Gun Control

It is true that we agree on some aspects of gun control. As was previously said, the Heller decision is crucial in this debate for two reasons. 1.) Establishes that the right to bear arms is an individual right that is independent of service in a militia. 2.) The right is not unlimited and that measures prohibiting felons and the mentally ill from possessing firearms are not unconstitutional. The question we are left with is where is the middle ground where our rights are not unduly infringed in the name of public safety. I will now go into recent gun control measures and why they don't/won't work and then even propose some ideas that are supported by fact instead of fear. That's right, a gun rights advocate proposing a gun control measure! Recent attempts at "common sense" gun control In the attempt to find that middle ground, bear in mind that any measure which constitutes a de-facto gun ban is repeatedly found to be unconstitutional. For example, in 2002 New Jersey passed a law that when the technology became available to the public; within 3 years all firearms in the state would be required to be a "smart" gun. This constitutes a de-facto ban on the second amendment rights of the citizens of New Jersey as a court would find that the average citizen cannot afford a $2,000 gun. The gun I'm referring to is the Armatix ip1 if you'd like to look it up. I would like to also add that if you were to ask any police department if they were interested in the technology... the answer would be no, everytime. In a self defense scenario that gun would get you killed and in terms of keeping it out of the wrong hands, a safe is more effective. Microstamping- first off, despite claims that the technology is "readily available," it is not. Second, the stamp is a microscopic imprint on the firing pin. Why would a gun control measure that can be defeated with three strokes of a file work? Third, an easy work around would be for a criminal to use a revolver as it does not eject the spent brass. Banning asssault weapons- as previously stated, rifles are responsible for a very low number of murders. Half as many as hands/feet in fact. So banning them would have a very small impact on the actual crime rate. Not even to mention that there would be either 30 million of them grandfathered in, or millions of law abiding citizens turned to felons. Magazine limitations- I wish to cite you to a study of the NYPD *1 from 1996-2006. While not the newest information, 11 years of data is significant. The study found that NYPD officers who discharged their weapons had a hit ratio of 34%. Point being that accuracy suffers when your life is threatened. This is why the people I know who concealed carry, typically spend more time at the range than someone who doesn't concealed carry. Would magazine limitations save lives during an active shooter event? Probably not. The Virginia Tech shooter had 19 fully loaded magazines. Had their been a stringent magazine limitation, it's likely he would have simply brought 30 mags. As for the victims chances of escaping increasing because he has to reload, it's unlikely. Reloading takes seconds. 3D printed guns- This one is just plain funny for any firearms enthusiast. How does a gun work? Two basic things. 1.) a contained explosion and 2.) the energy having one direction to travel in. Thus causing the projectile to be propelled down the barrel. Plastic is not sufficient to contain an explosion. There is no such thing as a "ghost gun" that can pass through a metal detector because such a gun would 1.) fail to fire due to a lack of a metal firing pin 2.) fail to contain the explosion and cause severe trauma to your hand. Registration- Why won't gun owners register their firearms? As previously mentioned, New York and Connecticut. Here is an excerpt from a letter sent to a gun owner who failed to be in compliance due to the possession of 3 .22 rifles. 1. Immediately surrender your Rifle and/or Shotgun to your local police precinct, and notify this office of the invoice number. The firearm may be sold or permanently removed from the City of New York thereafter. 2. Permanently remove your Rifle and/or Shotgun from New York City" Two of the guns in question were bolt action .22's with a capacity of 5 rounds. On to the question of what gun control measures would make sense- NICS check for all handgun sales- I hate to say this one because I love my handguns. I also know though that I would not under any rational gun control measure be prohibited from owning one. As previously shown in the FBI stats linked, handguns are responsible for the majority firearm related homicides. What I would propose is simply requiring that private transactions for the sale of a handgun be done at an FFL dealer with a NICS check done. Would this stop all criminals from acquiring a gun? God no. Criminals will acquire the "tools" of their trade no matter what since they already break laws on a regular basis. This is; however, a gun control measure which at the least makes sense. Barring schizophrenics- Historically, violent crimes committed by the mentally ill are almost always associated with schizophrenia (auditory/visual hallucinations). I would propose that all people diagnosed with schizophrenia be reported to the FBI for the purpose of causing them to fail a NICS check. My apologies if the aforementioned policies/proposals hurt the debate in the event that you agree with me. While conflicting opinion is the bread and butter of a debate, this is a topic where I think it can be safely said that everyone would like to find common ground. In regard to your three possibilities, I'm of the opinion that number three is most likely as crimes are committed by... criminals. If they want a weapon, they'll have one. *5 "According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source." Even with enhanced gun control there are over 300 million firearms in America. Guns don't just go away, with proper maintenance they can and do last over 100 years. Gun control would also fail to stop mass killings. Recently in China, 26 people were stabbed to death and another 140 were wounded. Bad people will always do bad things. Which brings me to my next point. Gun control can actually increase crime *2, *3 "Britons suffer 1,158,957 violent crimes per year, which works out at 2,034 per 100,000 residents. By contrast the number in notoriously violent South Africa is 1,609 per 100,000. The U.S., meanwhile, has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is lower than France"s, at 504; Finland"s, at 738; Sweden"s, at 1123; and Canada"s at 935." "The findings of two criminologists - Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser - in their exhaustive study of American and European gun laws and violence rates, are telling: Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population)." Which brings me to the question, do criminals fear an armed populace? According to this study *3, they absolutely do. "Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi surveyed 2,000 felons incarcerated in state prisons across the United States. Wright and Rossi reported that 34% of the felons said they personally had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"; 69% said that they knew at least one other criminal who had also; 34% said that when thinking about committing a crime they either "often" or "regularly" worried that they "[m]ight get shot at by the victim"; and 57% agreed with the statement, "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." James D. Wright & Peter H. Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms [1986]. See Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda? by Don B. Kates, et. al. Originally published as 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 [1994]." So with that being the case, it could be easily be concluded that increased gun ownership has a direct effect on crime rates. In that they go down... *1 http://www.nytimes.com... *2 http://www.nationalreview.com... *4 http://theacru.org...*4 http://www.examiner.com... *5 http://www.forbes.com...