Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Fine, but then lets lift the ban on manufacturing full-auto firearms for civilians. I'd fill out the paperwork if it didn't cost $10000 to get a decent one.
The benefit (or problem depending on your point of view) with elevating handguns and semi-autos to the NFA, is that it would make having a semi-automatic rifle just as 'bad' as a full-auto or a suppressor or short-barreled rifle or whatever else. Which is fine because it reduces the strange inequalities between a rifle and an SBR... evens the playing field. But it also means it would become a serious chore to get such a rifle... it could take months for the paperwork to go through, and that's after they hired many many more people to process NFA paperwork that would be flooding the ATF.
I can see how maybe putting in that natural 'wait time' might be a benefit to some: it certainly does make it so that a person who is angry or unstable can get a gun and turn around to use it within days or weeks: well within the attention span of someone driven by emotion. But after 5 months, you probably aren't so upset.
But that does also put a huge burden on FFLs who would then be left holding dozens and dozens of rifles in limbo, waiting for the buyer to be cleared but having to hold onto the specific item the buyer registered until the paperwork goes through. The FFL would have to increase locked storage space, would have to probably start charging a storage fee for weapons in limbo, and may put a quota on their monthly NFA sales.
That doesn't bother gun control types... but that won't make for a good environment for the rest.
Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Someone wants to buy a $200 .22 pistol or semiautomatic .22 rifle and has to pay a $200 tax and wait 4 months to get it. Do you think that is reasonable?
Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Someone wants to buy a $200 .22 pistol or semiautomatic .22 rifle and has to pay a $200 tax and wait 4 months to get it. Do you think that is reasonable?
Maybe?
I'm fairly indifferent to the plight of gun hobbyists. They have less to put up with than crypto hobbyists did in the past. I leave the burden of proof on them to justify nonregulation.
I'm fairly indifferent to the plight of gun hobbyists. They have less to put up with than crypto hobbyists did in the past. I leave the burden of proof on them to justify nonregulation.
I'd like somewhat of an explanation regarding that statement, if you could? I'm clearly a little out of touch with the plight of crypto-hobbists in the US, at least, in the portion of past you're speaking of.
Preferably just the facts, rather than a "Well, they had to put up with X, but gun hobbists only have to put up with Y!" kinda dealie, since I'm already familiar with the latter.
Though, of course, the burden of proof is on you to prove that the majority of firearm owners or hobbists are against any regulations, rather than the vocal right-wing minority that makes the argument convenient, since they're just SO easy to hate.
Crypto was regulated as a weapon in the US, with export controls and severe on-the-book penalties up to and including being charged with treason. Didn't you ever wonder why there were always two versions of things like web browsers and terminal clients back in the day? The "low encryption" versions were for dirty, evil foreigners. The creator of PGP was harassed by the government for a while.
As for who wants what, I really don't care. I literally only care about the pragmatic regulations that I want, and I couldn't care less about anyone else's motivations at this point.
If I distill what I want to just the core essentials, I only want two things.
1. I want a federal registry of all firearms and firearm transactions.
2. I want a zero-exception federal uniform background check requirement for all firearm transactions.
Everything else is entirely up for debate, my opinions nonwithstanding. I can easily be swayed by good arguments, but I've seen no good argument against these two points other than "THE GUBMIT GONNA TAKE MAH GUNS!"
If I distill what I want to just the core essentials, I only want two things.
1. I want a federal registry of all firearms and firearm transactions.
2. I want a zero-exception federal uniform background check requirement for all firearm transactions.
Everything else is entirely up for debate, my opinions nonwithstanding. I can easily be swayed by good arguments, but I've seen no good argument against these two points other than "THE GUBMIT GONNA TAKE MAH GUNS!"
No reasonable proponent of gun ownership is going to give you any argument against either of those requests.They might argue that implementation would be a pain in the ass, but that's a weak-sauce argument and they know it.
That's laughably milquetoast and impractical. Federal background checks are already in the works, and if they don't pass then heads are going to roll in Congress come 2014. A federal registry is cute, but doesn't do any good in the short term. If you want to curb gun violence (and don't want to deal with the infinitely entangled and undiscussed on the national theater drug problem) you're going to need to do something about the ~300,000 guns already out there.
Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Someone wants to buy a $200 .22 pistol or semiautomatic .22 rifle and has to pay a $200 tax and wait 4 months to get it. Do you think that is reasonable?
