0
BIGUN

Mass Shootings Proposal [ON TOPIC]

Recommended Posts

1. License the person (training, use, care, transfer, storage, transport).
2. Background Check (Criminal & Mental – defined as one who has a condition that makes them dangerous)
3. Waiting Period – 25 weekdays (if waiting period ends on a Friday – Monday pickup).
4. Training
a. 8 days - training, use, care, transfer, storage, transport.
b. 6 Days - CQB in a MOUT environment (automatic (2), revolver (1) shotgun (1), rifle @ the range (2). (*) = days.
5. Gun Show Loophole
a. All new weapons recorded/logged from cradle to grave (manufacturer to each new owner).
b. Existing weapons require
i. Individual sales to have a bill of sale.
ii. All weapons to be logged/recorded & kept with the owner – failure to produce equals minimum of three years.
6. Schools
a. Each school to have a minimum of one armed uniform police officer & one armed uniform security guard (onsite during school hours).
i. Each to carry an assault rifle, automatic pistol, taser, handcuffs, radio/cell).
ii. Both to train in CQB at their specific day w/ the local police department twice a year when class is not in session).
b. Teachers may carry if they choose and adhere to items 1-4
i. Teachers who carry receive $5,000-year special duty pay and must attend the twice a year training (6.a.ii)
c. Random & sporadic locker inspections.
i. Parents & students must sign an acknowledgement to allow.
ii. All students must carry their learning materials in the open (no book bags).

NOTES:
1. Items 1- 5: Cost of gun ownership.
2. Item 6: Both Left & Right have to cut their respective budgets equally at 50% of cost to protect schools. (i.e., Right – military budget. Left – social programs).

Special Notes:
1. Thanks to those that sent me information in a PM (both sides).
2. Everyone has to be receptive to giving up something.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this thread open to further constructive input? If so....
2. background check. Agree 100%-be aware if a LEO takes a person for 5150-a psych hold it is in the searchable records. However if a Dr. does it you'll never see it as it's buried under medical records confidentiality under HIPAA. So it opens a legit question-how do we get HIPAA overhauled to open psych medical records? Otherwise a real update to background checks is a moot point....

Also as a constructive response to any negativity about teachers carrying- no one has mentioned that after 911 a program of training was instituted for pilots that wish to carry in the cockpit-and many now do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Is this thread open to further constructive input?



Absolutely. And, as you have done by staying on topic to enhance the proposal. Thanks. Your points are appreciated and the above is not to say it's the final proposal. Just the framework based on the constructive information received.

With input received here and in PMs' we can further enhance the proposal which I intend to send to my representatives (and hopefully others will too).


EDIT: I encourage those who wish to add - to make a suggestion as to where they might put their suggestion. For example, I would put yours in a line item under background checks. For example - and to your point.. I'm having some difficulty with that exact issue. In some states, the background check upholds HIPPA by asking whether one has been involuntarily committed to a mental health institution; whereas in other states, they ask if you've been in any type of mental health counseling in the past three years. If "Yes," then they send a simple form to that mental health professional asking if they would consider that person safe enough to be considered for a CCP. If they get a "No" it's a rejection without further information. If they get a "Yes" then the CCP is granted. My concern with that is - the mental helath professsioanls who would be afraid of making a judgement call for fear of it coming back to haunt them.

I think this would need to flushed out with some suggestions in the Background Check section.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

1. License the person (training, use, care, transfer, storage, transport).
2. Background Check (Criminal & Mental – defined as one who has a condition that makes them dangerous)
3. Waiting Period – 25 weekdays (if waiting period ends on a Friday – Monday pickup).
4. Training
a. 8 days - training, use, care, transfer, storage, transport.
b. 6 Days - CQB in a MOUT environment (automatic (2), revolver (1) shotgun (1), rifle @ the range (2). (*) = days.
5. Gun Show Loophole
a. All new weapons recorded/logged from cradle to grave (manufacturer to each new owner).
b. Existing weapons require
i. Individual sales to have a bill of sale.
ii. All weapons to be logged/recorded & kept with the owner – failure to produce equals minimum of three years.
6. Schools
a. Each school to have a minimum of one armed uniform police officer & one armed uniform security guard (onsite during school hours).
i. Each to carry an assault rifle, automatic pistol, taser, handcuffs, radio/cell).
ii. Both to train in CQB at their specific day w/ the local police department twice a year when class is not in session).
b. Teachers may carry if they choose and adhere to items 1-4
i. Teachers who carry receive $5,000-year special duty pay and must attend the twice a year training (6.a.ii)
c. Random & sporadic locker inspections.
i. Parents & students must sign an acknowledgement to allow.
ii. All students must carry their learning materials in the open (no book bags).

