For those who don't want to deal with stupid website design.
How Gun Rights Activists Have Shot Themselves In The Foot by Adam Stone Jan 23, 14:57
Given the current political climate in the United States, it comes with little surprise that laws governing firearms only pass on a rare occasion. Out of the original "Single Issue Voter" topics, everyone has a passionate stance on gun regulation – for or against.
We expect our elected representatives to rise above this and look at hard facts before making a decision, but this is rarely the case. Instead, we find ourselves led by either the reactionary or the obstructionist. The reactionary respond to a crisis by demanding action, regardless of effectiveness. The obstructionist refuses to even discuss the topic.
This refusal results in nonsensical laws. The Gun Rights lobby, and the NRA in particular, ultimately shoot themselves in the foot by refusing to engage with the Gun Control lobby. Their belief that gun laws are already draconian results in a lack of involvement in drafting legislation, leaving that task to a group of politicians who have no desire or reason to learn about what they are banning.
Congress is notorious for legislating on subjects that they do not even marginally understand, so of course they would do the same with guns. California Senator Dianne Feinstein famously shows her ignorance on the topic each and every time it comes up for debate – failing to even know the purpose of the cosmetic additions she has banned.
While gun control supporters should certainly shoulder some of the blame for their failed policy, it is time for the gun rights crowd to recognize that they are responsible in no small part. If they were willing to say, "Let's sit down and discuss what each of these devices purpose is, and whether or not they should be allowed," we could end up with a sane compromise. Fully automatic weapons would still be banned, alongside under slung grenade launchers and incendiary rounds, but we would see fewer laws regulating absurdities like bayonet lugs and muzzle breaks.
Expecting the gun control lobby to create laws that make sense without the help of a base with knowledge of guns is laughable. It would be like trying to pass sensible drug laws without the aide of doctors. You would end up banning all opiates to outlaw heroin, only to discover that clinical painkillers are now illegal.
We see states working in entirely different directions. Texas passes an open carry law, despite concealed carry already being legal. New York inexplicably passes a law banning pistol grips and relying on honorable intentions of the individual to only load 7 rounds into a 10 round magazine. We do have to realize that a vocal minority on both sides controls this debate, marking anyone willing to compromise as a traitor.
The first step on the Gun Control side is to admit that the type of gun used to commit a crime is almost entirely irrelevant. A man with a bolt action hunting rifle can do plenty of damage, if he is so inclined. For Gun Rights activists, they need to drop the mental illness straw man. The way to prevent guns from falling into criminal hands is not to ban guns, and arming everyone is equally unfeasible. As distasteful as both sides may find it, registering all guns in a national database that is easily accessible by all agencies to which it is relevant will finally decrease gun violence. However, to pass such a law, the Gun Control crowd may have to compromise by reducing the restrictions on the type of gun available.
The only way forward is through compromise, not by demonizing one's opponents. Just because your next door neighbors own a few guns, it does not mean they are psychopaths. Likewise, registering firearms will not lead to confiscation. (Who do you think would confiscate them? Law enforcement and the Military are almost universally conservative and pro-guns. ) A simple, comprehensive chain of custody system would prevent guns from falling into criminal hands, regardless of if they are handguns, long guns or assault rifles.
Biometric locks, RFID systems, and micro-stamping are potentially potent technologies – but let's take a loot at a US Military study as an analogy. Millions were spent to develop self-guiding small arms munitions to increase infantry access, only to discover that a simple scope was more effective. Sometimes, simplicity and common sense are the best way to solve a problem.