What existing anti-gun laws should be watered down/repealed?

O

Oatka

New member
This is a spin-off of the "DONT GO BACK TO SLEEP!" thread.

It always bugged me in the past when we had those defeatist "What gun will they ban next?" threads. I always thought it should be the other way round, as per this thread's title.

For starters, I'd like to see the NICS banned from keeping records, as the law originally stated. Yeah, they can always back up existing ones, but they'll be pretty dated in a few years. I'd like to see NICS checking system put under an "airline reservation system" criteria, i.e. "you NEVER go down". I can't honestly see NICS being repealed, and in reality, I have no problem with a check being done, IF it's like "Is he/she in your database? No? They get the gun".

I'd love to see the antis being so busy defending their agenda that they can't push any new increments of their own.

Please - no 'ban ALL gun laws' posts - it's not going to happen, even if Charlton Heston was president. What are your REALISTIC proposals?
 
I'd like to see a task force of constitution experts (lawyers to be specifically excluded with prejudice) paneled to look at all federal gun laws to determine: 1. are they constitutional in intent, 2. are they repressive in application.

A second panel to be created which looks at the statistics of state gun laws much the same as John Lott has done to determine if state laws do what it is they are supposed to do.

Finally, I'd like the new Attorney General (the only lawyer) to look into violations of law by the FBI, BATF, etc. with respect to enforcing the federal laws already in effect. I expect charges to be pressed, trials to be conducted, and if the offending parties are found guilty they are to be publicly and slowly skinned on national TV. Then when the criminal prosecutions are concluded, I want litigation attorneys (you know, the one responsible for tobacco, Microsoft, and gun lawsuits) to file civil suits against governments officials for violation of civil rights.

Then we can get busy writing truly "reasonable" gun laws.
 
Oatka,

I know this isn't what you wanted to hear, but what many of us are thinking is that if we can get a few more Justices on the SC that actually will seriously consider the Constitution we might get rid of most federal gun laws, state laws will continue to be fought out on a state by state basis.

Currently all the federal gun laws are based on the "interstate commerce" clause of the enumerated powers of Congress. The Lopez decision, striking down the federal ban on guns in school, served as the first weakness in this ploy. While I am generally a pessimist, most of us think that a court decision is more likely than a political decision, because it takes the issue away from "guns" and places the emphasis on "Constitutional powers" of Congress.

Perhaps this is wishful thinking, fire away.
 
The Tenth Ammendment means the feds have no authority to say who may own a gun or what guns may be owned. Based on that, not the Second, I'd like to repeal all federal gun laws.

I think that the states should make their own gun laws. I'm not so libertarian as to say that any law with the word "gun" in it violates the second ammendment.

Banning, taxing, liscensing or registering any gun is particuarlly odious to me, though.
 
1. I think we should try to get the BATF disolved, if not totaly, then at least in relation to firearms. This was recommended by a commission some time ago and is justifiable on several grounds, not the least of which is the political misuse of the agency by the last administration. These are people who have little to justify themselves unless they can think up new ways to harass firearms owners. Whatever firearms laws remain should be administered by "real" law enforcement agencies (FBI?) that have "real" criminal law enforcement duties to perform.
2. Due to the recent alleged political misuse of the NICS, this whole thing needs to rethought by an administration more favorable to honest firearms owners. Perhaps it should be abandoned altogether as a potential threat to civil rights.
If not abandoned altogether, any records illegally or legally maintained (it will be hard to get government officials to admit to doing illegal things) should be destroyed and also made illegal again as it will be harder for the government to use illegal information or get convictions if they try to use such information.
If the system is not abandoned altogether, we must make sure that it is indeed an instant system. The system was originally proposed to be a tuely instant system of assuring dealers that they were not selling to known felons. This was why it was backed by the NRA as "resonable". It should be techincally feasible to have an instant check system that is truely very quick and minimally intrusive into citizen's lives. But we have now seen an administration deeply hostile to the 2nd amendment (all civil liberties really) misuse it for its warped purposes.
We should have these things if NICS continues:
A. It should be truely instant. It should be just as good as the systems used by the Credit Card companies and never go down. It must be available 24 hours a day, every day of the year and must be able to handle the worst usage periods without being overwhelmed.
B. If the system ever goes down, it should be crystal clear that dealers have the right to conduct their business normally. It is the government's job to keep the system going. Shutting down the system is not an acceptable way for a hostile and unscupulous administration to harass firearms dealers and the public at large.
C. The system was intended to make it more difficult for felons to aquire guns through dealers. It was not meant as a way of collecting serial number lists of firearms owned by honest citizens. I do not believe that any NICS check should be taking down the serial numbers of firearms bought by citizens whose names do not come up in the check. This would make the check quicker and make it far less likely that a future hostile government could use the system as a means of secretly making illegal lists of firearms owners and their firearms.

