Require background checks for all gun sales, and Strengthen the background check system for gun sales:
Both of these topics actually fall into the same category as far as perception and remedy, so they are treated as one. According to WhiteHouse.gov, "The single most important thing we can do to prevent gun violence and mass shootings is to make sure those who would commit acts of violence cannot get access to guns. Right now, federally licensed firearms dealers are required to run background checks on those buying guns, but studies estimate that nearly 40 percent of all gun sales are made by private sellers who are exempt from this requirement."
Perhaps a more effective approach would be to require all gun sales to be channeled through a licensed firearms dealer for a fee, or through the state police free of charge. Of all of the aspects of the President's proposals, this one makes the most sense.
No one in their "right mind" would resist better systems for keeping weapons out of the hands of felons or the mentally unstable. The question then become twofold: How can a private citizen perform a background check? and Who determines the mental state of the buyer?
Obviously, a private citizen does not have access to such information, so the answer to both questions is to involve the state police. There should be few objections to this approach. Gun dealers already do this. Pawn shops that would like to sell firearms, would need FFL licensing.
And finally: To put teeth into the law, dealers that sell weapons to persons without a background check should permanently lose their FFL. Individuals that sell firearms improperly should be held as conspirators in whatever crimes are committed with the weapon(s) that they sold.
Pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons, and Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds:
Again, two topics treated together... "The shooters in Aurora and Newtown used the type of semiautomatic rifles that were the target of the assault weapons ban that was in place from 1994 to 2004. That ban was an important step, but manufacturers were able to circumvent the prohibition with cosmetic modifications to their weapons. Congress must reinstate and strengthen the prohibition on assault weapons."
There are several things wrong with this approach. First, it is not constitutional to restrict or ban outright gun ownership universally. This argument could even be made concerning the ban on fully automatic weapons.
The White House accuses gun manufacturers of making "cosmetic changes" to avoid the ban. They are admitting by this statement that the very features that make a gun take on the assault weapon classification are cosmetic. A pistol grip is often removable. Gun manufacturers will always be able to find ways to get around the law.
Who is to say which weapons are adequate for self- and home-defense? Who makes this determination? What part of "shall not be infringed" does the White House not understand?
Larger magazines make a weapon more prone to jamming. This is what stopped the movie theater shooter. His gun jammed. They make the weapon harder to conceal and harder to reload. And, again: What part of "shall not be infringed" does the White House not understand?
Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets:
Nobody has a problem with getting AP rounds off the public market.
Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime:
Laws are already on the books to fight gun crime. Criminals do not care about stiffer penalties, especially if they know judges are going to release them early or whenever their prison get too crowded. Enforce existing laws, and consult with Eric Holder about not selling any more guns to drug dealers.
End the freeze on gun violence research:
This is as Rush Limbaugh would say, "Symbolism over substance." Federal studies have a poor record of solving anything.
"There are approximately 30,000 firearm-related homicides and suicides a year, a number large enough to make clear this is a public health crisis." Barack Obama is involving the CDC in this area, in an attempt to classify gun crime and suicide with a gun a new crisis with its own definition within the realm of mental health. Never mind that a murder or a suicide has taken place. Take the gun out of the equation and the crime will go away...right? What? This seems to be the position of the White House, or at least it is the argument they have made. The truth is that this president would dearly love to be able to pull the Second Amendment debate under the heading of Affordable Health Care, otherwise known as Obama Care. The last thing he wants is an open debate on the constitutionality of banning, restricting, or even confiscating guns!
Make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates:
"The Administration is calling on Congress to help schools hire up to 1,000 more school resource officers, school psychologists, social workers, and counselors..." The White House is attempting to avoid the inevitable by candy-coating the issue. School psychologists, social workers, and counselors are fine and dandy, as long as the shooter has the common courtesy of shooting the school psychologists, social workers, and counselors first. The problem is unhappy teens that see a world taking shape around them that they know in their hearts is just not how it should be. Abortion, gay rights, divorce, drug-addled parents, no parents at all, school prayer absent, God shunned by society, vegan diets, and complete distraction from the matters of life by things like a football game, all create a world that few kids want to inherit. The natural reaction is to lash out!
What is the answer? Love and trigger locks! Not government intervention!
Comments