Lost Sheep
Member
Help me clear my mind on this proposal. If there are holes in it, please tell me where. On its surface it seems like a workable idea that preserves 2nd Amendment rights, privacy and helps (helps, mind you) keep firearms out of the hands of those who have legitimately lost those rights.
Part 1
The FOID confirms 2nd Amendment RIGHT, not a permit.
Everyone, upon reaching majority (emancipated minor, adulthood, etc) gets a Firearms Owner ID Card. Everyone not prohibited by prior adjudication. This includes non-citizens in this country legally (just as current law allows).
This is a "Shall Issue" rule. No local jurisdictions prevent issue of the card. (It is, after all, not a weapon itself, but a verification of one's right and DEFINITELY NOT A GRANTING OF A PRIVILEGE OR RIGHT.)
Part 2
Revocations, restorations, database access.
If some condition comes up (conviction of an appropriate crime for example) that changes your status, your FOID is revoked (by due process of law).
Note that revocations and restorations will be recorded in a database, naturally, and legal prohibitions on who (e.g. what government agencies) can search the database will apply.
Part 3
Background Check Obsolete
The current style of background check will be gone. If you go into a gun store and inquire about the purchase a gun, a call to the database verifies the status of your FOID. The serial number of the gun is not reported, the type, caliber nor any other details of the gun are reported and not even whether you change your mind before leaving the store and end up not buying the gun is NOT REPORTED.
Part 4
(edit: Thanks to Twiki357's post #8 for pointing out a weakness this edit attempts to correct: The Second Amendment IS every man's and woman's concealed and open carry permit.)
Universal Carry Right (previously called a "Permit")
The FOID card serves as an indication of 2nd Amendment Rights to acquire, keep and bear arms in any manner the bearer sees fit (open or concealed, anywhere not prohibited by specific law). Essentially, it is a concealed carry permit, good anywhere in the U.S.
Alternatively, local jurisdictions may see fit to require concealed carry or require open carry. This would be something for constitutional review if the MANNER of carry is part of the 2nd Amendment's provision of "bear arms". Personally, I believe it should be up to the individual.
Part 5
Fees? None for individuals. Probably none for dealers, too.
The law may (or may not) require private sellers to verify the FOID card status of the buyer (such verification would be free of charge to ALL PRIVATE SELLERS). Hopefully free even to FFL gun dealers, too.
The cost of maintaining the database will surely be more than offset by the savings gained by the absence of all the needless deaths and injuries prevented by 1) prohibited persons not having arms and 2) all other persons being ABLE to protect themselves.
Ancillary facts:
Privacy Issues
Your current address nor any other personal data not REQUIRED for operation of the datbase is not in the database.
Revocation/Restoration/Errors
An inappropriate revocation (database error for example) shall have an appeal process that is free and easily accessible without use of attorneys. The appeal process shall be balanced in favore of the appellate, putting the burden of proof on the administrators of the database.
Criminal attempts to purchase
Any application which uses a FOID previously lost, stolen or revoked (which has not been restored or reported as recovered) will be reported to BATFE (or successor law enforcement organization) for investigation and (if appropriate) prosecution.
Enforcing penalties on criminal attempts to purchase
Telling the difference between an (criminal) attempt to purchase and (a non-criminal inquiry) not would depend on evidence surrounding the alleged attempt - testimony of the seller, 4473 form, store videotape, etc.
(Personal note: I realize this puts FFL holders in a position of trust with respect to upholding the laws preventing prohibited persons from obtaining firearms. In fact, they already have that trust, as gun dealers are already the first line of defense against criminals obtaining guns. This just makes it more pointed. I feel this is a good thing, though I recognize that "drafting" such civilians into the ranks of law enforcement may rankle others.)
Non-gun-purchase inquiries of the database
Checking on the status for a non-purchase reason would be free of such criminal penalty (checking on one's own status for example).
Gun-Free Zones
Any establishment posted as a "No Firearms Allowed" shall have a system whereby persons bearing arms may secure them (this will include a clearing barrel). This may be a "coat-check" or "parking valet" service, lockers or any sufficiently secure system. Insurance protecting the value of checked weapons must cover loss of such weapons would be required. Capacity of such storage would be dictated much as parking spaces are dictated for stores now. Liability for the acts of armed criminals against disarmed patrons of such establishments shall accrue to the management making the "No Firearms" policy.
What do you think?