Yes, I think that can be reasonable. A .22LR will kill you dead just like any other bullet, just not as easily at long range like a 5.56mm or .30-06. Holes in your torso generally equal dead without immediate surgery If you're lucky enough not to die instantly.
That's laughably milquetoast and impractical. Federal background checks are already in the works, and if they don't pass then heads are going to roll in Congress come 2014. A federal registry is cute, but doesn't do any good in the short term. If you want to curb gun violence (and don't want to deal with the infinitely entangled and undiscussed on the national theater drug problem) you're going to need to do something about the ~300,000 guns already out there.
You would have to do what NY is doing with weapons newly defined as "Assault Weapons": Give folks a time table, say 5 years. They have 5 years to register their weapons. Once that period is over owning a non-registered weapon becomes a crime.
You put the onus of registration on the owner, forcing them to prove that they are responsible , while at the same time giving them plenty of time to do it so they cant claim you were unreasonable.
As long as the registration process is accessible then it's a workable solution. The infrastructure needed to do it is staggering, but no more so than confiscation or an outright banning of firearms would be.
Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Someone wants to buy a $200 .22 pistol or semiautomatic .22 rifle and has to pay a $200 tax and wait 4 months to get it. Do you think that is reasonable?
Yes, I think that can be reasonable. A .22LR will kill you dead just like any other bullet, just not as easily at long range like a 5.56mm or .30-06. Holes in your torso generally equal dead without immediate surgery If you're lucky enough not to die instantly.
But you said pistol and semi-automatic rifle. Are you are saying that a .22 pistol is more dangerous then my 12ga over/under shotgun? Or any bolt action rifle? Or a side by side elephant rifle chambered in 700 Nitro Express? Your statement says those guns would not need NFA paperwork.
Make handguns and semi-automatic rifles class 3 firearms like fully automatic firearms. There, problem solved.
Someone wants to buy a $200 .22 pistol or semiautomatic .22 rifle and has to pay a $200 tax and wait 4 months to get it. Do you think that is reasonable?
Yes, I think that can be reasonable. A .22LR will kill you dead just like any other bullet, just not as easily at long range like a 5.56mm or .30-06. Holes in your torso generally equal dead without immediate surgery If you're lucky enough not to die instantly.
But you said pistol and semi-automatic rifle. Are you are saying that a .22 pistol is more dangerous then my 12ga over/under shotgun? Or any bolt action rifle? Or a side by side elephant rifle chambered in 700 Nitro Express? Your statement says those guns would not need NFA paperwork.
Handguns are more dangerous per there size which makes them easily concealable. They're responsible for about 10,000 deaths annually as a result. So yes, I think handguns need to be in a special class.
They're responsible for about 10,000 deaths annually as a result. So yes, I think handguns need to be in a special class.
Yes handguns are the weapon chosen to kill more people then others. But where are you getting your 10k number? According to the FBI it was 6,009 confirmed handgun murders in 2010 and 6,220 in 2011.
Also in in 2011 there were more people confirmed killed with hands and feet and shotguns then were killed with rifles. Also almost 5 times as many people were killed with knives or other cutting instruments then with rifles.
Also even all murders confirmed to have been a gun combined (8,583 in 2011) is less then the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates are killed by drunk driving (10,228).
So I have a couple questions about your proposal. How would taxing handguns and extending the waiting period help save lives?
Do you think taxing semi-automatic rifles and establishing a multi-month waiting period will help more with the murder rate then taxing knives? Why would taxing rifles help and not taxing knives as well? Why did you propose only semi-automatic rifles and pistols?
Considering more people are killed by drunk driving do you think that we should have a special tax for drinking at a bar? How high would the tax have to be to prevent people from drinking and driving?
I would actually honestly like to hear your proposals. Because I don't know how a tax and longer waiting period would solve any problems.
One of my problems with any sort of new regulation is that the black market will always exist. Now straw-purchases are a serious problem. I'm not worried about bubba having his buddy get him his gun for him because he doesn't want the gubmit knowing he has it, but its an actual problem as a source of illegal guns. Say we do find a way to get rid of that, like the things Rym has mentioned. Its really not THAT hard to build a gun. If guns were really that scarce on the black market, I have a feeling some large criminal organizations would easily fill that need. Things like 3D printers would easily work, and I'm sure parts kits and receiver flats would work help too. Hell, there are people making guns in caves in the middle east that you can buy for like $30 over there, so I don't doubt that criminals here would have no problem figuring it out.