In additon I would suggest:
1. Let's try to get rid of the whole FFL system altogether:

A. We have now seen an administration misuse this system as a means of unconstitutional gun conrtol by limiting the number of dealers from which the American public can purchase firearms. This must be stopped.
B. We have seen attempts to impose measures through civil litigation "agreements" (blackmail), such as that with Smith & Wesson, that can only be enforced through as system of licensed dealers. This must be stopped.
C. We have seen attempts with some success in the last administration to harass and prosecute people who have FFL licenses for no other purpose but to further cut down on the availablity of firearms to the American people. The FFL system exposes honest men and women who want to deal in firearms to a loss of both their rightful properties and liberties by any administration hostile to civil liberties that may come along in the future. This must be stopped.
The FFL system has now beyond any doubt in my own mind been abused to the point where it is fair to ask for it to be abandoned. No conceivable public good that can be advanced for it now justifies the abuses that have been engendered by it.

If the FFl and NICS systems are maintained:

1. Take long arms out of the system. Accounting for these firearms serves no justifiable law enforcement purpose.
2. Advance the age of firearms in the antique catagory to at least to those arms made after WWII. There is no justifiable law enforcement purpose to accounting for arms made so long ago.
3. Take the odd 19th century bizzar weapons (little guns that look like something else) out of the class III dangerous device category so that if some collector or other citizen still has one of these almost useless old devices, he or she is not inadvertantly commiting a felony. There is no useful law enforcement purpose to accounting for these rare and odd devices.
4. Reduce the price of the FFL and make them easily obtainable for ordinary honest persons wishing to deal in firearms, even as an adjunct to a hobby. Lots of people lile to trade friearms and there is nothing wrong with this. If there is any justification to the system at all, it is to keep known felons, not ordinary honest citizens, from trading openly in arms.
5. Let's get rid of obnoxious regulations dealing with the importation of arms from foriegn lands. Let's get rid of the stupid and useless little import marks importers must stamp into old guns they legally bring into the country. Let's make it easier to legitimately import arms. Free and honest citizens should be able to legally buy any arms they fancy from any part of the world that they choose.

In addition:
1. The Justice Department of the new administration should now be made to argue forcefully for a strict interpretation of the citizen's Right to Keep and Bare Arms in any case under its' jurisdiction. It should also intervene as a friend to the court in any state case that is in violation of this Constitutional Right.
2. Any anti-RKBA "executive orders" promulgated by the past administration should be terminated.
3. The administration should make it clear to all foriegn goverments and organizations that the citizen's Right to Keep and Bare Arms is an essential component of any government that is to be considered truely democratic.

Finally, I would very much like to see a real criminal investigation into the misuse of the system by the past administration. If crimes were committed by government officals, they should be prosecuted, not covered up. Get the rotten apples out of the government now.
 
I'd like to see the Assault Weapon Ban wiped off the books. Import bans of weapons should be likewise struck down.

Firearms should be removed from the provenance of the ATF and reassigned to the USMS regional offices.

Then I'd like each state to start putting a barcode on the back of every drivers license, and battery-powered readers designed and distributed to LEAs and gun dealers. Swipe the card, and if the barcode comes up as one set of numbers, you get a red light -- no carry/no purchase. Any other numbers gets you a green light -- carry how you want/buy what you want.

This way there's no central database, and if the reader goes down, you just buy new batteries.

LawDog
 
Brothers & Sisters,
Waitone, BTR, Herodotus, LawDog et alia,
This is the path of righteousness. Now call, write and demand of your elected officials that they keep this faith for you and others of like mind.
I would say that there is only one thing that is politically correct - the VOTE. Everything else is harassment.
Waving a phrase of PC in every direction is unacceptable.
If these expounders of virtue want solutions they need to get their own hands involved.
Regards,
Lance Gothic
Shibumi
 
For awhile lately I've been giving some thought to the 1994 Crime Bill. As I understand it, this tidy little package limited magazine capacity, so-called assault weapons, made the Brady Bill into law, and is also responsible for the Emmerson case.
I would like to address the first two items; those of magazine capacity limitations, and banning 'assault' weapons.

Recently, I found out that the '94 crime bill must be renewed in 2004 or pass out of existence.

More than likely, as that date approaches, you will see our olitical opponents screaming bloody murder in order to get the bill reinstated. Quite honestly, without a serious political mobilization on our part, you can be almost guaranteed that the bill will be reinstated.
<B>HOWEVER</B>
I believe that the solution will rest in a compormise not with the anti-rights crowd, but with the American people at large, those who don't understand the difference between an AR-15 and an M-16.
As such, we should fight tooth and nail to get the law expunged from the books, but in the event that public opinion doesn't sway that far into our favor, I would advocate that the compromise should be that only those who pass a background check get standard-cap magazines, or nasty-looking rifles.
This works in our favor in two ways:
1) If you pass any other background check, you could pass a background check for these. In other words, the check would be nothing more than a token effort thrown to the left in order to keep them from convincing the unwashed masses that we're a bunch of no-compromise psychopaths.
2)As long as you can get the average man-on-the-street to agree to something, you've won half the battle. This will help in working towards a day in the future when said laws would be repealed.

