Posted: 12/3/2013 8:05:41 PM EDT
|
I posted this over in the NRA Activism forum and there's nothing there but crickets chirping....
I've been thinking about this for a while, and would appreciate comments and poking any holes in it you find. How about every state ID and DL be required to have an enforcement for "legal to buy /possess a firearm". Removing this power from the fed and putting it in states' hands. If you are invalidated for whatever legal reason, your ID is seized and reissued without the endorsement. That would end the need for ANY background check, and end any possibility of a gun registry. FFL and private seller alike would simply need to check your ID. The only hole I see in that is "oh I lost my ID" when it's being seized, and continuing to use it until expiration. But even if every state required 5 year renewal of ID's, that would still be more accurate than the current NICS system. I haven't vetted this idea out obviously. Thoughts? Besides the confiscation / registration folks, would this fill everyone's requirement? Does it infringe too heavily on other privacies / rights? |
|
If you are talking about walk in, show DL, pay and walk out, I'm game.
BUT ONLY IF, the endorsement was automatically put on EVERY DL of qualified individuals so there woukd be no, hey this guy wants to be able to buy a gun form. A few issues I see. Do we really want the DOR to be any way involved with firearm issues ever again? The wouldn't stop someone from purchase that just had an order of protection levied against them. Interesting idea though. Personally, and I probably would be in the minority; if you aren't in prison, on parole or probation, or have a history of violence, you should be able to buy a gun. No matter what you have done in the past other than the violence issue. But if you use a gun in a crime, you NEVER get out. |
I think we should drop it altogether, but that wasn't your question.  I'm generally good with taking things away from the Federal government, but this idea wouldn't really accomplish that. It's still a federal law, so even if the handling was taken over by the states it would still be the fed telling the states what they have to do in order to receive the funds. Just more bureaucracy. |
|
Quoted:
If you are talking about walk in, show DL, pay and walk out, I'm game. BUT ONLY IF, the endorsement was automatically put on EVERY DL of qualified individuals so there woukd be no, hey this guy wants to be able to buy a gun form. A few issues I see. Do we really want the DOR to be any way involved with firearm issues ever again? The wouldn't stop someone from purchase that just had an order of protection levied against them. Interesting idea though. Personally, and I probably would be in the minority; if you aren't in prison, on parole or probation, or have a history of violence, you should be able to buy a gun. No matter what you have done in the past other than the violence issue. But if you use a gun in a crime, you NEVER get out. %100 agree... If you are incompetent mentally / physically, one would hope your caregivers would keep you away from guns the same as they would keep you away from pointy objects. |
|
How about make it NOT a gun thing then. I hate to call it a Civilian Status, but that's really what it is. An enforcement that shows your of good legal / mental status. Surely this applies to something else besides 2A items? Have to come up with a nice generic name for it, that can be USED for verifying legal ability to purchase a gun.
I don't agree with this restriction either, but it's current law, and if they are wanting to enforce current law, then enforce it on EVERYONE with as little impact on everyone as possible. Maybe this could be a step to eventually doing without the system all together. I was going to ask if you could get a restraining order without being charged with a crime, but then realized that's probably the case, in which one shouldn't have their 2A suspended without a crime being committed. But if that is infarct the law, they would have to work in a way to retrieve your license and revoke your enforcement. I had assumed the issuing body would use NICS before adding the enforcement. I haven't found SINGLE gun law that I agree with or that has had any impact on crime with guns. Even the 1932 NFA had little to do with combating gang crime. There many murders done with now NFA items then but what worked was taking down the criminals, not stripping the country of hardware store Thompson machine guns. This would be a new federal law, but I would intend it to replace the current laws requiring form NICS 4427 for every transfer, and preventing PP sales in other states, and using US mail to ship all firearms. Might be 1 step back but hopefully 2 steps forward. |
|
Anyone that goes seriously suggesting state IDs in place of nics checks will soon find themselves trying to fight that ID when they realize any state that would allow it would only add it to the federal check (ala Illinois FOID).
If you have any questions about that, just look up how that's going for nfa trusts after our friends in the nfatca attempted to trade adding photos and prints for removal of the Cleo signature in that process. 'Great idea for adding the prints and photos said the man (but we will keep the Cleo sig).' |
|
I'm not in jail and I'm breathing, that's all the right I need to own or purchase a firearm, any of these other sidesteps is just more bs to cloud the path.
I'm not saying its an awful idea, but we're so far gone from the intentions of the 2nd Amendment that I have no interest(as far as my voting power is concerned) in supporting an idea like that. Enough legal barriers as is with laws, permits, etc. |
|
Quoted: How about make it NOT a gun thing then. I hate to call it a Civilian Status, but that's really what it is. An enforcement that shows your of good legal / mental status. Surely this applies to something else besides 2A items? Have to come up with a nice generic name for it, that can be USED for verifying legal ability to purchase a gun. You're really saying that your way around gun registration, is to register people, and they can just show their papers to prove they're worthy of operating in society.  |
|
Quoted:
You're really saying that your way around gun registration, is to register people, and they can just show their papers to prove they're worthy of operating in society.
Quoted:
Quoted:
How about make it NOT a gun thing then. I hate to call it a Civilian Status, but that's really what it is. An enforcement that shows your of good legal / mental status. Surely this applies to something else besides 2A items? Have to come up with a nice generic name for it, that can be USED for verifying legal ability to purchase a gun. You're really saying that your way around gun registration, is to register people, and they can just show their papers to prove they're worthy of operating in society.
+1 Been actually thinking about exactly that all evening since I wrote that before leaving work. It's an idea with a horrible side-effect. Anyone think of any options to fix these issues pointed out above? |
|
I can see problems with civil liberties. The same problems currently being batted around over voter ID laws. Not everyone has a DL or non-DL and it is not required (I know a person has to show proof of ID when buying a gun from a licensed dealer). So, what do you do with people who do not want a DL or non-DL? Force them to get it anyway. What about private transactions?
This country did just fine without the Brady law for over 200 years. I say let's turn back the clocks. 
|
|
Quoted:
But would this actually do anything as far as making people safer? No. Yes, it would, by removing a barrier to ownership by people that don't want to deal with FFL's and 4473's or face to face private sales. More guns in the hands of free people makes them all safer. One of the costs to freedom of low lifes is their killing; one of the cheaper expenses for society. |
|
Quoted:
I can see problems with civil liberties. The same problems currently being batted around over voter ID laws. Not everyone has a DL or non-DL and it is not required (I know a person has to show proof of ID when buying a gun from a licensed dealer). So, what do you do with people who do not want a DL or non-DL? Force them to get it anyway. What about private transactions? This country did just fine without the Brady law for over 200 years. I say let's turn back the clocks. I've actually run into some guys that have never had a DL (but still drive, hehe) or state ID. Only way to pull that off is to be completely off grid. There is not much you can do in this current age without an ID. I agree. Every anti-gun law since 1932 has served no major benefit to society. And the debatable minor benefits are far out-weighed by the infringement of our rights. I would repeal or at least amend each and every one. |