Over the years since the Supreme Court of these United States installed one George W. Bush in the Oval Office of the White House, there has been an ever increasing problem in our nation with guns and the dead Americans they have been creating.
There is an obsession with guns by what appears to rest of us as a lunatic fringe on the far outskirts of civilized society. Since America dared to elect a black, Kenyan, socialist, marixt, Muslim President the violent rhetoric bleated about by these people has only grown in tone and volume.
For nearly a decade now, portions of the more sane elements of the population have been calling for reasonable and do-able regulation of guns and their #keepers; like eliminating loopholes in background checks by requiring EVERY single gun sale, no matter where or how it takes place, to be subject to a background check via a national registry.
None of that is working. The opposition to any legislation to curb the increasingly horrific loss of life Americans are experiencing in their families to these endless mass shootings from this US Congress has been overwhelming enough to prevent any progress from being made.
Not enough of us are dead yet, so the outcry to #EndTheSlaughter of our families in their schools or local movie theaters or at college or shopping at the local mall, it just hasn't gotten loud enough yet to convince this do nothing Congress to act to protect the people of the nation they swore to protect when they were elected to Serve as Senators and US Representatives.
But there is something that can stop it. And it doesn't include taking away a single gun from anyone.
Since, as I have been recently reminded in the threads, by Wisper, to truly change the 2nd Amendment so that no more court findings could re-release weapons of death upon us, it would require:
It would have to get 290 votes in the House (which it wont, there are only 199 Dems and they all wont support it)So realistically, in my lifetime, it's not going to happen.
Then 67 votes in the Senate (which it cant, there are only 55 Dems, including the Indys)
Then be ratified by 38 state legislatures (which wont even take it up. Its not like they even need to vote against it, 13 of the 24 states that voted for Romney in 2012 can just ignore it until it expires)
I would push for something much more realistic and specific that can be simply legislated without a Constitutional process. Gunshow loopholes, background checks, mental health provisions, licensing and carrying restrictions, etc...
Suffice it to say, I'm not willing to just say "fuck it, we can't win", not on this issue.
But there is an alternative to try and get rid of something our Constitution (sort of) and our SCOTUS (absolutely) says people have a Right to, which is "arms", and in the context of the Constitution that word has been determined to mean small arms, such as hand guns and rifles but not weapons commonly used by our military, such as fully-automatic firing small arms.
AMENDMENT IIDo you notice what the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution does not guarantee a person a Right to?
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
The ammunition those weapons require to kill a human being.
So let's stop trying to get rid of the guns, and instead, let's turn them into expensive sticks made of metal.
Let's highly regulate the production and ownership of ammunition, as a matter of Public Health Safety.
Require the ammunition manufacturers to put currently available technology to use, and stamp every shell with a unique identifier mark.
Require that anyone who purchases ammunition take a one time class in ammunition safety and legal use, then a yearly refresher course.
Require a federally issued photo ID and proof of insurance, to purchase ammunition.
Institute mandated prison terms for anyone convicted of violating ammunition purchase or sale regulations, so that both sellers and buyers of ammunition are liable if they perform 'black market' distribution of ammunition to unlicensed persons or groups.
Ban the sale of home shell re-loaders and the sale of empty shells & casings to allow such home-based manufacture of ammunition of any type.
Ban the possession of any ammunition which has been produced in such a fashion and attach a 5 year federal prison sentence for violators found guilty of possessing it. Such ammunition would lack the already required unique mark on individual ammunition.
So we can just ignore the damned guns.
After all, they are only deadly if they are loaded with ammunition and carried by a lunatic. So if we take one of those variables out of the equation, then the solution ends not with a dead innocent, but a lunatic carting around an extremely expensive chunk of metal.
I challenge any RKBAer to debate me on the logical aspects of my proposal.
I call for any legal beagles to chime in on the possibility of such a framework passing a SCOTUS challenge - because even if we get a legislator to write such an Act and both Houses to pass such an Act and a President to sign such an Act into Law... the very next day would surely bring a lawsuit directed right at the SCOTUS to invalidate it.
I ask the Community to debate with me this alternative to attempting to rid us of our scandalous "peculiar institution" of the 21st century, the Gun Nuts.
I believe it might be a way to allow reasonable people who want to exercise their 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms, but prevent the mentally unbalanced, the criminal, the lunatics from gunning down our fellow citizens in cold blood. Day after day after day.
Is this a project that anyone is willing to join me in moving forward with?
#AmmoControl it WILL #EndTheSlaughter of innocent Americans.
Thank you for participating, even those with whom I (vehemently) disagree.
One point I'd like to make: many (many, many) of you have asked why I expect to get away with banning bullets (paraphrased from the multitude of comments on this aspect). Excuse me. Did you read what I proposed? I did not recommend the banning of anything. Only the stringent, reasonable regulation of ammunition. I replied to one of the commenters thusly:
I'm not suggesting that bullets be banned, only that they be regulated so as to discourage criminals from attempting to use them in the commission of crimes, and to prevent those who are mentally unfit from acquiring the ability to commit mass murder via licensing and yearly renewals & microstamping and/or Taggant for powder, so that whomever purchased the ammunition could be held responsible if it's used to kill someone else.
How is any of THAT "punative"? And the only culture it's designed to "stamp out" is the one made up of criminals and the criminally insane. Which you should support, I would think.