NOTES:
1. Items 1- 5: Cost of gun ownership.
2. Item 6: Both Left & Right have to cut their respective budgets equally at 50% of cost to protect schools. (i.e., Right – military budget. Left – social programs).

Special Notes:
1. Thanks to those that sent me information in a PM (both sides).
2. Everyone has to be receptive to giving up something.



1-4 are reasonable, except the overly vague definition of "mental" (which, as is, could easily and reasonably be interpreted as having the desire to carry a gun). 5b needs work:
I'd suggest that all firearms, current or future, are registered, and such registration is requisite to any claim of ownership.
All sales go through licensed dealer; no individual sales, which would be a felony for both parties.
Any unlicensed firearms are treated by authorities as unowned, are confiscated, and subsequently destroyed.

I'd add a point that if a gun is easier to steal from the owner's home than it is to remove a big-screen television, then that gun is not sufficiently secure, and, if stolen, the owner shares responsibility for any unlawful use, with any claim of sufficient security requiring an affirmative defense.

Suggestions 6a and b are no better than the status quo. Any need for guns in school is a huge problem. Kids have a right to learn in gun free spaces. Bringing in more guns on purpose makes the situation worse, not better.

6c risks unconstitutionality, and neither students nor teachers could be required to sign any authorization in public schools.

School related suggestions imply that America's gun problem is a school problem. It's not, and school-centric solutions offer little potential benefit to underlying problems.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

1-4 are reasonable, except the overly vague definition of "mental" (which, as is, could easily and reasonably be interpreted as having the desire to carry a gun). 5b needs work:




I agree. I was addressing that and typing an edit concurrent to your posting and am looking for suggestions in that area.


Quote

I'd suggest that all firearms, current or future, are registered, and such registration is requisite to any claim of ownership.
All sales go through licensed dealer; no individual sales, which would be a felony for both parties.
Any unlicensed firearms are treated by authorities as unowned, are confiscated, and subsequently destroyed.



Personally (as a former FFL Dealer) have no problem with it - its what I had to do anyway. I had proposed it in this manner as an incremental step wherein people get used to logging and recording and perhpas down the road - registering doesn't seem such a big step.
Quote


I'd add a point that if a gun is easier to steal from the owner's home than it is to remove a big-screen television, then that gun is not sufficiently secure, and, if stolen, the owner shares responsibility for any unlawful use, with any claim of sufficient security requiring an affirmative defense.



I was asked the same question in a PM. My response was that I'm not sure I'm comfortable with mandating specific storage requirements for every household as much as educating people of the various types of storage with family-type recommendations. In the end, if you're responsible for the cradle to grave ownership - you're also responsible for ensuring positive control.

Quote

Suggestions 6a and b are no better than the status quo. Any need for guns in school is a huge problem. Kids have a right to learn in gun free spaces. Bringing in more guns on purpose makes the situation worse, not better.

6c risks unconstitutionality, and neither students nor teachers could be required to sign any authorization in public schools.

School related suggestions imply that America's gun problem is a school problem. It's not, and school-centric solutions offer little potential benefit to underlying problems.



We have different opinions about this subject, so I would like to remain on topic regarding the proposal. Thanks for the input.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All of the posts above have solid remedy's to deal with both school shootings and gun violence. With one exception.

"2. Background Check (Criminal & Mental – defined as one who has a condition that makes them dangerous) ."

A mechanism to deal with the removal of guns from someone deemed to be dangerous, or convicted of a felony. Specificity of what construes a dangerous mental condition. Because placement on a national cannot aquire database represents a serious removal of constitutional rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just responding to your comments on school security.

After 911 airports changed. The idea is to make a soft target a hard target. It could include many things. Closed campus. Entry and exit thru limited number monitored gates-consider metal detectors too. Again consider how airport security measures have changed-which does include more armed presence.....

And OK can agree it's not a school problem-can we try it's any soft target with numerous targets problem.
Please excuse the sidetrack but feel the above could use a real life example,
Example-the San Bernardino terrorist attack-first they hit their workplace Christmas party, next up if they would not have been stopped would have been a school (they had pics of entrance/exits of the school on his phone) and I can only imagine Christmas shoppers at Ontario Mills mall was on their list too. (Some countries actually already have security and metal detectors to enter their shopping malls!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the first section is good. I’m fine with private sales, with paperwork. Rushmc once mentioned a system used in Iowa where people get an annual (I think) license to buy and sell as an individual, and private individuals have to produce them. But parents are GOING to pass guns on to their kids. I like the training.

