Sent to me...The Real Plan

Status
Not open for further replies.

MagicD

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
126
DAILY KOS
·******** Profile
·******** Diaries (list)
·******** Stream
Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 03:20 AM PST

How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process
by sporksFollow

·******** 138 Comments / 138 New
It's nice that we're finally talking about gun control. It's very sad that it took such a terrible tragedy to talk about it, but I'm glad the conversation is happening. I hear a lot about assault weapon and large magazine bans, and whilst I'm supportive of that, it won't solve the problem. The vast majority of firearm deaths occur with handguns. Only about 5% of people killed by guns are killed by guns which would be banned in any foreseeable AWB.

Furthermore, there seems to be no talk about high powered rifles. What gun nuts don't want you to know is many target and hunting rifles are chambered in the same round (.223/5.56mm) that Lanza's assault weapon was. Even more guns are chambered for more powerful rounds, like the .30-06 or (my personal "favorite") 7.62x54R. Even a .22, the smallest round manufactured on a large scale, can kill easily. In fact, some say the .22 kills more people than any other round out there.

Again, I like that we're talking about assault weapons, machine guns, and high capacity clips. But it only takes one bullet out of one gun to kill a person. Remember the beltway sniper back in 2002? The one who killed a dozen odd people? Even though he used a bushmaster assault rifle, he only fired one round at a time before moving. He could have used literally any rifle sold in the US for his attacks.

The only way we can truly be safe and prevent further gun violence is to ban civilian ownership of all guns. That means everything. No pistols, no revolvers, no semiautomatic or automatic rifles. No bolt action. No breaking actions or falling blocks. Nothing. This is the only thing that we can possibly do to keep our children safe from both mass murder and common street violence.

Unfortunately, right now we can't. The political will is there, but the institutions are not. Honestly, this is a good thing. If we passed a law tomorrow banning all firearms, we would have massive noncompliance. What we need to do is establish the regulatory and informational institutions first. This is how we do it:

The very first thing we need is national registry. We need to know where the guns are, and who has them. Canada has a national firearms registry. We need to copy their model. We need a law demanding all firearms be registered to a national database. We need to know who has them and where they are. We need to make this as easy as possible for gun owners. The federal government provides the money and technical expertise, and the State police carry it out. Like a funded mandate. Most firearms already have a serial number on them, so it would really be a matter of taking the information already on the ATF form 4473 and putting it in a national database. I think about 6 months should be enough time.

Along with this, make private sales illegal. When a firearm is transferred, make it law that the registration must be updated. Again, make it super easy to do. Perhaps over, the internet. Dealers can log in by their FFLs and update the registration. Additionally, new guns are to be registered by the manufacturer. The object here is to create a clear paper trail from factory to distributor to dealer to owner. We want to encourage as much voluntary compliance as possible.

Now we get down to it. The registration period has passed. Now we have criminals without registered guns running around. Probably kooky types that "lost" them on a boat or something. So remember those ATF form 4473s? Those record every firearm sale, going back twenty years. And those have to be surrendered to the ATF on demand. So, we get those logbooks, and cross reference the names and addresses with the new national registry. Since most NRA types own two or (many) more guns, we can get an idea of who properly registered their guns and who didn't. For example, if we have a guy who purchased 6 guns over the course of 10 years, but only registered two of them, that raises a red flag.

Now, maybe he sold them or they got lost or something. But it gives us a good target for investigation. A nice visit by the ATF or state police to find out if he really does still have those guns would be certainly warranted. It's certainly not perfect. People may have gotten guns from parents or family, and not registered them. Perfect is the enemy of pretty darn good, as they say. This exercise isn't so much to track down every gun ever sold; the main idea would be to profile and investigate people that may not have registered their guns. As an example, I'm not so concerned with the guy who bought that bolt action Mauser a decade ago and doesn't have anything registered to his name. It's a pretty good possibility that he sold it, gave it away, or got rid of it somehow. And even if he didn't, that guy is not who I'm concerned with. I'm concerned that other guy who bought a half dozen assault weapons, registered two hunting rifles, and belongs to the NRA/GOA. He's the guy who warrants a raid.

