dukeofurl
Member
Imagine this - you are in the position to do something about the messed up gun laws in your municipalty. What would you do to try and satisfy the antis, keep the 2nd amendment intact, and lock up the gangbangers?
I would do a number of things:
1. Deregulate the call in program.
I live in FL, and my dealer calls FDLE everytime he needs to get an approval number for a customer. It seems to me that since my states chief law enforcement agency serves the state residents - they need to do more to serve state residents, especially on such an important issue.
I spoke with FDLE agents at a huge gun show in WPB at which point I asked them - if theres someone that I feel on the fence about selling to, do I as a resident of the state have the ability to do an instant background check as dealers so often do. Answer: Kinda.
I have the ability to spend $20 some odd dollars to have a background check run that can take up to 6-8 weeks. Instant? No way. Convenient? Hardly.
The antis make it a point to bash gun shows about how criminals acquire weapons there from unscrupulous individuals. Maybe if the average Joe had the ABILITY to check their background we wouldnt have this problem.
2. Proper Felon Identification.
If you are not able to accurately determine eligbility for your prospective buyer, simply have them show ID. I belive that anyone convicted of a felony needs to have "CONVICTED FELON" printed in red capital letters right under their state identification picture. No muss, no fuss. And for the anti gunners screaming "This will only drive them to creation of fake ID's" - I propose that we enact stricter penalties against uttering a forged instrument.
3. Deregulate FFL licensing. The anti platform has an annoyingly prevalent phrase - "Unlicensed Dealers".
Why is that? Simple. Ordinary citizens who enjoy the constant rotation of firearms, do not wish to be burdened by the ATF or the requirements of them to have business premises and an undue expenditure into the wonderful world of comprehensive liability insurance. (Side note: My parents had a restaurant with a $300,000 umbrella. Cost, $3000/year.)
Solution: Create another type of FFL (lets call it Type 001) that provides for a C&R type ability to recieve and keep track of firearms. Sales would be treated as normal OTC retail transactions with each state's department of revenue collecting appropriate use tax.
To keep the commercial type FFL's happy - prohibit distrubutor's and manufacturers to sell to type 001, whereupon the source of acquired firearms are limited to type 01 and 02 dealers, and common citizens in and out of state.
4. Promote LE Pro-active firearms enforcement.
I think that a lot of law enforcement agency overlook the fact that felons can get guns in the newspaper from an average joe. I think that every agency needs to take an approach at catching common criminals ATTEMPTING to acquire a firearm. Certainly that is (or should be!) a crime for someone whose lost their right to bear arms to attempt the acquisiton of one. A key example is all the denials of purchasers attempting to buy at FFL's. There are reasons for getting a denial number from NICS, but theres usually a good reason - meaning if the person lied on the 4473 about a prior, or a restraining order, or whatnot - ATF or local LEO's should be on the case as soon as the NICS operator gets off the phone.
Thats just my .02.
Anyone else have commentary? And yes- I know, some of it is a little radical but the antis keep ranting about "reasonable gun control" - so I'm led to believe if we deregulate the industry we'll have a safer one.
I would do a number of things:
1. Deregulate the call in program.
I live in FL, and my dealer calls FDLE everytime he needs to get an approval number for a customer. It seems to me that since my states chief law enforcement agency serves the state residents - they need to do more to serve state residents, especially on such an important issue.
I spoke with FDLE agents at a huge gun show in WPB at which point I asked them - if theres someone that I feel on the fence about selling to, do I as a resident of the state have the ability to do an instant background check as dealers so often do. Answer: Kinda.
I have the ability to spend $20 some odd dollars to have a background check run that can take up to 6-8 weeks. Instant? No way. Convenient? Hardly.
The antis make it a point to bash gun shows about how criminals acquire weapons there from unscrupulous individuals. Maybe if the average Joe had the ABILITY to check their background we wouldnt have this problem.
2. Proper Felon Identification.
If you are not able to accurately determine eligbility for your prospective buyer, simply have them show ID. I belive that anyone convicted of a felony needs to have "CONVICTED FELON" printed in red capital letters right under their state identification picture. No muss, no fuss. And for the anti gunners screaming "This will only drive them to creation of fake ID's" - I propose that we enact stricter penalties against uttering a forged instrument.
3. Deregulate FFL licensing. The anti platform has an annoyingly prevalent phrase - "Unlicensed Dealers".
Why is that? Simple. Ordinary citizens who enjoy the constant rotation of firearms, do not wish to be burdened by the ATF or the requirements of them to have business premises and an undue expenditure into the wonderful world of comprehensive liability insurance. (Side note: My parents had a restaurant with a $300,000 umbrella. Cost, $3000/year.)
Solution: Create another type of FFL (lets call it Type 001) that provides for a C&R type ability to recieve and keep track of firearms. Sales would be treated as normal OTC retail transactions with each state's department of revenue collecting appropriate use tax.
To keep the commercial type FFL's happy - prohibit distrubutor's and manufacturers to sell to type 001, whereupon the source of acquired firearms are limited to type 01 and 02 dealers, and common citizens in and out of state.
4. Promote LE Pro-active firearms enforcement.
I think that a lot of law enforcement agency overlook the fact that felons can get guns in the newspaper from an average joe. I think that every agency needs to take an approach at catching common criminals ATTEMPTING to acquire a firearm. Certainly that is (or should be!) a crime for someone whose lost their right to bear arms to attempt the acquisiton of one. A key example is all the denials of purchasers attempting to buy at FFL's. There are reasons for getting a denial number from NICS, but theres usually a good reason - meaning if the person lied on the 4473 about a prior, or a restraining order, or whatnot - ATF or local LEO's should be on the case as soon as the NICS operator gets off the phone.
Thats just my .02.
Anyone else have commentary? And yes- I know, some of it is a little radical but the antis keep ranting about "reasonable gun control" - so I'm led to believe if we deregulate the industry we'll have a safer one.