The armed officers in schools I’m not as comfortable with simply because of cost, if every school has to have them. I can understand the thought process behind licensed teachers carrying, but given that Pakistan (which has a worse problem with school terrorism) gave up on that, maybe not. Paying more attention to security during school design, great. Having all bags be see-through, great. Some kids aren’t physically capable of carrying that many books without a bag. Or maybe just have more between-class time to go to lockers.

I do think that, outside of some sort of exigent circumstances, if you have a gun stolen successfully from your home without the use of a forklift to remove the bolted-down safe (you get the idea), then you forfeit the right to keep guns in your home for a period.

Proposals like these will end up meaning more business for gun ranges, because for the target-shooting crowd, theyd be able to provide safe storage. For the home defense crowd, not so much. I don’t have anything to help with that.

Keith, thanks for coming up with such a thorough list.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of curiosity, which of these would have prevented any of the recent mass shootings?

Would the background check that was part of the "License the Person" be adequate for purchase? Or would it need to be done a second time.
In some states, having a carry permit satisfies the 'background check' for purchase and a second one isn't required.

Also, the idea of "Mental background check" has lots of issues.
Involuntary commitment to a mental institution (called a "72 hour hold" here in WI) only takes a cop and a doctor to agree to it. Denying a right based on that level of "conviction" (or lack of it) is problematic.

It's really easy to say 'dangerous mental condition', but defining it and quantifying it (how dangerous is "too dangerous"?) is a lot more difficult.

School locker searches OTOH are not a problem. There have been a few court rulings that the locker is the property of the school, and searches (with or without probable cause) are fine.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Paying more attention to security during school design, great.



Noted.

Quote

Having all bags be see-through, great. Some kids aren’t physically capable of carrying that many books without a bag.



I get it.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Would the background check that was part of the "License the Person" be adequate for purchase? Or would it need to be done a second time.
In some states, having a carry permit satisfies the 'background check' for purchase and a second one isn't required.


THIS ->having a carry permit satisfies the 'background check' for purchase and a second one isn't required.

Quote

Also, the idea of "Mental background check" has lots of issues.
Involuntary commitment to a mental institution (called a "72 hour hold" here in WI) only takes a cop and a doctor to agree to it. Denying a right based on that level of "conviction" (or lack of it) is problematic.

It's really easy to say 'dangerous mental condition', but defining it and quantifying it (how dangerous is "too dangerous"?) is a lot more difficult.



I understand. I'm more a proponent of; Last three years, mental institution thing. In my State - even vets with PTSD who are in counseling currently don;t quaify - therefore, vets aren't getting the counseling which is a big shame, but goes to show the depths of our gun culture. I think we would have to defer this to a legal AND mental health professional. But again, its a framework for submission.

Quote

School locker searches OTOH are not a problem. There have been a few court rulings that the locker is the property of the school, and searches (with or without probable cause) are fine.



I agree.

Lockers: Although there is an expectation of privacy, it is low, and courts have generally upheld locker searches.

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/research/search-and-seizure-due-process-and-public-schools

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with mandating specific storage requirements for every household as much as educating people of the various types of storage with family-type recommendations. In the end, if you're responsible for the cradle to grave ownership - you're also responsible for ensuring positive control.



Responsible gun ownership indeed implies responsible gun storage. If someone isn't ready to meet minimum security requirements, they aren't ready for gun ownership. It was with good reason that the best locks in the entire barracks building were always on the arms rooms, at least when I was in.

BIGUN

Quote

Kids have a right to learn in gun free spaces.

We have different opinions about this subject, so I would like to remain on topic regarding the proposal.



It is on topic as a reason that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards".
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It is on topic as a reason that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards".



And, yet you had to perform armed guard duty for physical assets while in the military. But, sound as though you're opposed to protecting human assets the same way. I believe kids have aright to a safe learning environment and am relying on my frame of reference in my state where we have armed police at each school. I understand that we don't agree on this point and its doubtful either of us will change the other's mind. You may or have - NOT agree on the poll.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

Quote

It is on topic as a reason that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards".



And, yet you had to perform armed guard duty for physical assets while in the military.



The civilian world should not much resemble the military world.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, that's not to say that what is - on topic - would be a constructive alternative suggestion for consideration. Simply saying, No, that won't work. (that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards.") yet not presenting a suggestion will only wind up in another SC circular discussion and drift off topic.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jcd11235

***

Quote

It is on topic as a reason that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards".



And, yet you had to perform armed guard duty for physical assets while in the military.



The civilian world should not much resemble the military world.

