tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

Last night I was sitting watching my liberal hero, Rachel Maddow (OK, conservatives, you have Sean Hannity, give me Rachel Maddow). She was doing a story on gun buyback programs, and how successful they have always been and continue to be. It set me on a train of thought that lasted long into the night, and I want to post it here and get reactions. It's really important that the ENTIRE piece be read, because any one part of it may be over the top, but taken as a whole I think it will honestly solve the problem of gun violence in this country. My proposal is not easy, and it is definitely NOT a short-term fix. I see this taking generations to have its full effect. But I ardently believe we have to start somewhere.

This proposal assumes three things:

1. The right to bear arms must be clarified and codified in
the Constitution.

2. This right must have limits. A person's right to bear arms
cannot trump a 6-year old's right to live a full life. All
rights have limitations.

2. This country HAS to step back from its deadly fascination
with guns and violence.

Here is my proposal:

Proposed:

1. Congress and the several states will pass a Constitutional
amendment that nullifies the unclear language of the
Second Amendment while at the same time
guaranteeing, in very clear language, to every American
not convicted of a crime or listed on a terrorist watch list
the right to own handguns and single-shot rifles and
shotguns, subject to certain conditions of ownership as
enumerated in Section 4 below.

2. Congress will pass a law banning the domestic
manufacture and retail sale of all handguns, automatic
and semi-automatic guns and rifles, and ammunition clips
or drums that hold more than ten bullets. Armor-piercing
bullets and bullet-proof vests, except for military use,
would also be banned. Currently banned items will
continue to be outlawed. All imports of aforementioned
items would also be banned.

3. Congress will appropriate a sum of $6 billion to be spent
over ten years to create a voluntary gun and rifle
buy-back program. The program would work as follows:
a. any citizen could voluntarily turn in any handguns or
rifles they currently own. These would take place at
any local police station or National Guard armory.
Each gun would be worth $200, each rifle $250. No
citizen who owns a firearm will be forced to participate
in this program.
b. all firearms bought from citizens would be registered
with the ATF.
c. all firearms considered to be collectible must be
registered with the ATF
d. funds used to purchase firearms would be issued to
the seller in the form of a debit card, and could not be
used to purchase new firearms.

4. Citizens would be allowed to buy any handguns or
single-shot rifles or shotguns that were turned in,
providing they meet the following requirements:
a. all buyers must be fingerprinted
b. all buyers must pass a criminal background check
c. all buyers must submit proof of citizenship
d. all buyers must pass a firearm safety course which
would include vision tests and reaction tests.
e. all buyers must pass a psychological screening test
f. all buyers must pass a drug test

Firearm permits would need to be renewed every 5 years. Every ten years buyers would have to pass another gun safety class.

Sales of returned firearms would be handled through National Guard armories to maintain federal control of all sales. All net proceeds from firearm sales would go back into the program to sustain, extend or enlarge it. These firearms would not be able to be resold privately nor ownership transferred. All transactions would be monitored through the ATF, and any violation would be a felony.

Firearms owned by people who pass away must be turned in for purchase. Firearms cannot be included in wills or estates, except those designated as collectible. Upon an owner’s death, ownership of collectible firearms must be transferred through the ATF. The new owner must meet all ownership requirements as listed in section 4.

All gun show sales would be prohibited.

Meeting the requirements for firearm ownership would automatically allow citizens to carry concealed weapons in any state, not subject to state or federal jurisdiction. States would have the power to declare certain specific areas as gun-free zones, such as schools and hospitals and churches. Neither Congress nor the states would have the power to declare cities, towns or municipalities as gun-free zones.

Any crimes committed with a firearm would have severe penalties attached, up to and including life without parole. Multiple murders committed with a firearm will carry the death penalty. Trafficking in firearms would have severe penalties attached, up to and including life without parole.

If the NRA is truly representative of its members, and not a front group for gun manufacturers (which I personally believe it to be), I believe that this proposal would guarantee their members’ rights and go a long way in getting guns out of the hands of criminals and those mentally unfit to own a gun. It would also minimize the carnage if an attack does occur. No system is perfect, but I think this preserves the constitutional rights of gun owners while at the same time decreasing the risk of random violence. Just as importantly, for me, it also starts to change the fascination this country holds for guns and gun violence. I'd love to hear how this proposal could be improved. What are your thoughts?

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

You have put a lot of thought into this.

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

Tschmath, did you write this or cut and paste it from somewhere? 8-)

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

This was totally my creation, inspired by the gun buyback story on TV.

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

I would never have thought you would be for capital punishment. 8-)

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

This is the kind of stuff obsessives like me do at 2:30 in the morning when they cannot turn their brains off.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

I'm absolutely against capital punishment. But I also am willing to compromise in an attempt to make this proposal acceptable to the widest range of people.

Bmac Loc: Long Island, NY

You are willing to compromise your beliefs on the taking of a life to get a bill passed? You may wish to think a bit harder about that. 8-)

OnTheFly Loc: Tennessee

You lost me in the first proposal....The Constitution is very clear...I have the right to keep and bear arms.
I do wish they would make the punishment for crimes that involve any kind of weapon(not just guns) more severe as you said.
Look....Here's the problem...I will say it again.
If you restrict the honest law abiding citizen the right to own guns, you are Not going to keep the guns out of the hands of the scum of life.
If that worked we would not have a drug problem in the U.S. because drugs are not legal here.....But wait....we do still have a drug problem. It is only the law abiding citizens who don't use drugs.
So if we take all the guns away from the good folks, everyplace would be a gun free zone. Oh, wait a minute....isn't that where most of these shootings take place?? Yes it is. This is due to the fact that the bad guy knows he will not meet any resistance at these places.
Ever heard of a person going into a gun shop to shoot the place up???

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

Sorry, but the Constitution is NOT clear about gun ownership. The debate about the Second Amendment has been raging for over 100 years. You are simply wrong about that.

My proposal is NOT limiting anyone's ability to own a firearm. If you own a firearm now, you can keep it. Let me repeat that. Under my proposal, you can keep your firearms.

If you don't own a firearm but want to, all you have to do is go to your local National Guard armory, meet the requirements listed, and you can own a firearm.

Knowing all of this, does that change your view?

OnTheFly Loc: Tennessee

I don't disagree with you in whole. We will have to continue to disagree about how clear the wording in the Constitution is. But that's o.k.
I would not be bothered by having some more strengent restrictions. But, once you are qualified to own one, I don't think you should be restricted to single shot weapons. I would hate to have to defend myself or loved ones with a single shot when the bad guy will have a simi auto. I don't, however think that any civilian has any business with a fully auto. So please don't get me wrong about that.
I do like and agree that all gun owners should have to take a safety course and pass...We have to take a driving test before being allowed to drive. So why not with a gun.
And I do appreaciate this civil conversation.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I applaud your passion and effort on this subject... And, I agree with you that the NRA serves the interest of manufacturers...

OnTheFly Loc: Tennessee

Yeah...I can't disagree with that either.

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

As one of the more conservative contributors here, I was actually looking forward to your analysis. What doesn't pass muster with you?

tschmath Loc: Los Angeles

I am still formulating this proposal. A big concern of gun owners is having guns fall into the hands of criminals. Here is a way we can prevent that:

Once a gun is registered to an owner, that owner is responsible for its security. If a registered gun is stolen, it must be reported with 24 hours. If a stolen gun is used in a crime, and has not been reported, then the registered owner will incur civil and criminal penalties. Reporting guns as stolen insulates the registered owner from any penalty.