Yes, but anyone who made that point is stupid. They kill more people than RIFLES, and only rifles. Which is why an assault weapons ban is a useless gesture. You need much stiffer regulation of HANDGUNS to curb the general gun violence of the country.
Because the gun lobby won't make people lose ten times the shit they lost when the government moved to ban assault rifles.
Everything else is entirely up for debate, my opinions nonwithstanding. I can easily be swayed by good arguments, but I've seen no good argument against these two points other than "THE GUBMIT GONNA TAKE MAH GUNS!"
That's because that vocal minority are damned near only people who are seriously arguing against that. You're making the same mistake that pretty much every anti-firearm campaigner makes, and you're trying to deal or debate with the crazy fuckholes who won't be satisfied till they're allowed to buy Dillon Aero M134 Miniguns at Wal-Mart, when if you'd try debating, talking and generally aiming your rhetoric towards to the more reasonable majority, we'd actually be able to get something done. I mean, I'm 100% with you on that one, frankly, Greg is right - what you propose is far weaker than what I've already proposed, which includes those ideas, And I'm all for civilian firearm ownership of all types.
I have the tools and skills needed to start manufacturing full auto submachinegun guns in my basement, not to mention assault rifles (full auto or otherwise) and anything else. The only thing I couldn't do at the moment is rifle my own barrels, but I know how I could do it (same way it was done in the early days)
I've already made a semi-auto sten gun and am working on building an AK74 from a parts kit.
No-one would know I had any of it unless they came to investigate my claims to make sure my shit was legit.
I'm not saying I'm against a registry, only that it won't solve everything: but perfect is the enemy of the good. Kalashnikov followed that apparently when designing the AK.
I have the tools and skills needed to start manufacturing full auto submachinegun guns in my basement, not to mention assault rifles (full auto or otherwise) and anything else. The only thing I couldn't do at the moment is rifle my own barrels, but I know how I could do it (same way it was done in the early days).
Aw, rifling barrels is pretty easy. Just pick yourself up a helical progressive rotary broach of the correct size and pitch, and you can do it on a lathe. Hell, you can even do it by hand, if you feel like ending up with arms like the Governator. I couldn't tell you how to DIY polyagonal rifling, though. That'd be a real pain in the arse.
I have the tools and skills needed to start manufacturing full auto submachinegun guns in my basement, not to mention assault rifles (full auto or otherwise) and anything else. The only thing I couldn't do at the moment is rifle my own barrels, but I know how I could do it (same way it was done in the early days)
I've already made a semi-auto sten gun and am working on building an AK74 from a parts kit.
No-one would know I had any of it unless they came to investigate my claims to make sure my shit was legit.
I'm not saying I'm against a registry, only that it won't solve everything: but perfect is the enemy of the good. Kalashnikov followed that apparently when designing the AK.
People as dedicated, skilled, and smart as you are the vast minority. If we can make it so that that is the largest source of black market weaponry, we will have done a good job.
People as dedicated, skilled, and smart as you are the vast minority. If we can make it so that that is the largest source of black market weaponry, we will have done a good job.
Cocane has been illegal in the United States for a very long time. Yet look at how easy it is to get. There are already well established drug routes. We know those routes take guns into Mexico and beyond. Why is it not safe to assume that if there were strict gun bans the drug routes would not just start bringing guns into the US along with everything else?
Cocane has been illegal in the United States for a very long time. Yet look at how easy it is to get. There are already well established drug routes. We know those routes take guns into Mexico and beyond. Why is it not safe to assume that if there were strict gun bans the drug routes would not just start bringing guns into the US along with everything else?