So registration is the first step. Now that the vast majority are registered, we can do what we will. One good first step would be to close the registry to new registrations. This would, in effect, prevent new guns from being made or imported. This would put the murder machine corporations out of business for good, and cut the money supply to the NRA/GOA. As money dries up, the political capital needed for new controls will be greatly reduced.

There are a few other things I would suggest. I would suggest an immediate, national ban on concealed carry. A ban on internet sales of guns and ammunition is a no brainer. Microstamping would also be a very good thing. Even if the only thing it does is drive up costs, it could still lead to crimes being solved. I'm willing to try every advantage we can get.

A national Firearms Owner Identification Card might be good, but I'm not sure if it's necessary if we have a national database. We should also insist on comprehensive insurance and mandatory gun safes, subject to random, spot checks by local and federal law enforcement.

We must make guns expensive and unpopular, just like cigarettes. A nationwide, antigun campaign paid for by a per gun yearly tax paid by owners, dealers, and manufacturers would work well in this regard. We should also segway into an anti-hunting campaign, like those in the UK. By making hunting expensive and unpopular, we can make the transition to a gun free society much less of a headache for us.

I know this seems harsh, but this is the only way we can be truly safe. I don't want my kids being shot at by a deranged NRA member. I'm sure you don't either. So lets stop looking for short term solutions and start looking long term. Registration is the first step.

Tell Pres. Obama and Democrats in congress to demand mandatory, comprehensive gun registration. It's the only way we can ban guns with any effectiveness.
 
That person is a gun owner. Look at all the terminology they have used and the understanding they show of firearms knowledge. I'd even go so far as to guess that whoever made that post is trying to encourage the Dems to take political steps that would not be very profitable for them.
 
Best part of that article is where they forgot that that would be entirely unconstitutional and SCOTUS would strike it down.
 
That person is a gun owner. Look at all the terminology they have used and the understanding they show of firearms knowledge. I'd even go so far as to guess that whoever made that post is trying to encourage the Dems to take political steps that would not be very profitable for them.

I took the same thing (the author is a gun owner), but in a different light.

I've seen text written by anti's, and I've seen text written by pro-gun people. This text was written by someone who is pro-gun pretending to be anti-gun. Why? To rile up the other pro-gun people by trying to convince them the "truth" of what the anti's are doing.

I don't doubt that they're planning some of the stuff the article says, but I don't need a fake "leak" to convince me of that.
 
Regardless, this is the political enemy and enemy of the Constitution. We think about them taking our guns, because they are thinking about it.
 
that would be entirely unconstitutional and SCOTUS would strike it down.
Just like they did the "Affordable care act"?
Actually MagicD just laid out EXACTLY what Sen.D. Feinstein said she would do,this is their strategy.
robert
 
If he did any research rather than regurgitate talking points, he would know the Canadian gun registry was a colossal failure. Microstamping is vaporware, and only useful if casings are left behind. Even if the author got everything he wanted, it still would not eliminate guns or gun violence, since this ONLY targets the law abiding citizens. Criminals who illegally possess their guns now would illegally posses their guns in the future.

And the whole thing is entirely unconstitutional to begin with, so there is that.

The problem is that low information voters will read this garbage and think its 100% true, easy as pie to implement, and will work without any resistance or opposition.
 
It could be someone's actual beliefs and not just a troll by a pro-gunner.

I've actually met a fair amount of lefties that have quite a few guns, know all the nomenclature and intricacies of how they work and understand why an "assault weapon" really isn't any more dangerous than any other gun, etc. etc.

But they honestly and truly believe that guns are just another toy for adults (though they still use them carefully and safely) like motorcycles or sports cars, etc and that our reps in the govt literally are the "parents" of all the other citizens and when they finally decide that too many of us children are hurting ourselves with these toys and take them away it will be time to "finally grow up" and turn them in so that our society and advance beyond such childish things.
 
I'm not one to cry "to battle!" over the little infringements on our rights, but somewhere along the path to the government taking our guns, it will happen. The registry would probably cause civil unrest, but at the point where they close the registry I'm sure millions of Americans who passed middle school history will look up the declaration of independence and go "yup, we need to hit the reset switch".
 
That person is a gun owner. Look at all the terminology they have used and the understanding they show of firearms knowledge. I'd even go so far as to guess that whoever made that post is trying to encourage the Dems to take political steps that would not be very profitable for them.

Possibly.

If so, he's going about it pretty cleverly.

This was posted on the Daily Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172661/-How-to-Ban-Guns-A-step-by-step-long-term-process

This site is all about upholding and strengthening the Democratic Party.

If he is working "behind the scenes", as it were, then he's pretty darned consistent with his pro-gun control stance throughout his article and the comment strings following it.

:scrutiny:
 
I think it's fake, but it could happen.
It couldn't happen fast, but gun control can happen in a slow insidious manner too.
Look at how it worked in the UK. Firearms used to be uquitous in the UK a century ago. Anyone who reads Sherlock Holmes stories knows that it was quite common to keep a revolver in one's pocket for protection, and a shotgun at home.
I'm sure there are still a few relics from these times tucked away in Britain, but for the most part, firearms have gone from commonplace to extremely rare in a few decades, not by police ransacking homes, but by incrementally whittling away at gun owners rights.
An illegal firearm will only pass through a generation or two before being handed in at an amnesty by a concerned relative of a recently deceased person.
 
Slander, what was the purpose of this trolling effort?

ETA: Regarding the cigarrettes comment, the article suggests that smoking is gone. About 1/3 of the people I work with smoke. It hasn't stopped smoking.
 
CmdrSlander said:
It has been confirmed that this was a trolling effort by the folks at AR15.com

CmdrSlander, a quick search did not turn anything up, can you provide a link?

Not that I don't trust ya ;)
 
Just look at some of the comments from members on this forum about universal back ground checks. You will see that this is possible and very likely.The only way that ubc could work is registration and registration is the first step of confiscation. I love the post about how the supreme court will uphold the constitution. If we lose one justice and Obama gets to appoint one you can kiss it all good bye. The last case was 5 to 4 so dont count on them.The dems mean to have our guns and led by our current president they will.
 
CmdrSlander, a quick search did not turn anything up, can you provide a link?

Not that I don't trust ya ;)
I used to be a member over there, they ran me off, but while I was on there someone admitted to crafting this troll and others confirmed that they had helped him.

If you look closely you will see ARFcom references and irreverence such as boating accidents, pie, and commies loving 7.62x54r.
 
The fellow who forwarded this to me is an avid clays shooter,1911 aficionado and formerly 3 gun competitor....maybe he isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer but passing on troll leavings is just not his modus operandi.
Fact is I've known real gun grabbers fluent in gun speak. Dunno just hate for us to out think ourselves.As they say sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
 
If this was for real, the author of it forgot a real big factor.

People just love to kill one another, for all kinds of reasons. They do it all day, every day. Sometimes they even do it without the use of firearms.

I think that if the author of that paper wanted to end violence, instead of banning guns, he should have proposed banning all the things that people kill each other over. Stuff like money, food, land, boyfriends, girlfriends. Cars, houses, jewelry -- clothes (remember Starter jackets?), shoes.

Don't forget hair styles, clothing styles, tattoos, dirty looks, finger gestures, and certain words. Language, skin color, religion. Alcohol, drugs, unlucky poker hands.

We should really get busy eliminating all these things, or there's just never going to be any peace around here.
 
Real or fake, use it against them. The Daily KOS is very anti-gun, so use it to burn people who say the anti's don't want a total gun ban.
 
It's real, and I posted the original link to the original text up like, 2 months ago.

We've already had this discussion once, at length.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top