do not infringe in any way on owning a gun. The legitimate gun owner loses no rights by having an rfid in his gun. The criminal can be readily identified because he will have the gun without an rfid.

 

[bozack]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Every gun and the magazines for that gun should be registered with the government.

Every gun should have an RFID tag inserted into it that cannot be removed without some effort. The tag would also identify the owner, its type and the magazines that go with the gun.

Every gun owner must take and pass a gun safety test and do so at least once every three years.

Every gun owner must visually inspect each gun at least once every seven days to make sure it is not missing.

There should be a zero tolerance for being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while in possession of gun. Penalties should be severe.

All guns in a residence must be secured. Quick release retainers that open biometrically would still make guns readily availabe for home defense.



If I can be found by cell phone, then guns should also be. If the Sandy Hook school had readers surrounding the property the police would immediately have known there was a gun on the premises and may have arrived before the shooter finished his deadly task.

Registering guns clearly falls under the "well regulated militia" proviso.

These rules do not infringe in any way on owning a gun. The legitimate gun owner loses no rights by having an rfid in his gun. The criminal can be readily identified because he will have the gun without an rfid.

1. Ok for new purchases but how do you mandate this happens for existing hardware out there?
2. Again, for new purchases that is fine, but will do nothing for guns already in circulation and or guns traded illegally
3. Ok but this only works for registered gun owners
4. How do you enforce this?
5. Absolutely but again how is it policed, and what if the guns are secure while you use drugs or alcohol while in your own home? starting to infringe on other personal rights.
6. How is this enforced?
7. How much will that infrastructure cost? who will manage it?

 

[Jaepheth]

Someone will have to correct me if I'm getting this wrong, I'm trying to recall what I read years ago.

Anyway, the problem with sensible gun control is that the well has been poisoned.
The way I heard the story was that a gun registration bill for New York was introduced and was supported by legal gun owning citizens because it was promised that the registration would not be used to seize firearms. Well, it WAS used later for seizing legally owned firearms and as you can imagine gun owners were furious.

So now gun rights advocates take a "never again" stance in relation to anything gun control related because the last time they gave the gun control advocates an inch, they took a mile.

 

[zsdersw]

The lengths people will go in a hysterical knee-jerk response to a tragedy consistently both surprises and saddens me.

"The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves ..."

You can't cure crazy/stupid with more laws that require more enforcement and do nothing but make the cat-and-mouse game one step more complicated.

 

[waggy]

The lengths people will go in a hysterical knee-jerk response to a tragedy consistently both surprises and saddens me.

"The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves ..."

You can't cure crazy/stupid with more laws that require more enforcement and do nothing but make the cat-and-mouse game one step more complicated.

more i think about it the more i get it. the government want's guns banned.

people want a scape goat. they can't blame mental illness since well then its saying people failed. they really don't want to do that.

so they go for the easy target. the gun when it was the crazy guy that pulled the trigger.

 

[CycloWizard]

How would any of these things have made a damn bit of difference last week? If someone is willing to kill the gun owner and steal the gun, then use it to kill children, my hunch is that he is not going to stop to check whether the RFID tag is working properly so that he's in compliance with the law. There are sensible gun control laws but your proposals do not fall into that category.

 

[PokerGuy]

Sounds like typical left wing drivel trying to punish legal gun ownership by placing onerous burdens on those who choose to exercise their rights. Fail.

 

[schneiderguy]

Quoting from DC v. Heller:

[t]he adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training.

 

[zsdersw]

There are sensible gun control laws

.. none of which come in the aftermath of a gun-related tragedy.

 

[HomerJS]

Sounds like typical left wing drivel trying to punish legal gun ownership by placing onerous burdens on those who choose to exercise their rights. Fail.

Which one of those suggestions do you consider onerous?

 

[Jaepheth]

also...

Why all this talk solely on gun control?

Why not any talk about some media control? It's not like the press are protected by the constitution or anything.