There's a good chance many of them are already. I'd be surprised if the vast majority of illegal gun sales/usage/etc. wasn't related to drugs, gangs, organized crime (the various mafias out there), and other related criminal enterprises. The fact is, I think it's pretty damned hard to buy an outright illegal firearm (as opposed to "unchecked" when talking about guns that are generally purchased without background checks or other necessary permits) unless you've already got criminal connections -- either through being part of some sort of organized crime or by being a convicted felon who made connections while in prison. Why do I say this? Because I have no freaking clue how I would find the sketchy truck or warehouse in the scary part of town where I can find the shady dude selling illegal firearms. However, it'll take me seconds to Google the locations of the nearest Wal-Mart, Bass Pro Shop, independent gun shop, gun show, Craigslist ad (or equivalent), or gun site like Gunbroker.com, all of which are legal ways to purchase firearms. In fact, the gun show, Craigslist, and Gunbroker.com examples allow me to purchase an "unchecked" firearm without background checks and probably without required permits (like concealed carry and so on) either. The average non-hardened criminal looking to buy a gun would almost certainly be in the same situation with the possible exception of someone who already lives in a crime-riddled neighborhood and who can see the shady guy selling illegal firearms out his window.
Cocane has been illegal in the United States for a very long time. Yet look at how easy it is to get. There are already well established drug routes. We know those routes take guns into Mexico and beyond. Why is it not safe to assume that if there were strict gun bans the drug routes would not just start bringing guns into the US along with everything else?
There's a good chance many of them are already. I'd be surprised if the vast majority of illegal gun sales/usage/etc. wasn't related to drugs, gangs, organized crime (the various mafias out there), and other related criminal enterprises. The fact is, I think it's pretty damned hard to buy an outright illegal firearm (as opposed to "unchecked" when talking about guns that are generally purchased without background checks or other necessary permits) unless you've already got criminal connections -- either through being part of some sort of organized crime or by being a convicted felon who made connections while in prison. Why do I say this? Because I have no freaking clue how I would find the sketchy truck or warehouse in the scary part of town where I can find the shady dude selling illegal firearms. However, it'll take me seconds to Google the locations of the nearest Wal-Mart, Bass Pro Shop, independent gun shop, gun show, Craigslist ad (or equivalent), or gun site like Gunbroker.com, all of which are legal ways to purchase firearms. In fact, the gun show, Craigslist, and Gunbroker.com examples allow me to purchase an "unchecked" firearm without background checks and probably without required permits (like concealed carry and so on) either. The average non-hardened criminal looking to buy a gun would almost certainly be in the same situation with the possible exception of someone who already lives in a crime-riddled neighborhood and who can see the shady guy selling illegal firearms out his window.
Sure, you don't know where to get one NOW, but if there was a big enough gap in the market I have a feeling former gun manufacturers who were laid off, and entrepreneurs with a knack for machining would probably fill that void enough for you to be able to know a guy who knows a guy who could get you a gun. Things like straw purchases are a problem now, but if that dries up they'll find another way.
Sure, you don't know where to get one NOW, but if there was a big enough gap in the market I have a feeling former gun manufacturers who were laid off, and entrepreneurs with a knack for machining would probably fill that void enough for you to be able to know a guy who knows a guy who could get you a gun. Things like straw purchases are a problem now, but if that dries up they'll find another way.
That's a big if, though. I don't see any sort of massive layoffs of gun manufacturers taking place if the sorts of reasonable gun control measure being discussed are implemented. For one thing, the kids of automatic and semi-automatic weapons that people are talking about banning are pretty much mostly used by the military. I find it highly unlikely that civilian sales of said weapons make up more than a trivial portion of their overall numbers. Even so, the whole finding a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy takes considerable effort and I would need considerable motivation to do so. Compare this to the whole "moment of anger/insanity/etc." scenario where for some insane reason I want to get a gun right now and can't wait to hunt down the guy who knows a guy. If I actually had to spend the effort to find a black market gun dealer, I may have cooled down enough that I'm no longer interested in using the gun to inflict harm on someone. The black market will remain the bastion of either organized crime or long-term sociopaths. It will not be used by crimes of passion or those who had instant psychotic breaks.
That's a big if, though. I don't see any sort of massive layoffs of gun manufacturers taking place if the sorts of reasonable gun control measure being discussed are implemented. For one thing, the kids of automatic and semi-automatic weapons that people are talking about banning are pretty much mostly used by the military. I find it highly unlikely that civilian sales of said weapons make up more than a trivial portion of their overall number
Yes, on the full auto, not so on the semi auto. The bans being proposed right now target a crap-ton of weapons that are A: sold en masse to civilians, and B: not actually used in a significant amount of crime. Said bans will also be fairly easy to get around, it will cost gun manufacturers millions to adjust their manufacturing to make the necessary changes to the more popular product lines, but the resulting weapons will be every bit as deadly as the current ones, just with differently shaped handles. The big companies like Glock and Colt will be fine, but a lot of the little guys (like where I work) will take it up the ass.