I am reminded of the adage from H. L. Mencken, "For every problem there is an answer that is clear, simple ... and wrong." Please help me figure out where this one is wrong.
Lost Sheep
Part 1
The FOID confirms 2nd Amendment RIGHT, not a permit.
Everyone, upon reaching majority (emancipated minor, adulthood, etc) gets a Firearms Owner ID Card. Everyone not prohibited by prior adjudication. This includes non-citizens in this country legally (just as current law allows).
This is a "Shall Issue" rule. No local jurisdictions prevent issue of the card. (It is, after all, not a weapon itself, but a verification of one's right and DEFINITELY NOT A GRANTING OF A PRIVILEGE OR RIGHT.)
Part 2
Revocations, restorations, database access.
If some condition comes up (conviction of an appropriate crime for example) that changes your status, your FOID is revoked (by due process of law).
Note that revocations and restorations will be recorded in a database, naturally, and legal prohibitions on who (e.g. what government agencies) can search the database will apply.
Part 3
Background Check Obsolete
The current style of background check will be gone. If you go into a gun store and inquire about the purchase a gun, a call to the database verifies the status of your FOID. The serial number of the gun is not reported, the type, caliber nor any other details of the gun are reported and not even whether you change your mind before leaving the store and end up not buying the gun is NOT REPORTED.
Part 4
(edit: Thanks to Twiki357's post #8 for pointing out a weakness this edit attempts to correct: The Second Amendment IS every man's and woman's concealed and open carry permit.)
Universal Carry Right (previously called a "Permit")
The FOID card serves as an indication of 2nd Amendment Rights to acquire, keep and bear arms in any manner the bearer sees fit (open or concealed, anywhere not prohibited by specific law). Essentially, it is a concealed carry permit, good anywhere in the U.S.
Alternatively, local jurisdictions may see fit to require concealed carry or require open carry. This would be something for constitutional review if the MANNER of carry is part of the 2nd Amendment's provision of "bear arms". Personally, I believe it should be up to the individual.
Part 5
Fees? None for individuals. Probably none for dealers, too.
The law may (or may not) require private sellers to verify the FOID card status of the buyer (such verification would be free of charge to ALL PRIVATE SELLERS). Hopefully free even to FFL gun dealers, too.
The cost of maintaining the database will surely be more than offset by the savings gained by the absence of all the needless deaths and injuries prevented by 1) prohibited persons not having arms and 2) all other persons being ABLE to protect themselves.
Ancillary facts:
Privacy Issues
Your current address nor any other personal data not REQUIRED for operation of the datbase is not in the database.
Revocation/Restoration/Errors
An inappropriate revocation (database error for example) shall have an appeal process that is free and easily accessible without use of attorneys. The appeal process shall be balanced in favore of the appellate, putting the burden of proof on the administrators of the database.
Criminal attempts to purchase
Any application which uses a FOID previously lost, stolen or revoked (which has not been restored or reported as recovered) will be reported to BATFE (or successor law enforcement organization) for investigation and (if appropriate) prosecution.
Enforcing penalties on criminal attempts to purchase
Telling the difference between an (criminal) attempt to purchase and (a non-criminal inquiry) not would depend on evidence surrounding the alleged attempt - testimony of the seller, 4473 form, store videotape, etc.
(Personal note: I realize this puts FFL holders in a position of trust with respect to upholding the laws preventing prohibited persons from obtaining firearms. In fact, they already have that trust, as gun dealers are already the first line of defense against criminals obtaining guns. This just makes it more pointed. I feel this is a good thing, though I recognize that "drafting" such civilians into the ranks of law enforcement may rankle others.)
Non-gun-purchase inquiries of the database
Checking on the status for a non-purchase reason would be free of such criminal penalty (checking on one's own status for example).
Gun-Free Zones
Any establishment posted as a "No Firearms Allowed" shall have a system whereby persons bearing arms may secure them (this will include a clearing barrel). This may be a "coat-check" or "parking valet" service, lockers or any sufficiently secure system. Insurance protecting the value of checked weapons must cover loss of such weapons would be required. Capacity of such storage would be dictated much as parking spaces are dictated for stores now. Liability for the acts of armed criminals against disarmed patrons of such establishments shall accrue to the management making the "No Firearms" policy.
What do you think?
I am reminded of the adage from H. L. Mencken, "For every problem there is an answer that is clear, simple ... and wrong." Please help me figure out where this one is wrong.
Lost Sheep
Last edited: