Guns, The 2nd Amendment and the Legitimacy of Their Necessity

[BloodRider]

So getting away from what the constitutional system in the US says - I'd love to hear what pro-gun folks would want as far as an ideal solution. For me, my ideal would be the following:

• Mandatory gun training in public school with a very well vetted trainer. Schools would not have firearms of any sort on the property and all training would be done offsite.
• Anyone can own a gun, provided that they have not been convicted of a felony violent crime and they pass a background check.
  • The background check could check for mental illness, but would have to be limited in scope.
• In addition to the background check, everyone must be licensed to fire a weapon. This will have rules similar to drivers licensing, where your vision and mental acuity would be checked every 5-10 years and you would have to reregister.
• You would be required to carry insurance for any weapons you own. Insurance would depend on the type of weapon as well as the situations of your house. 
• All firearms are to be safely secured when not in direct use. Failure to do so is an automatic crime in addition to whatever else is done with the firearm.

I realize a lot of this isn't constitutional; I don't care. I suspect strongly that a large chunk of actual gun owners would be totally fine with these rules, as they do these things anyway.

 

Yes to the insurance.  Specifically liability insurance.  And in any death, injury or property damage from that firearm, that firearms owner's insurance has to pay out in almost all cases.  If they don't want to, they have the burdern of substantial proof to show why they should not pay. 

[Jaxom 1974]

I disagree.  I would LOVE a mandatory "life skills" class.  I'm talking safely changing a tire, laundry, some budgeting, basic gun safety, tool safety, etc.  

I don't think the schools should remotely be responsible for training proficiency in firearms, but a basic safety and knowledge course, (safeties, how to safely transport, how to verify unloaded, basic safety rules, etc.) I think would be highly useful.

Yeah. I don't know your age, but we used to have things like this...since budgets get cut to the bone, home economics, automotive electives, et al. have gone away.  Life skills used to be part of schooling.  They didn't include guns then and they don't now. 

 

I think that in the US it is necessary. It can be assumed that people will at the very least encounter a firearm in their lifetime, and a very large minority of the US will actually have a firearm. I understand the objection. I figure the NRA can pay for it. (said in my best Trump voice)

If you're curious, I'm modeling a lot of this off of countries where this has worked - Switzerland and Israel. Both of which have everyone have some familiarity with firearms and both of which have very little gun violence. 

And the Swiss one is also an interesting one, because their gun laws are specifically with the notion of making everyone an able-bodied member of the militia - you know, what the 2nd amendment actually says. 

I'm by no means an expert, but isn't military service mandatory in Israel?  Sure seems like that's the better place to get weapons training. 

Full disclosure: I loathe guns.  I'm not a gun person.  I'm not going to be.  I see little need to try hunting, so that's not a good enough reason for me specifically to have a gun.  The echo chamber of gun absolutism that people I believe to be friends exists in does not warm me to their cause (many are far too comfortable declaring "Obama's cummin' fer mah guns!", if only because Rush tells them this is so).

I get that the Second Amendment isn't going away. I don't want to see "Gun Control" so much as "Gun Common Sense".  It's a tall order.  If we're going to spitball ideas of finding a solution and leaving the constitution at the door, for the moment, then:

1. Clearly define the weapons.  Declare this to be a "Military Grade" weapon and that's it.  No argument.  If a average citizen wants one of these weapons, they need to APPLY to purchase it, and then be limited to 1.  If you served in the military, you can apply for 2.  If you're caught with more than 1, then you're facing stiff penalties and jail time.

2. Register the weapons.  This idea that having a list is a slippery slope that will allow the government to come get the guns is such a red herring.  There are plenty of ways to track anything and everything these days.  And frankly, if you're someone buying dozens if weapons, legally of course, I still think I'd feel better if it tripped a red flag and some nice people from the FBI came buy to ask WHY you need that many weapons.  We're spit balling here, the constitution is out the window at the moment.

I'm sure there is more, but I'm really rambling.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

We should aggressively reduce the availability of guns, following the examples of other Western nations' gun control laws. It works to reduce gun deaths, as well as homicide and suicide overall.

The Constitution is no obstacle to this, there is no blanket individual right to gun ownership under the Second Amendment- that is a relatively recent and novel interpretation of its text, most notably pushed and funded by the NRA. Heller vs D.C. was incorrectly decided, over the dissent of 4 justices who specifically argued that the Second Amendment only protects keeping and bearing arms in relation to state militia service. One more liberal and it would have been decided differently, and correctly. It still can be in the future- that's a political challenge. Never vote Republican if you want something done.

[JonSnow4President]

Yeah. I don't know your age, but we used to have things like this...since budgets get cut to the bone, home economics, automotive electives, et al. have gone away.  Life skills used to be part of schooling.  They didn't include guns then and they don't now. 

 

I'm 24.  There were some electives left in my school (which had a separate curriculum for "university track" and "trades track" students.)  I'm talking about something mandatory, that covers many things generally.  Hell, throw some sex ed in there.  I know I would have benefited more from a class like that than I did Etymology. 

[The guy from the Vale]

I think that in the US it is necessary. It can be assumed that people will at the very least encounter a firearm in their lifetime, and a very large minority of the US will actually have a firearm. I understand the objection. I figure the NRA can pay for it. (said in my best Trump voice)

If you're curious, I'm modeling a lot of this off of countries where this has worked - Switzerland and Israel. Both of which have everyone have some familiarity with firearms and both of which have very little gun violence. 

And the Swiss one is also an interesting one, because their gun laws are specifically with the notion of making everyone an able-bodied member of the militia - you know, what the 2nd amendment actually says. 

We Swiss aren't giving away ammunition though, just the gun without ammo. And we have a ton of gun violence compared to our neighboring countries.

[Kalbear]

I'm by no means an expert, but isn't military service mandatory in Israel?  Sure seems like that's the better place to get weapons training. 

It is. I believe it also is in Switzerland, though it's apparently not hard to get out of. And I'd agree - but in lieu of that, school is what we have. Maybe the life skills thing would be better, and you get training for it offered to you in school that isn't mandatory - just like drivers ed is offered in school but isn't mandatory. 

 

Full disclosure: I loathe guns.  I'm not a gun person.  I'm not going to be.  I see little need to try hunting, so that's not a good enough reason for me specifically to have a gun.  The echo chamber of gun absolutism that people I believe to be friends exists in does not warm me to their cause (many are far too comfortable declaring "Obama's cummin' fer mah guns!", if only because Rush tells them this is so).

I'm not a big fan of guns, but I'm coming to the conclusion that the problem isn't guns. It's the loosy-goosy way that the US treats gun laws and rights. Other countries have a fairly good amount of ownership of guns and don't have the problems the US has, and part of that is because guns are basically toys for people here, treated with the same amount of respect and care that a nerf gun is. Again, Switzerland requires everyone to actually have a gun in their home. Not just allows, actually requires it. And they aren't shooting each other particularly often, either accidentally or deliberately. Israel does as well. 

Ideally I'd love to change the culture so that guns aren't such a big deal to people. But I don't think that's going to happen. Instead, I'd like to change the culture to make guns taken a bit more seriously. Instead of looking down on people who have guns, we can all look and laugh at people who carry their guns badly or do showy bullshit things. We can call CPS if we see guns brandished around kids. We can deride people for not locking up their guns. Enough pressure like that, and things will change, I believe. 

And hopefully after a while of that, guns won't become such a big deal. 

[HexMachina]

I learned to shoot in school.  We had an indoor range in our school's basement (but I was in JROTC)

was this compulsory though? That is what I understood Kalbear to be suggesting.

Like like and though I am coming at this from an outsiders perspective so my opinion/input will be of limited use here. I find the whole gun culture in the US baffling, so I'm hoping this thread will shed a little light on things

[Kalbear]

We Swiss aren't giving away ammunition though, just the gun without ammo. And we have a ton of gun violence compared to our neighboring countries.

You can apply for the ammo though, right? That was my understanding, at least for a privately owned weapon. 

And while the Swiss have a lot more gun violence compared to, say, France, you have 1/4 the amount of gun violence per capita than the US. I'd take that in a heartbeat if I could. 34000 deaths reduced to 8500? Yes, please. 

[TerraPrime]

was this compulsory though? That is what I understood Kalbear to be suggesting.

Like like and though I am coming at this from an outsiders perspective so my opinion/input will be of limited use here. I find the whole gun culture in the US baffling, so I'm hoping this thread will shed a little light on things

It is indeed a complex and nuanced issue, and rather difficult to fully convey over text. It is an attitude, an outlook in life, a philosophy. The closest comparison I can think of is perhaps the French's adoration of the joi de vive - it encompasses many aspects of their culture and is a fundamental core value to many. 

[Jaxom 1974]

 

I'm not a big fan of guns, but I'm coming to the conclusion that the problem isn't guns. It's the loosy-goosy way that the US treats gun laws and rights. Other countries have a fairly good amount of ownership of guns and don't have the problems the US has, and part of that is because guns are basically toys for people here, treated with the same amount of respect and care that a nerf gun is. Again, Switzerland requires everyone to actually have a gun in their home. Not just allows, actually requires it. And they aren't shooting each other particularly often, either accidentally or deliberately. Israel does as well. 