Which isn't to say that we couldn't institute reasonable weapons restrictions, we just really shouldn't use the ones that are on the table right now.
Well, I was speaking more to the hypothetical "Lets ban all guns to civilians" idea, not so much to the propositions right now. They might result in some layoffs but overall it wouldn't change much other than piss people off. Straw purchases are something that is really hard to get rid of, since even with things like registries people often just report them stolen after they sell them.
Straw purchases are something that is really hard to get rid of, since even with things like registries people often just report them stolen after they sell them.
So, if one person magically has reported "stolen" guns that magically end up being used in crimes on a regular basis, the police put the dude under surveillance (with a warrant) and bust his next illicit sale. If it turns out he literally just keeps being robbed of his guns, he probably shouldn't be allowed to have guns in the first place since he clearly cannot secure them.
If one gun dealer magically is the source of a ridiculously large number of later-illegally-possessed guns, said dealer should similarly be investigated. I'd be fine with shutting down dealers who, by design or by accident, repeatedly are the source of guns that end up illegally in the hands of those who then go on to commit crimes. Put a little more of the due diligence and assumption of risk on them.
Straw purchases are something that is really hard to get rid of, since even with things like registries people often just report them stolen after they sell them.
So, if one person magically has reported "stolen" guns that magically end up being used in crimes on a regular basis, the police put the dude under surveillance (with a warrant) and bust his next illicit sale. If it turns out he literally just keeps being robbed of his guns, he probably shouldn't be allowed to have guns in the first place since he clearly cannot secure them.
If one gun dealer magically is the source of a ridiculously large number of later-illegally-possessed guns, said dealer should similarly be investigated. I'd be fine with shutting down dealers who, by design or by accident, repeatedly are the source of guns that end up illegally in the hands of those who then go on to commit crimes. Put a little more of the due diligence and assumption of risk on them.
Additionally, If we close the "gunshow loophole" and require background checks and registration of private sales, then we can start catching the straw purchasers themselves.
Remember that in order to sell a firearm a dealer has to make a record of the transaction (form 4473) and keep it on file. The authorities can track it to that point with little trouble, and relatively few firearms go "off the books" while it's still in the nominal possession of a registered dealer.
The wrinkle that allows so many firearms to go missing, is that the original purchaser can sell the firearms to someone else as part of a "private sale" with no enforced record keeping. That last part of the process is what allows folks to sell firearms illegally with minimal risk. The seller has no legal obligation to verify the identity or character of the buyer. When the firearm shows up later at a crime scene, the seller can count on the ambiguity of that final sale to keep him out of prison.
Creating a chain of ownership that extends from the manufacturer all the way to the current owner will allow the authorities to determine who is responsible when a firearm ends up in the hands of a criminal, and then stick that person with appropriate consequences. Currently, far too many of these chains end up broken at some "Gun-show" somewhere.
Better than half of my job is running around trying to keep track of thousands of serial numbers so that we can tell the police/FBI/whoever exactly where they are at any given time. It really burns my biscuits to do all that work only to have some asshole skirt around the law by exploiting the system like that.
What I want is a system where a police officer can plug a serial number into his PDA and in 5 minutes get a picture and name of the firearm's owner. When that happens, legal owners have nothing to fear and the scum suckers can get what's coming to them.
Comments
I can see how maybe putting in that natural 'wait time' might be a benefit to some: it certainly does make it so that a person who is angry or unstable can get a gun and turn around to use it within days or weeks: well within the attention span of someone driven by emotion. But after 5 months, you probably aren't so upset.
But that does also put a huge burden on FFLs who would then be left holding dozens and dozens of rifles in limbo, waiting for the buyer to be cleared but having to hold onto the specific item the buyer registered until the paperwork goes through. The FFL would have to increase locked storage space, would have to probably start charging a storage fee for weapons in limbo, and may put a quota on their monthly NFA sales.
That doesn't bother gun control types... but that won't make for a good environment for the rest.
I'm fairly indifferent to the plight of gun hobbyists. They have less to put up with than crypto hobbyists did in the past. I leave the burden of proof on them to justify nonregulation.