Feel free to present an alternate suggestion other than "armed" for inclusion in the proposal.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

But, that's not to say that what is - on topic - would be a constructive alternative suggestion for consideration. Simply saying, No, that won't work. (that we need to find a more effective and less superficial solution than "armed guards.") yet not presenting a suggestion will only wind up in another SC circular discussion and drift off topic.



That's an interesting debate tactic you keep using. Pointing out that a bad idea is a bad idea does not carry with it any obligation to offer a different idea. You ignore the most obvious solutions, anyway.

Armed guards are a reactionary response; we need prevention. If a student attempts to harm other students, but is killed by an armed guard prior to harming any additional students, it's still a failure. We have to figure out how to prevent desire to harm their fellow students, not just react to it.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is just a hypothetical as being a UK gun owner I already have to comply with a vast proportion of that list. As part of 5a, would it be worth asking the manufacturer to submit two fired rounds and cases for a forensic database with mandatory resubmission after changing the barrel and/or working parts (breech block, extractor claw etc.)
Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rifleman

This is just a hypothetical as being a UK gun owner I already have to comply with a vast proportion of that list. As part of 5a, would it be worth asking the manufacturer to submit two fired rounds and cases for a forensic database with mandatory resubmission after changing the barrel and/or working parts (breech block, extractor claw etc.)



That happened in Maryland.

Millions of dollars spent.

Zero crimes solved.

None.

And how would that affect 'mass shootings'?

I asked that before. How would any of these proposals have thwarted any of the recent shootings?

Possibly, Roof in Charleston, had the background check been done properly. But all of the others involved guns that were legally purchased, with a background check.
I don't think that even the "mental health" background check would have prevented any of the shooters from passing the checks (could be wrong on that, I didn't research it). They were all "ordinary people" to the legal system.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rifleman

This is just a hypothetical as being a UK gun owner I already have to comply with a vast proportion of that list. As part of 5a, would it be worth asking the manufacturer to submit two fired rounds and cases for a forensic database with mandatory resubmission after changing the barrel and/or working parts (breech block, extractor claw etc.)



Not a bad point. I didn't even have to do that as a dealer. Thank you.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it may be Apples and oranges, Joe.

Not every new gun sold (cause those "fingerprints" are already at the factory - except in digital format).
I "believe" the suggestion was: If *after* the sale AND there's a change to the weapon that has an effect on that digital fingerprint - send the information in.
Am I reading that right?
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on special note 2 I don't think I'm violating the on topic tag.

Would people be ok with needing license to vote if I submit to needing a license to own a firearm?

Note: I already have a CCW permit so have submitted to licensing, but know people who will not get a CCW permit as they don't want their name on a "list".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

I think it may be Apples and oranges, Joe.

Not every new gun sold (cause those "fingerprints" are already at the factory - except in digital format).
I "believe" the suggestion was: If *after* the sale AND there's a change to the weapon that has an effect on that digital fingerprint - send the information in.
Am I reading that right?



Yes - if you make an alteration to the weapon after purchase that affects the forensic characteristics of a fired round then you have to resubmit.
Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BIGUN

I think it may be Apples and oranges, Joe.

Not every new gun sold (cause those "fingerprints" are already at the factory - except in digital format).
I "believe" the suggestion was: If *after* the sale AND there's a change to the weapon that has an effect on that digital fingerprint - send the information in.
Am I reading that right?



There is no quantifiable way to identify a barrel rifling, firing pin indentation or chamber/extraction markings on fired brass. Forensic matches are done by skilled examiners comparing two samples next to each other.

In addition a firearm can have its barrel, extractor and firing pin exchanged. Voila, new weapon. Alternatively a dremel emery flap wheel could polish and change each of those features in a minute or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That's an interesting debate tactic you keep using. Pointing out that a bad idea is a bad idea does not carry with it any obligation to offer a different idea. You ignore the most obvious solutions, anyway.



OK What are they? You keep implying that you have solutions to offer and then don't.

Quote

Armed guards are a reactionary response; we need prevention. If a student attempts to harm other students, but is killed by an armed guard prior to harming any additional students, it's still a failure. We have to figure out how to prevent desire to harm their fellow students, not just react to it



OK What are they? You keep implying that you have solutions to offer and then don't.

Quote

That's an interesting debate tactic you keep using. Pointing out that a bad idea is a bad idea does not carry with it any obligation to offer a different idea.



I have been encouraging m/any idea to incorporate in the proposal and have asked you to provide them - more than once. Please share what your solutions opposite an armed presence would be. Please. I told you I'm up for any suggestions. I put what I had in post 1 and you don't share any new thoughts. What are these obvious solutions you keep referring to. List them out. Put fingers to keyboard and type a list. That's all I'm asking to stay -on topic- in this thread.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0