This is what the gun control law should be in the US.

This would be an excellent step forward.

 

We already have requirements for ownership of guns, we also have registration in parts of the US and license requirements. So all of that is constitutional

 

What would all of the above ultimately accomplish, not simply in theory but in actual practice, that would deem it both a worthwhile approach and a success? Fewer firearms illegally acquired by prohibited individuals? Fewer firearm-related suicides? Fewer incidents of firearm-related negligence by those who cannot be bothered to exercise critical thinking skills?

 

We could start saving a lot of lives

 

It would make sure that everyone who wants a gun is going to actually be responsible since why would anyone go though all this trouble just to break the law and get it revoked. Just like drivers licenses, people who get them are far less likely to do something intentionally stupid because of how long it took to get.

Yep. After the implimentation, anyone with out a fire arms license would be required to hand in all guns or face a stiff punishment maybe 5-10 years, most would turn them in regardless of legality, the few that didn't would soon relies how much harder life is when now just being seen with the gun can get them jailed or killed by the cops when its obvious that you do not have a legal fire arm.

Yep, with the requirement of not being a threat to yourself and from having to get family to sign on. it makes it much less likely that someone suicidal would have a gun, and if they did their license could be revoked.

Yep, people that can't pass the test or shoot for **** would never even get the chance to shoot.

Again just look at Canada

 

Who pays for it, the applicant or the government?

And that only disarms the law abiding.

Never happing and whose license will be revoked?

And what would be the number of rounds fired, at what distances and again, who pays for the training?[/QUOTE]

 

Really!

How would law enforcement know a firearm in the hands is "properly registered?"

If a LEO see's a person with a firearm and that person is not known to the LEO, at that point registering is not considered factor.

The LEO will go SOP as trained and the person with the firearm will either cooperate with the LEO's orders, or maybe get shot.

 

The law would give LEOs immunity in all cases where the gun was illegal. Even if after finding out it's not legal the person is in cuffs and they execute them.

 

How about answering my previous question before modifying your proposed legislation any further.

 

Lets take this literally, you are proposing if someone didn't follow your proposed legislation their are fair game to be executed?

 

Individual just like driving school

They have it on hand like drivers license.

The rest will be caught

The person who had their approvals revoked

Person pays just like drivers and it's target shooting

 

Yes because they probably were going to kill someone if they didn't register.

 

How though? How would such actually be accomplished in practical terms?

Just like drivers licenses, people who get them are far less likely to do something intentionally stupid because of how long it took to get.[/QUOTE]

The number of individuals arrested for traffic violations, or for simply operating a motor vehicle while under the influence, would suggest the requirement to acquire a license does not actually do anything to decrease the rate at which those on the road engage in stupid and reckless behavior.

Presently in the united states, anyone who has been convicted of a felony offense cannot legally purchase a firearm under any circumstances. Nor can they legally possess a firearm under any circumstances. Any possession can be punished by an automatic sentence of five years in prison. A prosecutor need not even prove physical possession occurred, in many cases attempted possession is sufficient enough to warrant a prison sentence.

Yet despite this being the case on a national level, prohibited individuals with disqualifying records still routinely acquire and possess firearms, and have no concern for the consequences of their actions. Thus suggesting the proposal would do nothing to address the illegal acquisition of firearms by those who should not have them.

Psychology and psychiatry are not hard sciences, they are largely guesswork and speculation. Too often individuals who have displayed clear warning signs of being a danger to themselves and others have been passed on by to the so-called "experts" and considered to pose no threat to anyone. The problem has become so widespread the so-called "experts" have coined the notion of "spontaneous suicide" to excuse their inability to detect troubled individuals, claiming that such simply comes out of nowhere and can affect anyone without warning.

How will such prevent someone from engaging in reckless behavior after they have already acquired a firearm? How has such an approach done anything to prevent traffic-related incidents when applied to the operation of motor vehicles on public right of ways?

The same nation of Canada that concluded there was no legitimate purpose in keeping a registry of rifles and shotguns, and deleted all of the data due to just how useless and error-ridden the registry was? Along with the fact that it was not contingent in solving even a single firearm-related offense?

 

So you are advocating a single mother living in poverty, just getting by, needs to come up with a few hundred dollars on top of the cost of a firearm for training and licensing, just to protect herself and her children from her very violent ex boyfriend?

And she delayed in protecting herself while taking the training and pass through other process's before being able to protect herself or her children from being injured or killed?[/quote]

How very compassionate on your part.

A LEO would not know that for sure if the person did or not did have a license, systems are full of errors which circles around to my comment, you are advocating the legal execution of anyone who has a firearm in their hands.

A LEO responding to a call, in most cases, has no other than information than that provided by the complainant to the 911 call taker, if the dispatch address has no "officer safety" hits in VIPER, there is no way the responding officer(s) would not have any clue as to any legally or not legally armed individual's who are present at the location of the dispatch.

A LEO assumes everyone is armed and dangerous and does not back down until that is resolved.

But you are advocating the responding LEO's should have the power to become the Judge, The Jury and The Executioner!

Very sick!

 

Such would never be an acceptable standard in the united states. Therefore there is nothing left to discuss beyond the above being presented on the part of yourself.

 

Nikolas Cruz, the shooter in Parkland, had been checked into Henderson Behavioral Health and was released a short time later.

After that, as history points out, he went to MSD and became a mass school shooter.

 

Then there is the individual David Katz, who managed to legally purchase multiple firearms in the state of Massachusetts, despite being subject to involuntary commitment to a mental health facility. Not simply once, but six times in a period of ninety seven days.

 

If it's not that strict people won't fear the law.

They must be detered by fear of life not want of good.

Police already get away with murder for less. "I thought he had a gun"

 

I thank you for that information.

 

And they go to prison for it too.

 

Then why are not all crimes punishable by death when laws are not complied with?

Some indeed do, but others do not. However such is hardly a reasonable argument to be making in support of such an approach to law and order.

 

This law prevents death. Laws not stopping death need not be so strict

 

" SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED " Try moving to canada if you love their rules. This is America son , we got rules.

 

There is really no reason to continue to even have conversations with someone who wants to overturn the Constitution and allow police to execute law abiding citizens. Have you found the missing "t" yet?

 

No, totally incorrect, what you are proposing will actually make murder by some legal.