An essay on reasonable gun control

[PavePusher]

Again, I ask that we debate the content, not the source.

http://www.officer.com/web/online/On-the-Street/Op-Ed--Reasonable-Gun-Control/21$49245

Personally, I think this is mostly pretty reasonable, although I believe if that much training is to be required for a Federal Carry licence, it should be paid for by the Government, and we should then require similar restrictions on the rest of the Bill of Rights.

:hide:

[GreenStormCloud]

1. Good Article, Good Reccomendations.

Here are the reccomendations:

•Weapons with legitimate self-defense use should be allowed, including so-called assault rifles.
•Weapons that have no legitimate self-defense application should continue to be restricted.
•Weapons in the gray middle area can be decided on a fact- or outcome-basis. If they prove to be a menace they can be restricted; if they do not, there's no need to restrict them further nor to ban them.
•Enforce the myriad of unenforced legitimate laws already on the books. The NRA pushed the Clinton administration hard to do this; the Clintons resisted hard for years, but were finally forced to give in and fund Operation Exile, with a significant reduction in gun violence as a result.
•All gun laws (state, local and federal) ought to be reviewed and abolished if they can't be shown to have their desired outcome, to wit: a depressing effect on violent crime. (This kind of zero-based review of all laws would be wise, but such a proposal is beyond the scope of this article.)
•While right-to-carry licenses should probably, for practical reasons if nothing else, remain under the state's purview, how about a federal License To Carry if the applicant meets the normal criteria - no felony convictions, etc., and passes the same 40 or 80 hour firearms training program that federal agents have to pass in order for them to carry nationwide? The FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) firearms program - both the classroom and range parts) - could be made available to certified instructors in the private sector who would certify citizens.

Sounds like a real good list to me.

I like the idea of opening the FLETC up to civilians to get a Federal Carry Permit.

I would add that a way should be found to open the NICS for private purchases.

Allow silencers. They don't work the way Hollywood says they do.

[Old Codger]

3. All good

And can be done in a very practical way.... the federal license is a good idea with proper training as stated... Silencers were originally invented for the purpose of protecting shooters hearing, there a very few if any records of crimes committed that involved silenced weapons, silencer impede the use of a weapon, they make it too long usually, they impact the accuracy and they do not make them really that silent...

[taurus145]

6. I can hear the wailing now

FLTC will meet strong opposition from IL, WI, CA, NJ, and the other 8 states, along with D.C., Guam, and PR that either outright ban concealed carry or severely limit CC permits.

I like Vermont, New Hampshire, and Alaska concerning CCW. NH did get smart in one respect. It instituted a low cost permit for the convenience of its residents who wish to CC in other states with reciprocity laws. When they had no permit to CC, reciprocity of CCW was not possible because states honoring reciprocity have language in their CCW laws that required said permits for reciprocity to be honored.

[taurus145]

7. Wahhhhhhhhh

He didn't mention my favorite primary uses of firearms; recreational shooting and hunting.

I'm going to go have an "I was excluded" tantrum now.

[eqfan592]

8. Don't expect such strong opposition from WI at least.

The majority of people here support CCW. It used to be a small majority, but I think it's grown over the last few years with the lack of "blood flowing in the streets" in other CCW strongholds.

We very nearly had it here twice, but the Gov. vetoed it both times. We came 1 and then 2 votes shy of overturning that veto. So I actually think Wisconsin would more support than not support such a measure.

Sadly, none of the candidates that I've reviewed for gov. next year and aren't bat-shit crazy right wingers are interested in CCW. Not even Mayor Tom Barrett, who was beat with a pipe earlier this year while trying to help a woman who was being assaulted. I applaud him for his actions, but talk about carrying an ignorant view point to a truly self-destructive level.

[taurus145]

9. You're close

I hope the lawmakers there wake up soon and allow you the full exercise of your rights.

[eqfan592]

11. Thanks. :)

The sad thing is that if a Dem. candidate were to come out in support of CCW, they'd likely win with little difficulty. The simple fact is that they have a lot more support to gain from being in favor of it than they have to lose.

[spin]

2. K&R excellent article. (n/t)

[Endangered Specie]

4. Interesting read, especially when you consider how many NFA weapons...

would easily qualify as "reasonable for self defense". Short barreled shotguns and rifles (especially in pistol caliber) would make great home defense weapons.

I had always thought a good 'test' as to what was reasonable to own vs what wasn't basically comes down to if the weapon is crew serviced or not (hence, no longer an INDIVIDUAL weapon). This permits the usual small arms, including alot of NFA items, whilst excluding artillery, cannons, rockets, bombs, missles, and crew serviced machine guns.

[virginia mountainman]

10. A submachine gun would make a fine home defense weapon...

After a good 12ga shotgun..

See this ad, for the Thompson Sub Machinegun...PERFECT for ranches, estates and other property...

[rrneck]

5. A good piece.

I agree that more extensive training should be subsidized since those who are in the most danger of assault are usually econommically disadvantaged.

I am assuming that training would also include conflict resolution if it doesn't already.

[rd_kent]

12. Great Post. I find it telling that the anti's have nothing to say.........

[spin]

13. They won't touch the OP with a ten foot pole. (n/t)

[PavePusher]

14. But, but, but.....

Police WANT gun control for their safety!!! All their Chiefs say so...!

Or something to that effect. I can hear the hand-wringing.

[ManiacJoe]

15. This is what the politically elected chiefs usually say.

What the patrolmen usually say is a very different story.

[PavePusher]

16. Oh, I know...

I should have used the sarcasm tag. Sorry.