tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

With gun safety being debated in the Senate starting today, I was thinking about the huge divide in this country on the topic of guns.

One of the very few areas that the country seems to agree on is the idea of background checks. Almost every survey show an overwhelming majority of Americans favoring them.

But that doesn't mean everyone does. One argument against them is that criminals will continue to get guns.

To counter that, I had an idea, and I'd like some input as to its possible effectiveness. Here it is: why not make it a criminal offense, punishable by jail time, to apply for a gun permit and a background check if you are a convicted felon? I realize it will not completely eliminate the problem, but won't it make huge difference in the number of criminals who can get access to guns? If a background check only takes a few minutes, then we will be able to quickly identify those people who shouldn't be applying in the first place, and discourage them from doing so.

Of course, all of this is useless if the NRA pushes more legislation like they did in Louisiana. For those of you who aren't aware of it, a court in Louisiana just ruled that it violates the new state constitutional amendment that was championed by the NRA to deny felons access to guns. This means that all prisoners currently in prison for gun violations will probably have their convictions overturned and be freed from jail.

But that aside, is it stupid to impose criminal penalties for what I'm talking about? I'd like to hear your thoughts. And remember the saying, perfect is the enemy of the good. This idea may not completely cure our problems, but is it a good start?

Kombiguy Loc: Cedar Rapids, IA

I don't know about California, but it's already illegal to do that in Florida and Illinois.

TrainNut Loc: Ridin' the rails

I agree but most criminals don't get their guns legally.

pbearperry Loc: Massachusetts

I am shocked.lol

ole sarg Loc: south florida

I don't really fear criminals having guns. After all they are professionals in what they do and realize the consequences of their actions. If one looks at the stats there are few and fewer use of a gun except to intimidate. See: http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vvcs9310.pdf#Page=7

The problem is the vigilante civilian who thinks his gun will solve a problem and uses it and the crazy person.

The problem with the stats is that murder is a crime and the cause of the murder is not broken out too well. What we can say is that of the some 14K murders that some 5.7K are committed by someone the person who was killed did not know. The stats do not say under what circumstances the murder occurred.

Although, I am very much for strict gun control, I just do not see how anything will stop the above people. Maybe the cooling off period needed before you can take possession of a weapon would help in some instances. Or, if a domestic complaint is filed the offending party be put in a holding cell without it going on ones record of being jailed. In short, a cooling off cell type of arrangement.

As for the nut case. There is no defense. There is no defense if you are armed. Just look at the tape of the attempted assassination on President Reagan or the Gifford incident and one can quickly see the futility of having a weapon at hand.

In most states it is against the law to sell a gun to a criminal or for a criminal to purchase one.

pbearperry Loc: Massachusetts

It is a Federal crime for a felon to have firearms.It is also a crime for a felon to attempt to buy a gun or to lie on the Federal form you have to make out for all purchases from a dealer.Every year thousands of criminals lie on these forms and less than 1% of these violators are prosecuted.Once again,what's the use of creating a new law?We aren't using laws that have been on the books for decades.

sourdough58 Loc: Maine

I agree well said, That law is on the books , they need to enforce the laws we allredy have.

Skellum0

It's a first step and every journey has to start somewhere. As already stated, the legislation exists, it is just not enforced enough.

Gun control without effective enforcement is worse than useless, look at Mexico.

Real gun control, starting with offenders and following through would save around 1 in every 1000 people in America based on the experience in other countries. Doesn't sound much but it is 30000 lives a year.

nascar27 Loc: Kansas City, MO

pbearperry is right. Why do we try to re-invent the wheel? Inadequate enforcement of existing laws won't help anymore than enacting additional laws that will not be properly enforced as well.8-)

gphotography Loc: Colorado

They can make all the laws they want, it will NOT stop criminals from getting guns. Why is no one talking about working on the mentally ill part of the problem? And stop call people crazy! People with the ability to make rational thoughts have a hard time realizing people that can not are victims of their situation. And when they do something violent, they are condemned without understanding. Most people with mental illness are unable to work and can not afford medical help. Why aren't we spend time and money getting these people help. Better their lives and maybe save others as well. Making gun laws is a lot of wasted time and money. Spend it on helping mentally ill people, where it will make a big difference. Criminals break the law, so how do more laws change criminal behavior? It does NOT! Its a waste of time and money!