Ideally I'd love to change the culture so that guns aren't such a big deal to people. But I don't think that's going to happen. Instead, I'd like to change the culture to make guns taken a bit more seriously. Instead of looking down on people who have guns, we can all look and laugh at people who carry their guns badly or do showy bullshit things. We can call CPS if we see guns brandished around kids. We can deride people for not locking up their guns. Enough pressure like that, and things will change, I believe. 

And hopefully after a while of that, guns won't become such a big deal. 

Kal,

I believe I am, in the end, of a similar mind.  I'd prefer to see the culture changed and the way the laws are approached and applied.  The echo chamber disheartens me greatly.  I saw a "Friend" on Facebook today claiming he didn't want to see anything alter until it could be shown that the other "30,000 gun laws on the books" could be enforced.  No source.  No back up.  Just obstinacy.  Makes me not even want to seek out to see if there truly are that many laws gumming up the works.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

OAR,

I understand your position on Heller but your favored case, Miller, is not without problems.  Further Heller specifically holds that Miller is good law just that it never reached the question of whether the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right or not.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

was this compulsory though? That is what I understood Kalbear to be suggesting.

Like like and though I am coming at this from an outsiders perspective so my opinion/input will be of limited use here. I find the whole gun culture in the US baffling, so I'm hoping this thread will shed a little light on things

It was only for those in Junior Reserve Officer Training Corp (JROTC) which is a military class (but without any military obligation since it was just high school)

 

it was definately something worth learning though. 

[The guy from the Vale]

You can apply for the ammo though, right? That was my understanding, at least for a privately owned weapon. 

And while the Swiss have a lot more gun violence compared to, say, France, you have 1/4 the amount of gun violence per capita than the US. I'd take that in a heartbeat if I could. 34000 deaths reduced to 8500? Yes, please. 

You still have a number of differences:

1. almost everybody who owns a gun was in the military
2. almost everybody has his gun safely locked away as nobody expects his guns to be used for personal self defence (see also 3.)
3. use of the weapons except for target shooting or hunting (for which you need a license) is explicitly forbidden except for the police or in times of war. In particular, no such thing as concealed carry

[JonSnow4President]

You still have a number of differences:

1. almost everybody who owns a gun was in the military
2. almost everybody has his gun safely locked away as nobody expects his guns to be used for personal self defence (see also 3.)
3. use of the weapons except for target shooting or hunting (for which you need a license) is explicitly forbidden except in times of war. In particular, no such thing as concealed carry

While I don't have numbers to prove it (the only numbers I can find are published by the Texas DPS [most recent 2013], which is my area, and reinforces my perception), the firearms crime committed by concealed carry license holders is ludicrously low.  

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/reports/convrates.htm

[TerraPrime]

It is a bit of a red herring to pinpoint on crimes committed by conceal carry license holders only, when the discussion is the gun culture in general, which encompasses a lot more than concealed carry. 

[alguien]

I'd also like to do away with statutes preventing actual governmental agencies from performing nation-wide studies of the issue. The fact that Congress basically made it impossible to obtain objective, quantitative information on gun usage on a national level is almost Kafka-esque to me.

[The guy from the Vale]

Thank you, Terra

 

I didn't want to state that concealed carry license holders were the source of the US gun problem. The problem, in my view, is that in the US, you buy a gun for personal protection (i.e., you expect to use your gun against other humans). In Switzerland, guns don't have that status as items of personal protection. You got one because you're expected, as member of the military reserve, to train your shooting regularly (at least once per year). You're possibly a hunter, in which case you may have a hunting rifle. But the idea of a gun as means of your personal safety would be ridiculed hereabouts.

[JonSnow4President]

It is a bit of a red herring to pinpoint on crimes committed by conceal carry license holders only, when the discussion is the gun culture in general, which encompasses a lot more than concealed carry. 

I'm aware of that.  I'm just responding to the third point from theguyfromthevale.  Concealed carry is really a non-factor.  

In Texas in 2013, there were 2292 convictions for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.  10 were from concealed carry holders (less than the number convicted for sexual assault of a child).  Deadly Conduct Discharge of a Firearm had 204 convictions, of which 1 was a concealed carry holder.  364 murder convictions, of which 3 were concealed carry holders.  

[The guy from the Vale]

Again, my point was not that concealed carry was the problem. I see the concealed carry fetish as a symptom of what I'd consider the main problem with US gun culture, compared to Swiss gun culture.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

OAR,

I understand your position on Heller but your favored case, Miller, is not without problems.  Further Heller specifically holds that Miller is good law just that it never reached the question of whether the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right or not.

Stevens' dissent argues that the majority's opinion does in fact conflict with and overturn Miller's established precedent, even though Scalia's argues that his decision is not in conflict with it. I'm sure it comes as no surprise that I find Stevens' take on that question far more compelling than Scalia's.