a culture that both defends our freedoms and protects our future.

[Im_not_gimmeluck]

Please do all you can to support President Obama in his fight to impose reasonable gun control laws.  I am of the personal opinion that his executive action, while not going far enough to control guns and their negative effects on society, is a good starting point for further discussion.  The second amendment guarantees our "Right to Bear Arms".  I am in complete agreement.   It also demands a "Well Regulated Militia".  Regulation doesn't take away rights.  Regulation secures a future free of the epidemic of gun violence.
I would like to see guns individually titled just as cars are titled.  This would discourage straw purchasers from supplying criminals with guns.   Titling guns would make law enforcement's job of solving crimes easier.  Titling guns will erase any loophole that enables those not qualified  from acquiring weapons.   For a fee any gun shop can shepherd  this process.
I would like to see a federal requirement that all guns, regardless of the gun owner's domestic situation, be secured in a lockable gun safe.  No responsible gun owner should be without one.  While they may be expensive to purchase now market forces would cause the price to come down considerably.
I would like to see pistols and semi automatic weapons, with exception of shotguns with no more than a 4 round magazine, have the most regulation in much the same way as fully automatic weapons are.  That is to say a thorough background check by the ATF/FBI, fingerprinting of the owner and a high tax to discourage casual use.
I would like to see a high tax on ammunition purchased by individuals.  The exception would be ammunition purchased and used at public and private gun ranges and clubs.  Most of the spent shells and casings  would have to be accounted for.
I would like to see a Federal buyback program of up to $1000 per working weapon to help rid the streets of the ridiculous number of weapons owned by Americans.  This would attract people who now have second thoughts over the purchase of a weapon for a perceived threat that they know may never happen.
I realize I'm asking for the moon.  I understand that the gun lobby is a very powerful organization that is fighting hard to oppose all gun regulation.  I also know that as a society we can't continue to turn a blind eye to the epidemic of gun violence that makes the USA unique in the world among developed nations.  We can and should do more to protect ourselves from a rabid and destructive gun lobby who represents an amoral sensibility based on greed and profit.   We can have a culture that both defends our freedoms and protects our future.  Sensible people can do no more.   Reasonable people should do no less.

[NIHILIST]

While I agree with many of your thoughts, I'm afraid I find some to be naïve, and at least one to be counterproductive.

I would like to see a federal requirement that all guns, regardless of the gun owner's domestic situation, be secured in a lockable gun safe.

Completely counterproductive for anyone buying a gun for home protection. I bought a gun in the midst of the 1967 Detroit riots. The cop who lived across the street told me that if I was purchasing it for home defense, I'd better be prepared to keep it loaded at all times and in an easily accessible location.

Imagine, under your scenario, you and your family are in your beds, asleep at 4 AM. A noise awakens you and you realize someone has broken into your home. Still half asleep you quietly work your way to your safe in which your gun is securely locked. Gripped with fear, you try to remember the combination as you hear footsteps on the stairway and the home invaders muttering about possibly having to kill the residents ( you and your family ) if things somehow go bad.

My neighbor cop's other advice was that if I was unprepared to deal with such a scenario I was better off not buying a gun. I bought a Colt 38 and kept it loaded and in the nightstand by my bed with the hammer on an empty chamber and the next chamber empty as well.

I would like to see pistols and semi automatic weapons, with exception of shotguns with no more than a 4 round magazine

Completely naïve. Anyone who has seen a Rambo or VietNam war movie has seen the military assault rifles with 2 magazines taped together. In a firefight ( or at an elementary school ) the shooter has merely to eject the first spent magazine after killing 4 people, flip it over, insert the full second magazine and continue the carnage. That process would take 2-3 seconds at most.

Regulation secures a future free of the epidemic of gun violence.

The greatest naivete of this entire issue is the notion that increased regulations will somehow reduce the overwhelming number of gun deaths.....urban violence. Currently Illinois and New York have some of the strictest gun laws in the country and have had them for years. This hasn't prevented Chicago from having one of the nation's highest murder rates. New York City, though not among the highest rates, still suffered 400+ gun homicides last year.

Taking a page from the Obama playbook, the Democrats in New York and Illinois aren't going to let a good crisis go to waste, so they've rushed to institute even more stringent gun regulations while taking bows for their courage on CNN and MSNBC.

Check with me in a year to review the results.

Incidentally, what's lost in the anger and hysteria of Sandy Hook is that about 1000 shootings have occurred in the USA since Sandy Hook. No outrage to be seen.

I personally would like to see full background checks of all gun purchasers, at the retail level or at gun shows, and including fingerprinting. I like the idea of titling and having all info in an ATF database to expedite any follow-up.

What disturbs me the most is the current inflammatory dialog that only serves to ratchet up the insanity......armed guards in schools, etc. While Hussein was impressing you with his executive actions and rhetoric, the membership of the National Rifle Assn has increased by more than 250,000.