Now, before you accuse me of pandering to the bad guys, or compromising on something that shouldn't be compromised, hear me out.

One of the reasons that anti-gun legislation works is because it is done incrementally. This is usually so subtle that most people don't notice it until they go to buy a MAK-90 and have to suffer through the nightmare ergonomics of a thumbhole stock. By that time, it is waaay to late to totally repeal the law, because in the minds of the public said weapons are bad. However, if we <B>incrementally</B> work to reverse this legislation, we will be afforded the time to change minds and hearts on this matter while at the same time putting the anti-rights crowd on the defensive.

Remember, sweeping legislation rarely goes through, and is rarely effective because it rocks the boat too much for the average man.
But what reasonable, undecided person would have a problem with someone else owning a FAL with bayonet lugs as long as they go through a reasonable background check? ;)

I hope that this makes sense. I myself am still pondering how we are to combat the anti-rights people when this bill comes up for renewal in 3 years or so.
 
I'm seconding caliban with incremental laws being easier to pass than sweeping ones. The only problem I would find with this arguement is that the anti crowd will raise a great hue and cry over any watering down of bills no mater how minute, and I would guess that the representatives and senators that would vote for a small pro-RKBA bill would vote for a big one. I'm not positive about this, but most Legislators feel very stongly one way or the other, and I would like to see as much change as possible in the next two years, before the Dems possibly regain the House and Senate. I do think the 1994 Crime Law is on the way down the pooper; the Repub dominated House and Senate has voted to repeal it every year the past few years, to have it killed by a veto. No veto this time around. Executive deep fat-frying of those responsible for illegaly keeping NICS records would be nice to, along with a "redefining" of the limits of the BATF's power. I feel real confident that Cheney will do a lot for RKBA.
 
Make it just another component of an "end victimless crimes" package. No harm, no foul. Better chances of passage when a whole slew "crimes" are targeted for legalization because they are harmless and popular.
 
I'd say we've got one, count 'em, one election left in which to establish an actual pro-gun majority in at least one house of Congress, before the "assault weapons" ban comes up for renewal. If, that is, they don't try to sneak it through before then. I think, however, they would have done that during this lame duck session, if they were going to... assuming they didn't sneak something into that omnibus bill, and we just haven't found out about it yet.

In 2002, we can take nothing for granted, we must contest every election, starting from the primaries on up!
 
I'm with Oatka. Stop the BATF and the Justice Department from keeping the NICS records. We essentially have gun registration right now. My understanding (from other TFL posts, a "usually reliable" source) is that the Justice Dept. is keeping all NICS records because of a loophole in the law that allows them to keep some records for some period of time in order to investigate crimes. So they're keeping all records.

I'd also like to change the handling of form 4473's. They are essentially gun registration, also. The Gun store must hold them. When the gun store goes out of business, they go to the BATF.

So Bush should stop Justice from keeping those NICS records (as the law requires--imagine! asking Justice to observe the law!) and should require BATF to destroy 4473's in its posession and stop confiscating 4473's from gun stores that go out of business.
 
My suggestions:

Everybody over 18 can buy and own any form of firearm, so long as they are mentally competent and have no criminal record.

Shall-issue permits in all 50 states plus US territories. Under the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution, there would be full reciprocity anywhere on US soil.

The Federal Privacy Act should be amended to make it an offense to mantain records of a private individual's gun ownership, except by the manufacturer for warranty purposes.

For those that use guns in crimes, a law similar to Florida's 10-20-life: 10 years for carrying a gun while commiting a felony, 20 years for pointing it at someone, and life for firing it whether you hit anyone or not. Build a Devil's Island style work camp someplace really miserable to house these offenders.

Manufacturers must prove every new design by firing 1000 rounds through a single unit to show it will not blow up. That would be the only constraint on design and manufacture.

All other gun related laws in the dumper.
 
what denfoote said..... all of them.

is there any crime you can name that could not be covered under other laws already on the books?
brandishment... is assault simple at least

i dislike making simple possetion of anything illegal.
even explosives. those who don't know how to handle/store them will quickly leave the gene pool. those in possetion in urban areas could be handled under "risking a catastrophe "laws.

rms/pa
 
Well...

... let's see. How about NFA '34, GCA '68, the import restriction and Class 3 provisions sneakily tacked onto FOPA, the Brady Bill, Crime Bill '94, the beat goes on...
 
What denfoote...et al said...all of them! But alas..I wouldn't hold my breath. Wimpy Senator and House of Represenatives....will not expose themselves to political suicide. Best we can hope for...is let sleeping dogs lie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top