Let us begin today by not assuming that all restrictions on
guns are attempts to curb gun ownership, or to put undue burdens on gun owners,
or to confiscate guns. Those are simply
smokescreens that the NRA uses to capture the attention and monetary support of
2nd amendment purists who see nothing else but strict interpretation
of that Amendment. In the face of such
rhetoric, one can only point again to the words used by one of the most
conservative Justices ever, Antonin Scalia, when he wrote the majority opinion
for the Court in District of Columbia v. Heller
decision in 2008:
“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is
not unlimited (emphasis
mine). It is not a right to keep and
carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: concealed weapons prohibitions have been
upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not
be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of
firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of
firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws
imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
With those words in mind, let us remind ourselves of the
current federal and state laws (something we looked at in greater detail last
Post), particularly as concerns registration and licensing. (A more detailed and viable summary can be
found at The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence at www.smartgunlaws.org)
“A limited system of federal firearms registration was
created by the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. § 5801 et seq. The
National Firearms Act (“NFA”) was enacted in 1934 to impose an excise tax and
registration requirements on a narrow category of firearms… With its provisions effectively limited to
pre-ban machine guns and transfers of short-barreled rifles and shotguns that
are specifically authorized by the Attorney General, the registration system
created by the National Firearms Act falls far short of a comprehensive
registration system.
“There is no
comprehensive national system of gun registration. In fact,
federal law prohibits the use of the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS) to create any system of registration of firearms or firearm
owners.5”
Summary of State LawSix states and the District of Columbia require registration of some or all firearms. Hawaii and the District of Columbia require the registration of all firearms, and New York requires the registration of all handguns through its licensing law.10 Hawaii, New York and four other states also have a registration system for certain highly dangerous firearms, such as assault weapons. (For more information about such laws, see their summaries on Assault Weapons, 50 Caliber Weapons, and Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines).
Additional states require the reporting of firearm sales and
transfers to a state or local agency, which maintains these records. For
information about such laws, see the summary on Maintaining
Records & Reporting Gun Sales. California and Maryland
also require new residents to report certain firearms that they bring into the
state.
Conversely, eight states have statutes prohibiting them from
maintaining a registry of firearms except in limited circumstances.
The Law Center
makes the bold claim that:
“Licensing
and registration laws make it more difficult for dangerous people to obtain
guns and help ensure that firearm owners remain eligible to possess their
weapons. Firearm registration laws can lead to the identification and
prosecution of violent criminals.
Registration helps law enforcement quickly and reliably trace firearms
recovered from crime scenes. Registration
laws are most effective when combined with laws requiring licensing of firearm
owners and purchasers.
“States
with some form of both registration and licensing have greater success keeping
firearms initially sold by dealers in the state from being recovered in crimes
than states without such systems in place.2
This data suggests that licensing and registration laws make it more difficult
for criminals, juveniles and other prohibited purchasers to obtain guns.”
The
Center suggests the following as a framework of legislative actions and provisions that might get us to a point
where these outcomes are general and viable:
- Registration required for all firearms prior to taking possession, or, in the case of firearms already owned or brought into the jurisdiction, immediately after the firearm is brought into the jurisdiction
- Registration to include: name, address and other identifying information about the owner of the firearm; names of manufacturer and importer; model, type of action, caliber or gauge, and serial number of firearm; and name and address of source from which firearm was obtained (Hawaii, District of Columbia)
- Registered owners
are required to renew registration annually, including submitting to
a background check (D.C. requires renewal every three years; New York
requires handgun licensees to recertify their licenses every five years)
- Registered
owners are required to report any loss, theft or transfer of the registered
firearm to law enforcement within a short time of the event and to turn in
their registration card or certificate upon loss, theft or transfer (District
of Columbia)
- Registered
owners are required to store all firearms safely and securely
- Additional restrictions may include limitations on where registered firearms may be possessed and to whom they may be transferred (particularly relevant for certain classes of firearms such as assault weapons, 50 caliber rifles, and large capacity magazines)
Some Other Suggestions of reasonable
and sensible reforms include:
1)
Ban
large capacity ammunition magazines. Large capacity magazines, some of which can hold up to 100 rounds, are the
common thread uniting all of the major mass shootings in recent history [pdf]. These magazines were prohibited under federal law until Congress allowed
the 1994 assault weapons ban to expire in 2004.
It’s time to bring it back.
2)
Require
a background check every time a firearm is sold. Under
existing federal law, a prospective purchaser only has to undergo a background
check when buying a gun from a licensed dealer. If a person buys a gun from a
so-called "private seller"—as
is the case in an estimated
40 percent of gun sales every year—no background check is federally
required. A background check requirement alone isn't enough—more also needs to
be done to ensure that the names of
persons who are prohibited are appropriately entered into the system.