imntrt1 Loc: St. Louis

You are correct.....Simply an issue of manpower factors into play. The laws on the books now cover most instances of illegal firearm possession...but there are simply not enough people in Law Enforcement to enforce the laws...so adding another won't help. Look at illegal immigration...same thing there....I know the feds are refusing to enforce it but they also are short on enough staff to do adequate enforcement. Plus the crooks will not be honest on a form or even buy the weapons legally. So if you don't know they did it how can you arrest them? I cannot tell you the number of times as a police officer I arrested convicted felons with firearms and they were never touched by the feds unless it was a standout high profile crime they were involved in. I took a 12 gauge shotgun off a guy one night that was sawed off so that the entire length of the weapon - from tip of barrel to end of stock, was 13 5/8 inches...Because it was during a domestic disturbance call, the feds did nothing. Street justice got him though...he was shot to death before he ever went to court on the domestic violence and flourishing a Dangerous and deadly weapon charges.

Wickspics Loc: Detroits Northwest Side. Cody High School.

I did some time on various Police Depts in Michigan.Spent a year or so in a place called Royal Oak Township Public Safety. While working midnights received a normal call of shots fired and crept into area with no lights and sat. Watched a young man with an small automatic weapon walk from between buildings and fire it into the air. Gave chase on foot and caught him a block away. He was 14 years old, asked him where he got the UZI he said " Gemme 200.00 dollars and I can buy them all day long " The problems are larger than simple laws already on the books and not enforced. Kid lost the gun and a Juvenile Judge let him off with a warning.

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

The NRA is NOT for criminals having access to guns, there must be some other aspect they are against. For instance, they were against the mythical "Cop Killer" bullets, which did not then, nor do not now, exist. The legislation was written, either by ignorance or by design, to outlaw any jacketed bullet, which even a pure target round must have to retain the bullet shape in flight and be accurate. But someone out there.. can you guess who, wrote the headline NRA AGAINST COP KILLER BULLETS. The law would have made all +/- 98% of all bullets illegal.

The NRA has always been behind legislation of an additional 10years mandatory jail time for any crime that includes a gun. This is the first thing judges plea away or ignore, they slap these guys on the wrist and let them out early..

The jails are full, but often cell space is taken up by people whose crimes did not harm anybody else. I believe that jails should primarily be for people who commit violent crimes, white collar, drug and etc., would serve time in more effective ways, garnished wages, community service, ankle bracelets, etc., etc.

Our problem isn't that we don't have enough laws, it is that the existing ones are not enforced.

You can say what you want about the NRA, but don't get your information about them from ANYONE but from them, or you WILL get lied to. The NRA HATES crimes with guns just as much as liberals seem to welcome them... as referenced by Obamas Chief of staff: "... never letting a crisis go to waste", and then proposing legislation that ALL agree would never have prevented whatever crisis was the catalyst of said legislation.

http://www.mrc.org/commentary/never-let-tragedy-go-waste

SO go a re-read that bit about the NRA, and find out what little bit of the law that isn't being reported or buried that would infringe upon the 2nd amendment for LAW ABIDING citizens and you will answer that distortion.



I will say, that I think if someone lies on a form and it involves obtaining a weapon illegally, that is a crime involving a gun... so sure. The problem with back ground checks is that it creates a paper trail, which any country that has had an effective gun confiscation program, like Canada, used to their advantage. This is contrary to the intent of the 2nd amendment.

TrainNut Loc: Ridin' the rails

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

tomk

I'm not sure how background checks work. Who do they check with? Will the laws be changed so that mental health care providers can release their records? The HIPA laws forbid the providers from releasing them. On the news this I heard that 3 if not 4 of the last mass shooting perpetrators had some of their previous actions prior to the shootings reported to authorities or their schools who took no action!! Were they afraid of lawsuites? If Judges do not fully inforce the laws on the books, how will more laws help? And if they are allowed to release the records, how long before others beside gun sellers get access to them. Will a Human Resources department be able to check before they hire someone??? As the saying goes---beware of what you wish for!!!