[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

I’d start by increasing access to mental health and removing the stigma associated with getting help. I’d also look into the reason why the US has this issue and other countries where you have access to the same guns don’t.

And how do you determine who needs mental health? I mean, there are some people on this site I think should have some couch time, but how do you force them to see a mental health professional? If someone doesn't think they are sick, they are not going to go to a doctor. How is someone selling a gun to one of these individuals going to make a call that the person is mentally ill? Unless you are suggesting a psych eval prior to purchasing a weapon, which would increase purchase times to weeks/months while a proper analysis is completed, you're not proposing anything of value. Its great to say that we should increase access to mental health services, but how does that stop someone from getting a gun and using it on other people?

A registry only tells you who has guns if they register them, it doesn’t say how those guns are being used or how they will be used. Canada ditched the LGR because it wasn’t accomplishing what people thought it would. There was no evidence it actually lowered the homicide rate or made women safer. It was inaccurate and had a low compliance rate (which the police couldn’t stop). The compliance rate in the US would probably be well under 50%, with no way to actually force compliance.

Was there evidence to the contrary in Canada? Did the existence of the registry cause an increase in gun violence or violence against women? Did it increase the existence of illegal weapons? I have a feeling the answer to this is a resounding "no" on all accounts. The reason the gun registry failed was because of political weakness and opportunity for conservatives to appeal to their base. The same #### happens down here all the time.

You are right, that the gun registry only tells you who owns a gun when its registered, but when you start registering them at purchase, and then making the owners responsible for the actions of those weapons, people will then begin to act like responsible gun owners. They will then secure their weapons properly. They will then take extreme care when transporting, using, or selling those weapons. Placing the responsibility of the actions of the weapon on the registered owner will make them act more responsibly in how they manage the weapon. It works with other property where liability is an issue, so why should that not work with guns?

Limiting standard capacity mags (20 & 30 round) doesn’t improve safety and it doesn’t stop crime, even Canadian limited capacity mags can be returned to full capacity in a minute or two. People like to say that if a shooter had to change mags, it would give people a chance to run. That’s not a really viable argument when it takes a second or two to swap.

Limiting the number of rounds in a mag does limit the amount of damage an individual can inflict. The reason for the large capacity mags in the military is for spray and pray fire fights. Those don't exist in the civilian world. There really is no need for a large capacity magazine. As someone who has a #### ton of high capacity mags I will be the first to admit they don't provide any value to the recreational shooter except limiting reload time. If you're out hunting bambi and you can't take them down with a single shot, maybe you should take up knitting. If you need a 20-30 round mag for hunting, something is seriously wrong. The only reason for that large capacity mag is so I don't have to reload as often. PERIOD.

So if, in an active shooter situation, the shooter has to reload every 10 shots, that is more than ample time for people to take action and observe Run, Hide, Fight.

For the sake of argument, let’s say they do ban mags over 10 rounds. How do you enforce it? There is no record of who bought what (accessory purchases are not regulated), a vast majority won’t voluntarily surrender them without compensation, you have law enforcement that won’t enforce the law and you can’t go house to house to search for them.

Same way they would ban the internal combustion engine. First, you stop allowing them to be sold. Then you wait for attrition to take place. Then you police when and where you can. When some yokel arrives at a run range with his 20-30 round magazines they quickly get confiscated. It is a slow process, but it is a start. And that's the important thing here, to get a start on dealing with the problem, because continuing to bury our collective heads in the sand does nothing to help the problem. In fact, it only makes it worse.

Assuming anyone actually complies, how would you use the registry to prevent people from going off the rails and shooting up a mall? Unless your proposal includes limiting the amount of property someone can own and then using the registry and police to enforce those limits. It might be good for after the fact tracing, but in most of these cases, the shooter is either dead or in custody already. Even if they aren’t, tracing is possible now. We already register property, but it hasn’t stopped laws being broken.

The idea of a gun registry is to prevent people from buying weapons they shouldn't have, identifying the owner of a weapon should it be lost or stolen, encouraging responsible gun ownership, and having an audit trail to follow the life of a gun, and then holding owners accountable for their property. All of these are simple steps in helping limit the problem. There is no single silver bullet (pardon the pun) solution, but there are a whole bunch of things that can help limit the problem.

A lot of ideas are being tossed around, but they aren’t usually accompanied by how the specific idea would prevent shootings from happening. Not only that, but some of the things suggested are already illegal.

Let's start by using common sense and enforcing responsible gun ownership. Let's have real background checks, proper waiting periods, register weapons, restrictions on types and numbers of weapons owned, and then enforce responsible gun ownership. It works for all sorts of countries around the developed world, it should work in the US as well. If I were looking for a model to follow, I would look to Switzerland.