3)
Give
ATF the resources it needs. Better enforcement of existing law is an important piece of reducing gun
violence, which is why the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
(ATF) needs to have the resources and permanent leadership to enforce existing
federal firearms laws effectively. For
starters, the Senate ought to have promptly confirmed President Obama's nominee
for ATF Director instead of blocking approval for FOUR YEARS!
Second, the Bureau should be given the resources to crack down on dishonest
firearms dealers. ATF has the resources to perform an inspection, on average,
only once every decade. As documented by the Washington Post, that's
only one of the many resource limitations that are preventing ATF agents from
more effectively preventing the widespread trafficking of crime guns.
4)
Improve access to funding and data for researchers. As
the New York Times reported
recently, the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) once played a key role in supporting
research into the public health concerns surrounding gun violence and the
development of effective firearms laws. That was until Congress singled out
guns in the CDC's funding bill: “None of the funds made available for injury
prevention and control…may be used to advocate or promote gun control.” Researchers
are also denied access to data
tracing the origins of firearms recovered in crimes by what is known as the Tiahrt Amendment, that restricts and conceals trace data from
public view.
When the
freedoms, liberties, property or lifestyle of some threaten to cause harm,
injury or hurt to many others, there have to be penalties, restrictions,
regulations or limits by which we can all live together in tranquility,
solidarity, safety and well-being. It is common-sense, but it is also related
to a contractual theory of governing that underlies much of what we are about
as a representative democracy and a Republic.
In
that vein, I submit to you some penalties and requirements that some states have
promulgated, or are considering:
- Criminal Penalties for Buying a Gun for
Someone who Can't
- Criminal Penalties for Buying a Gun with False
Information
- Criminal Penalties for Selling a Gun without a
Proper Background Check
- Require Background Checks for all Handgun
Sales at Gun Shows
- Require Purchase Permit for All Handgun Sales
- Grant Law Enforcement Discretion in Issuing
Concealed Carry Permits
- Prohibit Violent Misdemeanor Criminals from
Possessing Guns
- Require Reporting Lost or Stolen Guns to Law Enforcement
- Allow Local Communities to Enact Gun Laws
- Allow Inspections of Gun Dealers
Two of the most maligned departments of the federal
government are the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
The FDA is responsible for
protecting and promoting public health through the regulation and supervision
of food safety, tobacco products, dietary supplements, prescription and
over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines, biopharmaceuticals, blood
transfusions, medical devices, electromagnetic radiation emitting devices,
cosmetics, animal foods & feed and veterinary products. Under their
jurisdiction comes the licensing and registration of vendors and products. Likewise,
the Environmental Protection Agency was created for the purpose of protecting
human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations, as well
as licensing and registering vendors and products.
Both of these agencies are indicative
of the broad spectrum of registration, licensing, and issuance of permits that
goes on every day. It is one of the
necessities of living in a contractual relationship with others under a
constitution that calls for equal justice, equal rights, and the on-going quest
for a more perfect Union.
So, how about looking at this whole gun issue from another
angle: treating guns like we treat other
products such as automobiles (another form of weapon or at least a potentially
dangerous projectile) or perhaps as we treat certain drugs that are potentially
harmful, dangerous and injurious. As
citizens, we accept and even request restrictions on potential violence,
destruction and injurious results in these other products; how come guns as
products are excluded from any restrictions? The simple answer is the NRA’s power as a
lobby. But I maintain that it is more
specifically due to the confusion that the NRA willingly creates by using the
term “gun rights.” In other words – and this is CRUCIAL: a
right to ownership of guns (protected by the 2nd Amendment) is
entirely separate from the issue of the safety, viability, potential danger,
and potential defects of a product: the actual guns. Ownership of guns is
the protected right; the gun as a manufactured product has no rights. Any
such manufactured product found wanting in certain areas, can (and should) be
restricted by government in its role as protector of the general welfare, of domestic
tranquility and of equal application of justice for all. Moreover, any potential or actual use of such a product in the
commission of a crime or to do harm to another must be regulated, restricted or
banned, and then appropriately punished.
The following thoughts and proposals are thus offered in the
context of what we already accept as reasonable restrictions on potentially
dangerous products, and their potentially dangerous utilization, in our daily
living.
1) Just
as we have registration required for every car, we should register every gun,
renewable every 3-5 years. Those found
with unregistered guns (or without ownership title) should be fined (or perhaps
jailed, if warranted) and guns impounded until registered. I would suggest that background checks
continue to be required before any gun is able to be purchased, that guns given
to someone or exchanged on a private basis be accompanied by a re-titling and re-registration
process similar to car ownership titles.
Just as car dealers often perform the actual paperwork with DMV, so gun
dealers might be allowed (encouraged?) to perform this service with an
appropriate government agency, if feasible.
2) Just
as we have inspections of cars every year, we should do a similar thing for
guns, but not on an annual basis. We
should continue the practice of some police departments for a turn-in of
registered and unregistered guns on a periodic basis; no questions asked. We should also require an inspection of safety
devices, and triggers (to make sure that none are “hair” triggers), as well as
locks (as we do of pollution control devices on cars) made mandatory for all
guns. Perhaps such inspections could be
required every three years. Guns that
fail could become temporarily registered for 10 days during which time they can
be fixed, re-inspected, and re- registered.