 

[HomerJS]

How would any of these things have made a damn bit of difference last week? If someone is willing to kill the gun owner and steal the gun, then use it to kill children, my hunch is that he is not going to stop to check whether the RFID tag is working properly so that he's in compliance with the law. There are sensible gun control laws but your proposals do not fall into that category.

Why not hold the owner liable for any crimes commited with their gun.

If the mother had not been killed she should have been jailed for life. She knew her son was unstable yet kept guns in the house.

 

[Tom]

How would any of these things have made a damn bit of difference last week? If someone is willing to kill the gun owner and steal the gun, then use it to kill children, my hunch is that he is not going to stop to check whether the RFID tag is working properly so that he's in compliance with the law. There are sensible gun control laws but your proposals do not fall into that category.

gun safe or trigger locks that use biometrics.

 

[HomerJS]

also...

Why all this talk solely on gun control?

Why not any talk about some media control? It's not like the press are protected by the constitution or anything.

None of the above inhibits law abiding citizens from owning/using guns. Where does the "control" enter in? These all seem like safety.

 

[HomerJS]

more i think about it the more i get it. the government want's guns banned.

people want a scape goat. they can't blame mental illness since well then its saying people failed. they really don't want to do that.

so they go for the easy target. the gun when it was the crazy guy that pulled the trigger.

Ok so how to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

 

[Matt1970]

Well that ought to do a lot to combat illegal guns.

 

[dank69]

We must tread carefully. Surrendering to emotion after a tragedy is how we ended up with The Patriot Act and two useless wars. I'm not saying we have to accept these events as "the new normal" but in a world where humans have free will we must realize that tragedies are inevitable.

For example, after 9/11, we knew we couldn't eliminate planes but we "had to do something" and the result was a loss of freedom. For what? A determined group could still accomplish the same thing no matter how many restrictions we place on our freedom.

The reality is, if we ignore emotion for a moment, we don't have to do something other than make peace with the fact that humans are capable of unimaginable evil and no amount of legislation can possibly stop it from ever happening.

One common idea I've heard in the last few days is that "we can't allow the rights of a few to trump the needs of the many." That is utter horseshit. The Second Ammendment is everyone's right, regardless of whether or not we choose to exercise it.

 

[HomerJS]

Well that ought to do a lot to combat illegal guns.

You realize with that logic nothing would be illegal becase of "well you're not going to stop it anyway"

 

[DaveSimmons]

It would do more good to have mandatory breathalyzer locks on every vehicle.

 

[zsdersw]

One common idea I've heard in the last few days is that "we can't allow the rights of a few to trump the needs of the many." That is utter horseshit.

It is also a prelude to communism.

 

[CycloWizard]

Are we going to force RFID tagging of trucks, knives, bows-and-arrows/knives, more knives, and old people/Buicks?

 

[highland145]

Someone will have to correct me if I'm getting this wrong, I'm trying to recall what I read years ago.

Anyway, the problem with sensible gun control is that the well has been poisoned.
The way I heard the story was that a gun registration bill for New York was introduced and was supported by legal gun owning citizens because it was promised that the registration would not be used to seize firearms. Well, it WAS used later for seizing legally owned firearms and as you can imagine gun owners were furious.

So now gun rights advocates take a "never again" stance in relation to anything gun control related because the last time they gave the gun control advocates an inch, they took a mile.

History repeating itself. IIRC, Hitler, Stalin,....the British.

http://www.davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/american-revolution-against-british-gun-control.html

 

[highland145]

Well that ought to do a lot to combat illegal guns.

Like fast and furious....uh....nvm.

 

[HomerJS]

Are we going to force RFID tagging of trucks, knives, bows-and-arrows/knives, more knives, and old people/Buicks?

And when was the last time an untrained person was able to commit mass murder with a knife?

 

[Ausm]

Ok so how to keep the mentally ill away from guns?

Ban the Teaparty from owning guns?