Bob

[Zorba]

Bravo, gimmeluck. It's about time the problem is tackled. It won't be easy to solve and it will take a long time, so all sorts of people will quickly tell you regulation doesn't work. But it's a long-term process and only works if the regulation is nation-wide and effectively enforced.

[socksey]

Take a look at these videos.  They express my view.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=criminals+for+gun+control+video&mid=AA1E27EACF75F05DFAE2AA1E27EACF75F05DFAE2&view=detail&FORM=VIRE2

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=criminals+for+gun+control+video&mid=AA1E27EACF75F05DFAE2AA1E27EACF75F05DFAE2&view=detail&FORM=VIRE2

socksey



If we do not change our direction, we are likely to end up where we are headed. - Ancient Chinese proverb

[Zorba]

Obviously the huge US weapons industry promotes fear, to sell more products.

But it's an endless spiral, because the fear itself is fed by the incredible amount of guns floating around in the USA, because of the lack of proper regulation and safety measures.

So the USA has come to a point where people feel they needs guns, because so many others have guns.

It's time to end the spiral, not go deeper downward this route.

Many european countries show that it's actually much safer if less people have guns. The USA sticks out like a sore thumb in the murder rate statistics of western countries. The current system fails and something needs to be done.

[NIHILIST]

In the midst of the debate, it's illuminating to hear from someone who's been there and done that.

William Bratton served as New York City's top cop for 27 months from 1994 to 1996, he helped turn around a violent, crime-ridden city with policies that later were adopted nationwide and across the globe. The 65-year-old now runs a consulting business and a tech firm that focus on law enforcement.

The problem with the gun and ammo bans, he offers, "is that that's going forward." They do nothing about the 350 million firearms, including assault weapons, and hundreds of thousands of extended clips already in circulation. "You can't deal with that retroactively." As for the practical effect of gun control, he notes that "all the studies that were done about assault weapons after the ban ended after 10 years were pretty much inconclusive."

Mr. Bratton predicts that "the most successful focus is going to be on the licensing and background checks. Because that's the heart of the problem—who gets access to the guns?" he says. "Clearly a large number of people who shouldn't have firearms actually apply through the process and obtain firearms."

But the gun reform that truly gets Mr. Bratton fired up is one you don't hear much about these days. It is what he calls "certainty of punishment," or stricter gun-crime sentences.

"People are out on the streets who should be in jail. Jail is appropriate for anyone who uses a gun in the commission of an act of violence. Some cities have a deplorable lack of attention to this issue," he says, citing Philadelphia.

In Chicago, where the murder rate rose 16% last year, "to try to put someone in jail for gun-related activity you really have to go the extra mile," he says. "If there's one crime for which there has to be a certainty of punishment, it is gun violence." He ticks off other places where help is needed: "Oakland, Chicago, D.C., Baltimore—all have gangs whose members have no capacity for caring about life and respect for life. Someone like that? Put 'em in jail. Get 'em off the streets. Keep people safe."

In late 1993, after a brief return stint in Boston, Mr. Bratton was appointed commissioner of the New York City Police Department by Mayor-elect Rudy Giuliani. Mr. Bratton publicly promised to cut crime by 10% in his first year and 15% in his second. Privately he told Mr. Giuliani that crime would drop 40% in three years.

And down it went. In two years, murders fell 39%, robbery 31%, burglary 25% and car theft 36%. By 1998, two years after he left the job but with his programs firmly in place, murders had fallen 70%, robbery 55%, burglary 53% and car theft 61%.

For starters, police wouldn't ignore minor crimes such as prostitution, aggressive panhandling, excessive noise and underage drinking. It was an application of what would become famous as the "broken windows" theory, which held that even small signs of disorder would, if left untended, breed further disorder, crime and fear.

"Stop the behavior when it's small, stop the cancer when it's small," Mr. Bratton says, an approach he says is as useful today as it was then. It turns out that those who committed minor offenses often also committed major ones. When police started arresting subway turnstile-jumpers, one in seven had an outstanding warrant and one in 25 carried a gun.

Another innovation was the almost obsessive use of timely crime data to drive tactics and accountability. Police began questioning every person arrested with a gun about where, when and how it was obtained. Detectives were instructed to investigate all shootings as if they were murders.

All of this went on under a legal architecture that had existed for years, including a 1974 state gun-control law considered the strictest in the nation. The tide turned so dramatically only in 1994, says Mr. Bratton, because finally the police enforced the law "fairly, compassionately and consistently" across all neighborhoods.

This last point is the most critical, and the simplest; ENFORCE THE LAWS WHICH ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS.

Bob

[garp_02]

As is usual, Bob completely misses the point.

[NIHILIST]

Which is ?

Bob