Guns used only for collection and/or display should probably be exempted
from this process, although a special certification could be issued.
3) Just
as we have “learner permits” and driving tests before someone can register a
car, likewise we should require certification of training that covers safe and
proper use of a gun. Plus, certification
(or permit) from a responsible party such as state police or mental health
practitioner that the applicant is mentally fit to own and utilize a gun, would
be desirable. Standardized tests could
be part of this process.
4) Just
as we have traffic laws, rules of the road, and driving regulations, we should
consider the same for gun ownership and on-going registration. Similar to requiring the re-certification of
certain drivers, we should require re-training, re-testing and re-certification
by a professional when certain behaviors, violations, or complaints are
introduced.
5) Just
as we have a “traffic court” in many jurisdictions, let us consider
establishing “gun use courts” to handle infractions related to gun ownership
and gun use.
6) In
all this, it is necessary of course, to determine how much should be mandated
in federal laws, and how much should be mandated by State laws, and how much
leeway states should have in the implementation of certain of these provisions,
i.e. inspections, registrations, certifications and which state or local agencies
of government should be involved.
Just because there is a second amendment that allows for
ownership of guns does not negate the larger issue of the rights of everyone to
live without fear and in safety. The
right to own guns does not negate the fundamental and superior right to life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to freedom and justice for all; to the
pre-eminence of life above property or to the safety and security of government
protection of the general welfare of all citizens. Free speech is also a constitutional “right”,
but it is not unrestricted. In fact, one
cannot slander others, use hate-filled speech against others, or yell a false
warning of FIRE in a crowded theater.
Yet we cannot get a Congress (filled with Republicans who support
restrictions of all kinds on voting, abortion and women’s equal rights among
others) to support any restrictions on guns as products, or as lethal weapons
that can negate the rights and lives of other citizens.
By advocating for no restrictions on gun ownership or guns
as products, the
NRA ends up using the second amendment to advocate for violence,
doubling down on that nefarious construct by advocating that concealed carry by
more and more people can stop, rather than exacerbate, mass killings! That is wrong; it is destructive of all that
underlies our system of contractual government.
The fact that the NRA has a lobbying arm that is also a front for gun
manufacturers, receiving monetary support from the very industry they are sworn
to protect, is nothing short of bribery and a kick-back scheme. They are guilty of selling a second amendment
right to the highest bidders, of pimping for their contributors, and of unwitting
complicity in the 117,000 deaths of men, women, and children every year by gun
violence.
As the direct descendant of many gun makers on both sides of my
family, and as the grand- nephew and nephew of three ancestors who were
superintendents at large gun manufacturing plants (in Massachusetts,
Connecticut and New York), it is a wonder to me that the good men and women and
young people who are responsible gun owners (and members of the NRA), and who often
favor sensible gun controls right along with the general public, do not take it
upon themselves to form an alternative organization to the NRA. Perhaps such an organization could once again
primarily promote responsible gun ownership, gun sports, hunting, target
shooting competitions, training for new gun owners and maybe even launch a
rival effort to propose sensible gun violence prevention measures to ensure the
safety and well-being of all. What better time than Independence Day to embark
on such an adventure?
Why don’t the hunters and sportsmen, the skeet-shooters and
target-shooters step forward to say ENOUGH! Give us back what
the NRA has stolen – the artistry of a champion target shooter in the Olympics;
the artistry of the gun-stock maker; the artistry of the gun-lock maker; the
artistry of the collector who knows who made every gun, who designed them, even
who owned them or used them.
ENOUGH. Take back the controls – do not allow:
·
concealed carry anywhere at any time, or
·
self-defense out of fear/prejudice/hate, or
·
big ammunition clips, or
·
semi-automatic guns or assault rifles
to define you as a gun owner just because you are an NRA
member.
ENOUGH
– don’t let the those who want to protect themselves from phantom government
agents and imagined government takeover of your guns become your mentors. As we
do in so many other areas of our lives, let us treat licensing and registration
and owner titles as reasonable contributions to the welfare and the tranquility
of our nation.
ENOUGH
– don’t stay associated with the violence of guns; bring back the artistry. Put the emphasis of government back where it
belongs – on the pursuit of secure and prosperous life and happiness and
well-being for our fellow-citizens, not the odious killing by guns of 117,000
people per year!
ENOUGH
– above all, don’t allow the gun rights fanatics to turn you into one more
unwitting accomplice in the shooting massacres that continue to happen now on a
very regular basis. Assault weapons must
be banned from sale to citizens just as other lethal weapons are not allowed
for general sales. (Seen any neighbors with tanks, atomic bombs or ICBMs
lately?).
ENOUGH! – it’s time to
declare your INDEPENDENCE from the NRA!