Preferably just the facts, rather than a "Well, they had to put up with X, but gun hobbists only have to put up with Y!" kinda dealie, since I'm already familiar with the latter.
Though, of course, the burden of proof is on you to prove that the majority of firearm owners or hobbists are against any regulations, rather than the vocal right-wing minority that makes the argument convenient, since they're just SO easy to hate.
As for who wants what, I really don't care. I literally only care about the pragmatic regulations that I want, and I couldn't care less about anyone else's motivations at this point.
If I distill what I want to just the core essentials, I only want two things.
1. I want a federal registry of all firearms and firearm transactions.
2. I want a zero-exception federal uniform background check requirement for all firearm transactions.
Everything else is entirely up for debate, my opinions nonwithstanding. I can easily be swayed by good arguments, but I've seen no good argument against these two points other than "THE GUBMIT GONNA TAKE MAH GUNS!"
So let's fight for that and shut up the fringe on both sides. ^_~
(Or, they can have their "it's a PITA" argument if I get the same argument for deregulating copyright). ^_~
You put the onus of registration on the owner, forcing them to prove that they are responsible , while at the same time giving them plenty of time to do it so they cant claim you were unreasonable.
As long as the registration process is accessible then it's a workable solution. The infrastructure needed to do it is staggering, but no more so than confiscation or an outright banning of firearms would be.
Also in in 2011 there were more people confirmed killed with hands and feet and shotguns then were killed with rifles. Also almost 5 times as many people were killed with knives or other cutting instruments then with rifles.
Also even all murders confirmed to have been a gun combined (8,583 in 2011) is less then the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates are killed by drunk driving (10,228).
So I have a couple questions about your proposal. How would taxing handguns and extending the waiting period help save lives?
Do you think taxing semi-automatic rifles and establishing a multi-month waiting period will help more with the murder rate then taxing knives? Why would taxing rifles help and not taxing knives as well? Why did you propose only semi-automatic rifles and pistols?
Considering more people are killed by drunk driving do you think that we should have a special tax for drinking at a bar? How high would the tax have to be to prevent people from drinking and driving?
I would actually honestly like to hear your proposals. Because I don't know how a tax and longer waiting period would solve any problems.
I've already made a semi-auto sten gun and am working on building an AK74 from a parts kit.
No-one would know I had any of it unless they came to investigate my claims to make sure my shit was legit.
I'm not saying I'm against a registry, only that it won't solve everything: but perfect is the enemy of the good. Kalashnikov followed that apparently when designing the AK.
Which isn't to say that we couldn't institute reasonable weapons restrictions, we just really shouldn't use the ones that are on the table right now.
If one gun dealer magically is the source of a ridiculously large number of later-illegally-possessed guns, said dealer should similarly be investigated. I'd be fine with shutting down dealers who, by design or by accident, repeatedly are the source of guns that end up illegally in the hands of those who then go on to commit crimes. Put a little more of the due diligence and assumption of risk on them.
Remember that in order to sell a firearm a dealer has to make a record of the transaction (form 4473) and keep it on file. The authorities can track it to that point with little trouble, and relatively few firearms go "off the books" while it's still in the nominal possession of a registered dealer.
The wrinkle that allows so many firearms to go missing, is that the original purchaser can sell the firearms to someone else as part of a "private sale" with no enforced record keeping. That last part of the process is what allows folks to sell firearms illegally with minimal risk. The seller has no legal obligation to verify the identity or character of the buyer. When the firearm shows up later at a crime scene, the seller can count on the ambiguity of that final sale to keep him out of prison.
Creating a chain of ownership that extends from the manufacturer all the way to the current owner will allow the authorities to determine who is responsible when a firearm ends up in the hands of a criminal, and then stick that person with appropriate consequences. Currently, far too many of these chains end up broken at some "Gun-show" somewhere.
Better than half of my job is running around trying to keep track of thousands of serial numbers so that we can tell the police/FBI/whoever exactly where they are at any given time. It really burns my biscuits to do all that work only to have some asshole skirt around the law by exploiting the system like that.
What I want is a system where a police officer can plug a serial number into his PDA and in 5 minutes get a picture and name of the firearm's owner. When that happens, legal owners have nothing to fear and the scum suckers can get what's coming to them.