Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Martian · 04-22-2006, 04:53 PM

I'm seeing all this talk about the '30s, 1914, etc etc. But really, the world is not the same place now as it was then. Gun laws or no, a massacre like the one outlined above could not happen today; we live in a world of free and rapid information exchange and knowledge, as they say, is power.

Now, down to the meat of it. Bearing in mind that I am a Canadian and therefore have slightly differing views on gun laws and usage, I would envision it thusly:

Any individual who wishes to do so and does not fall under the list of exceptions may, after appropriate testing and training, own a semi-automatic handgun of any make or calibre. Upon completion of testing and training this individual shall be issued a license to own a gun that must be renewed every six years. This individual may carry said weapon anywhere that is not specifically prohbited. Places prohibited would include but are not limited to schools and hospitals. Other locations where it would be deemed that a gun may be an unreasonable hazard may also apply for limitation.

An individual may own a long gun or shotgun for hunting or sporting purposes, after appropriate testing and training that is seperate and distinct from that submitted on issue of a handgun. Said individual must also register and carry a license as a hunter, to be renewed every six years. Poaching or hunting without a license shall be a felony with a mandatory prison term of not less than three years and not more than five years.

No private citizen may own an automatic weapon for any purpose, under any circumstances. An inidividual found in possession of an automatic weapon of any size, make, or calibre, shall face a felony offense with a mandatory prison term of not less than ten years and not more than fifteen years.

Individuals who are barred from owning firearms include those who have been conviced of a violent crime for which a pardon has not been granted, those deemed mentally or physically incapable of safely owning and operating a firearm and any individual who fails the testing. Should an individual fail testing, a test may be re-issued at no less than two years from the date of the failure.

Every weapon shall be registered in a national database and will include papers certifying ownership. Registration will take place upon manufacture of the weapon and will include all pertinent information about the weapon, including appearance, calibre and a spent shell casing for ballistic testing purposes. The weapon will be subsequently tracked through it's service life and any individual wishing to purchase the weapon must register the change of ownership at the time of the sale. Owning an unregistered firearm of any size, make or calibre is a felony offense carrying a penalty of a fine of no less than $1000 and an optional prison term of no more than two years. Any individual wishing to make changes to the weapon must register these changes at the time of modification. Exceptions to this include modifications to the sighting mechanism, grip and changes of a cosmetic nature.

I don't know if that really encapsulates how I'm feeling all that well, so I'll put in the spirit of it. Hell, maybe someone can make it look more legal, should they be so inclined.

Basically, I understand the right to self-defense and would not infringe on that, nor would I infringe on those who use their guns for sport or hunting. However, I've always been a bit worried about escalation. You carry handguns, the crooks get handguns. You get shotguns, the crooks get rifles or automatic weapons. You get automatic weapons, the crooks get explosives. It's a cycle and I think it's best avoided. That's why the ban on automatic weapons.

Registration and licensing is inspired by automobiles. Both have the same destructive capacity, I reckon both should be licensed in a similar fashion.

And yeah, it may seem a bit constrictive to those of you who follow the constitution. But as quoted above, the constitution states that any individual, under any circumstances, has the right to keep and bear arms. given that nearly every post here outlines exceptions, I don't think many of you truly believe that's the right way to go about it; there are individuals who, should they have access to a firearm, will become a danger to themselves and/or those around them. I would not want those people to have weapons of any nature and certainly not one as dangerous as a gun.

And I do believe that anyone who's committed a violent crime of any nature should be barred from owning a weapon. They've proven they have the capacity, regardless of if the gun was used or not.

04-22-2006, 04:53 PM	#24 (permalink)
Martian Young Crumudgeon Location: Canada	I'm seeing all this talk about the '30s, 1914, etc etc. But really, the world is not the same place now as it was then. Gun laws or no, a massacre like the one outlined above could not happen today; we live in a world of free and rapid information exchange and knowledge, as they say, is power. Now, down to the meat of it. Bearing in mind that I am a Canadian and therefore have slightly differing views on gun laws and usage, I would envision it thusly: Any individual who wishes to do so and does not fall under the list of exceptions may, after appropriate testing and training, own a semi-automatic handgun of any make or calibre. Upon completion of testing and training this individual shall be issued a license to own a gun that must be renewed every six years. This individual may carry said weapon anywhere that is not specifically prohbited. Places prohibited would include but are not limited to schools and hospitals. Other locations where it would be deemed that a gun may be an unreasonable hazard may also apply for limitation. An individual may own a long gun or shotgun for hunting or sporting purposes, after appropriate testing and training that is seperate and distinct from that submitted on issue of a handgun. Said individual must also register and carry a license as a hunter, to be renewed every six years. Poaching or hunting without a license shall be a felony with a mandatory prison term of not less than three years and not more than five years. No private citizen may own an automatic weapon for any purpose, under any circumstances. An inidividual found in possession of an automatic weapon of any size, make, or calibre, shall face a felony offense with a mandatory prison term of not less than ten years and not more than fifteen years. Individuals who are barred from owning firearms include those who have been conviced of a violent crime for which a pardon has not been granted, those deemed mentally or physically incapable of safely owning and operating a firearm and any individual who fails the testing. Should an individual fail testing, a test may be re-issued at no less than two years from the date of the failure. Every weapon shall be registered in a national database and will include papers certifying ownership. Registration will take place upon manufacture of the weapon and will include all pertinent information about the weapon, including appearance, calibre and a spent shell casing for ballistic testing purposes. The weapon will be subsequently tracked through it's service life and any individual wishing to purchase the weapon must register the change of ownership at the time of the sale. Owning an unregistered firearm of any size, make or calibre is a felony offense carrying a penalty of a fine of no less than $1000 and an optional prison term of no more than two years. Any individual wishing to make changes to the weapon must register these changes at the time of modification. Exceptions to this include modifications to the sighting mechanism, grip and changes of a cosmetic nature. I don't know if that really encapsulates how I'm feeling all that well, so I'll put in the spirit of it. Hell, maybe someone can make it look more legal, should they be so inclined. Basically, I understand the right to self-defense and would not infringe on that, nor would I infringe on those who use their guns for sport or hunting. However, I've always been a bit worried about escalation. You carry handguns, the crooks get handguns. You get shotguns, the crooks get rifles or automatic weapons. You get automatic weapons, the crooks get explosives. It's a cycle and I think it's best avoided. That's why the ban on automatic weapons. Registration and licensing is inspired by automobiles. Both have the same destructive capacity, I reckon both should be licensed in a similar fashion. And yeah, it may seem a bit constrictive to those of you who follow the constitution. But as quoted above, the constitution states that any individual, under any circumstances, has the right to keep and bear arms. given that nearly every post here outlines exceptions, I don't think many of you truly believe that's the right way to go about it; there are individuals who, should they have access to a firearm, will become a danger to themselves and/or those around them. I would not want those people to have weapons of any nature and certainly not one as dangerous as a gun. And I do believe that anyone who's committed a violent crime of any nature should be barred from owning a weapon. They've proven they have the capacity, regardless of if the gun was used or not. __________________ I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said - Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame