Does this sound helpful, or like a possible solution to the gun violence issue?

[Mach]

And numerous regulations/laws have gone down in flames courtesy the courts.

The OP's suggestions will never see the light of day.

You're not making an argument on whether it should be changed or not, you're just saying it's hard to change.
Should it be changed, is the question. Most non-idiots think there should be limits on firearms ownership in the United States.

 

[Glitch]

So...Where in the constitution does it say registration is unconstitutional?

See post #78.

 

[tres borrachos]

Just to be clear I have not thought this out completely. It was just something that occurred to me so I thought I would throw it out there to hear the pros and cons from people on both sides of the gun issue.

1. Significantly more severe penalties for anyone caught in possession of an unlicensed, unregistered or illegal firearm. That goes for anyone caught possessing a legal, registered firearm that is registered to someone else (even if owner gave permission). I was thinking minimum $10,000 dollar fine and minimum 5 years in prison without possibility of early release. These would be felony charges.​

​

2. Anyone with a registered firearm agrees to pay a $5,000 fine should their firearm be lost or stolen and they report it to the police. If the gun is recovered by police and it was not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays a $20,000 fine and is permanently prohibited from purchasing or owning a firearm. If that firearm was used in the commission of a crime and not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays the $20,000 fine and is held criminally liable for the crime that was committed, which is also carries a mandatory 5 years in prison.​

​

3. Anyone who lives in a household of a registered owner of a firearm, can use that firearm for purpose of self defense within that household, or within the boundaries of the property in the case of home ownership. This also applies in a motor vehicle where the registered owner is present. Outside of the property or household, only the registered owner may publicly possess the firearm (see point #1). I'm sure there are other special circumstances that would apply, I just can't think of any at this time.​

I am pro second amendment, but I also believe strongly in people taking personal responsibility when it comes to gun ownership. I believe that if there were stiff fines and severe penalties for both irresponsible gun owners, as well as for people illegally possessing a firearm, it would go a long way keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and those who would use them to hurt others.

I fully expect for this idea to have flaws, so please be respectful in your criticism.

.

Interesting suggestions. I give you a lot of props as you clearly put much thought into it.

On suggestion #1 and #2, they are all rock solid IMO. #3 may be harder.

 

[Glitch]

You're not making an argument on whether it should be changed or not, you're just saying it's hard to change.
Should it be changed, is the question. Most non-idiots think there should be limits on firearms ownership in the United States.

If they were non-idiots, as you claim, they would already know that there are numerous limitations on firearm ownership in the United States. Which clearly demonstrates that they are not the "non-idiots" that you claim.

No individual right may be used to harm another. Which is why we have laws limiting free speech against libel and slander. Just like we have laws limiting the individual right to keep and bear arms when used to harm another. To claim that there are no limitations already in place is both monumentally stupid and completely ignores reality.

Those who exercise their individual rights without harming others are not restricted or infringed upon by government.

 

[Citizen]

See post #78.

This is why it failed, not because it is unconstitutional

"D.C. had presented no evidence that requiring a gun to be brought to the police station would enhance public safety. As the court observed, “common sense suggests a person would not go to the trouble of obtaining a registration certificate for a weapon other than a weapon in his possession.” Besides that, carrying the gun to the police station created the risk that the gun (which by D.C. law must be unloaded when transported in public) could be stolen en route, or that a police officer might shoot a person who is seen carrying a gun or a gun case."

 

[Felis Leo]

Just to be clear I have not thought this out completely. It was just something that occurred to me so I thought I would throw it out there to hear the pros and cons from people on both sides of the gun issue.

1. Significantly more severe penalties for anyone caught in possession of an unlicensed, unregistered or illegal firearm. That goes for anyone caught possessing a legal, registered firearm that is registered to someone else (even if owner gave permission). I was thinking minimum $10,000 dollar fine and minimum 5 years in prison without possibility of early release. These would be felony charges.​

​

2. Anyone with a registered firearm agrees to pay a $5,000 fine should their firearm be lost or stolen and they report it to the police. If the gun is recovered by police and it was not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays a $20,000 fine and is permanently prohibited from purchasing or owning a firearm. If that firearm was used in the commission of a crime and not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays the $20,000 fine and is held criminally liable for the crime that was committed, which is also carries a mandatory 5 years in prison.​

​

3. Anyone who lives in a household of a registered owner of a firearm, can use that firearm for purpose of self defense within that household, or within the boundaries of the property in the case of home ownership. This also applies in a motor vehicle where the registered owner is present. Outside of the property or household, only the registered owner may publicly possess the firearm (see point #1). I'm sure there are other special circumstances that would apply, I just can't think of any at this time.​

I am pro second amendment, but I also believe strongly in people taking personal responsibility when it comes to gun ownership. I believe that if there were stiff fines and severe penalties for both irresponsible gun owners, as well as for people illegally possessing a firearm, it would go a long way keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and those who would use them to hurt others.

I fully expect for this idea to have flaws, so please be respectful in your criticism.

.

While I do agree that prison time should be on the table, I am not sure that I agree with mandatory minimums for failure to report firearm theft.

 

[Glitch]

This is why it failed, not because it is unconstitutional

"D.C. had presented no evidence that requiring a gun to be brought to the police station would enhance public safety. As the court observed, “common sense suggests a person would not go to the trouble of obtaining a registration certificate for a weapon other than a weapon in his possession.” Besides that, carrying the gun to the police station created the risk that the gun (which by D.C. law must be unloaded when transported in public) could be stolen en route, or that a police officer might shoot a person who is seen carrying a gun or a gun case."

So you are just going to ignore the Supreme Court case that held federal firearm registration unconstitutional. Why am I not surprised? Typical leftist, just ignore the parts you don't like.

 

[Citizen]

So you are just going to ignore the Supreme Court case that held federal firearm registration unconstitutional. Why am I not surprised? Typical leftist, just ignore the parts you don't like.

So you are just going to ignore that fact as to why this particular law was unconstitutional. Why am I not surprised. Typical wingnut, just ignore the facts.

"As of January 1, 2019, seven states and the District of Columbia required individuals to register their ownership of certain firearms with local law enforcement agencies"

Firearm registration requirements by state

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

 

[Indydave]

Just to be clear I have not thought this out completely. It was just something that occurred to me so I thought I would throw it out there to hear the pros and cons from people on both sides of the gun issue.

1. Significantly more severe penalties for anyone caught in possession of an unlicensed, unregistered or illegal firearm. That goes for anyone caught possessing a legal, registered firearm that is registered to someone else (even if owner gave permission). I was thinking minimum $10,000 dollar fine and minimum 5 years in prison without possibility of early release. These would be felony charges.​

​

2. Anyone with a registered firearm agrees to pay a $5,000 fine should their firearm be lost or stolen and they report it to the police. If the gun is recovered by police and it was not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays a $20,000 fine and is permanently prohibited from purchasing or owning a firearm. If that firearm was used in the commission of a crime and not reported lost or stolen, the owner pays the $20,000 fine and is held criminally liable for the crime that was committed, which is also carries a mandatory 5 years in prison.​

​

3. Anyone who lives in a household of a registered owner of a firearm, can use that firearm for purpose of self defense within that household, or within the boundaries of the property in the case of home ownership. This also applies in a motor vehicle where the registered owner is present. Outside of the property or household, only the registered owner may publicly possess the firearm (see point #1). I'm sure there are other special circumstances that would apply, I just can't think of any at this time.​

I am pro second amendment, but I also believe strongly in people taking personal responsibility when it comes to gun ownership. I believe that if there were stiff fines and severe penalties for both irresponsible gun owners, as well as for people illegally possessing a firearm, it would go a long way keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and those who would use them to hurt others.

I fully expect for this idea to have flaws, so please be respectful in your criticism.

.

these proposals would help........but the fact remains the 2nd is obsolete and should be repealed.......because we have lost our ability to control the madmen who murder with guns........and that is sad......the good guys will have to sacrifice because we cannot control the bad guys.......making guns illegal will not stop madmen from murder.......but it will slow it down......and for now that's about as good as we can do......outlaw guns....outlaw ammunition.....outlaw ammunition and gun making......

 

[MamboDervish]

I find it WAY more infuriating that people possess illegal firearms, yet you think the suggested consequence is 'draconian'?
But it's more than ok to punish legal gun owners. That's what is wrong in this country.

Read what I wrote - perhaps until you get it. When the penalties are that high, you don't get charges, OR, if you do get charges, you won't get convictions. Law enforcement won't prosecute. The penalties suggested are ones that most people cannot even afford to pay. Dialing it back for 1st/2nd offenses makes prosecution more likely.