Tuesday, February 16, 2016

What is a "Good Guy with a Gun"?

I think many people misunderstand the NRA stance of "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

I submit that most people take that to mean the "good guy" is an armed citizen.

In reality, I am sure "good guy" could be an armed citizen or could be law enforcement or armed security.

Those who are opposed to private carrying of firearms, are all for the police and probably armed guards having firearms. They often espouse "just call 911!" And what is it you are hoping will happen when you call 911? Are you hoping an ambulance shows up? Or maybe the fire department? Maybe the dog warden? No. You want the police to show up, with their guns, to end a bad situation.

So those who are opposed to armed citizens are not against guns, per se, as they want the cops to show up, armed, and handle the situation. They are against a responsible citizen being armed and able to defend himself or herself and possibly end a bad situation.

It is state-ism, pure and simple. I carry a firearm. I am VERY aware of the responsibility that comes along with that. I am hopeful that I will NEVER have to use my firearm in defense of myself or others. If I am ever in a bad situation, I would LOVE it if the police were close enough to end the event, without my participation. All that being said, I still carry, because you never know when something bad is going to happen, how far away the police will be, and what you may be called upon to do.

The police are "good guys" with guns.

I will never use my firearms in an irresponsible manner. I will never use my firearms to commit a crime. I hope to never use my firearms to defend myself or others, but if the situation calls for it, I am ready to do so.

I am a "good guy" with a gun.

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Gun Control, Background Checks and Compromise

I am a proud gun owner.  I am also law abiding.  I am also a reasonable person.

With all the hubbub around the latest round of "Executive Actions" and gun control lately, there is the usual hue and cry of "no one is coming for your guns", "we just want reasonable gun control", "XX% (insert made up statistic here) of (Americans, Gun owners, Moms) are in favor of universal background checks.

Of course, there is the other side where the standard responses are "Registration leads to confiscation", "Molon Labe", "III%", "good guys don't commit gun crimes", etc.

I am in agreement that gun laws only impact the law abiding.

I do not like the idea of universal background checks, but I do understand the need to weed out those who shouldn't own guns.

The anti crowd are always saying "why won't pro 2A people compromise?".  Basically, pro 2A people have been compromising, i.e. giving up more and more of our rights, since 1934.  Asking me for $10, and then expecting me to compromise by giving you $5, is, in the end, still a grab from me.

I have, what I think is indeed, a reasonable compromise from both sides.  It requires both Pro and Anti 2A people to give up some of their sacred cows, in order to each get some of what they desire.

My idea is universal background checks for all sales, utilizing NICS or relying on CCW as proof.  In order for this to work, CCW would have to be recognized across state lines and all states would have to be "shall issue", or, alternately, the should be a federal CCW that is good in all 50 states.

A little more detail:

All gun sales must go through a background check.  There should be no fee for this check and their should be a tax credit of $XX for FFLs who run checks.  A tax credit is a dollar for dollar tax refund, not a deduction.  In my mind, given the speed and ease of NICs, the $ figure should be in the $10-15 range.  This gives the Anti crowd, one of their wishes.

However, if one has a CCW (and again, there would have to be a change to either a federal CCW, all states being mandated to be "shall issue" and/or national reciprocity), the background check would not be needed, and the CCW could be used as proof of a background check.  This gives the Pro 2A folks reciprocity and frees up some of the poor souls who live in states like NJ, where a CCW is a purple unicorn.

So Bob wants to buy a gun from Mary. 
  1. If Bob has a CCW, he can show that as proof, ,and the transaction can be completed.  
  2. If Bob does not have a CCW, Bob and Mary can go to an FFL, have a check run (which the FFL would get $ for in the form of a tax credit) and the sale can be completed.

So basically, Pro 2A folks would get national reciprocity, anti get their universal background checks, and this is an actual compromise, as both sides gain something and give up something.

Of course this is just an idea, and details are tricky.