*WARNING. Off-the-cuff 2nd Amendment/Gun Control talk follows*
Listening to the alarmist hyperbole on both sides of the gun control debate, watching respective parties pounce on the tragedy in Ferguson MO to ‘prove’ their point, I’m appalled how much mileage Stupid gets these days.
I mean there are hundreds of thousands of responsible, law-abiding gun-owning citizens (read ‘voters’ there) who respect their Second Amendment rights yet don’t feel violence is the solution to every problem and who aren’t ready to snap at the drop of a hat and shoot up a school/mall/church. Owning guns does not make one a sociopath.
On the other hand, we are talking about firearms here. Always potent, potentially deadly. No, guns don’t make you a killer; killing makes you a killer, but what exactly is wrong with mandatory gun safety courses? We do it for motor vehicles, motorcycles, trucks and heavy machinery. And Background Checks are wise. After all, how about we not give guns to crazy people.
So in search of middle ground, I am forming my own Gun Rights Organization: CITIZENS for RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP. (Pronounced Ser-Go.) We’ll have nifty t-shirts, ball caps, bumper stickers, and large annual barbecues where we eat lots of good food then all fire our weapons in a celebratory manner. (safely, downrange)
CRGO firmly and vocally upholds the Second Amendment, the law-abiding citizen’s inalienable right to defend property and family, as well as carry concealed for personal protection.
CRGO believes there is nothing inherently wrong with firearms, firearm training, military service, police and security professions, or the time-honored traditions of hunting and recreational shooting.
CRGO maintains any law-abiding American citizen without a felony record or domestic violence conviction should be able to own a firearm for any and all lawful purpose. 
CRGO believes children of both genders should learn basic firearm safety and handling under qualified supervision starting at a young age. Education is the best defense against accidents. Ignorance, fear, and hyperbole are never good strategies for any endeavor, certainly not firearms.
Recognizing gun ownership is an enormous responsibility, CRGO firmly supports mandatory firearm training, background checks, and secure storage for firearms and ammunition.
CRGO also supports restrictions on genuine military-grade weapons and mechanisms. However, understanding appearance does not equal function, CRGO maintains gun owners have the right to accessorize their firearms however they please.
Regarding Gun Laws and Gun Control, CRGO believes our nation has a glut of firearm laws and regulations presently on the books, many of them convoluted, contradictory and confusing. For the sake of the citizenry, police and judicial system, our nation needs a uniform set of concise regulations, firmly and consistently enforced. Not more laws, but clear laws fairly enforced.
There – that’s done. If this sounds good to you, chime in. We get enough people, the gun companies will send us free stuff.
Have a great day.
Hot Space Station Justice 
I mean there are hundreds of thousands of responsible, law-abiding gun-owning citizens
The actual number will never be known for sure but between surveys and census reports we can figure out an approximation. Polls indicate approximately 39% of households report at least one person in that home owns a firearm. Census reports estimates around 120,000,000 homes. Doing the math gives us 46,800,000 gun owners AT least. Way more than a couple hundred thousand.
No, guns don’t make you a killer; killing makes you a killer, but what exactly is wrong with mandatory gun safety courses?
First is there a need? Not joking here. Homicides — hardly a safety issue — are about 11,000 per year. Suicides — again hardly a safety issue — are even higher – around 18 or 19 thousand. Very few ‘accidental’ deaths are related to firearms According to the CDC, the high for the records available was 824 in 1999. In 2011 the accidental firearm related deaths numbered 591.
Second….who decides what how long the class should be, what it includes, how much? It is just to own a firearm, to carry a firearm?
Why should we allow the government to decide if we are safe enough to exercise a fundamental, Specifically enumerated Constitutionally Protected right?
Would you approve of a safety or training class before going to church or not attending? Before writing a blog, speaking to a friend.
Third – can you say ‘disparate impact’ on minorities and the poor? Courts routinely classify ‘voter id’ requirements where the person must present a photo id as unconstitutional. Texas for example provides a photo id good for 5 years for $26. A concealed handgun license — even with 50% discount for being poor is much more -$70 for the license, $10 for finger prints, $10 for pictures, $5 for the proficiency test fee…..and that doesn’t include the cost of the mandatory class — usually $50 or more.
And Background Checks are wise. After all, how about we not give guns to crazy people.
Want to run a background check — go ahead. There are dozens of sites where you can do that. But making it mandatory, no thanks.
I bought a firearm from a gun club member – we both had background checks to join. We both have concealed handgun licenses — another background check. How many times should we be checked?
Oh…and do they work?
Apparently NOT. Virginia Tech murderer 2 background checks, the UCSB murderer (3 killed with knives) 2 checks. The Washington Navy Yard shooter — 3 different background checks.
CRGO also supports restrictions on genuine military-grade weapons and mechanisms. However, understanding appearance does not equal function, CRGO maintains gun owners have the right to accessorize their firearms however they please.
So we get background checks, training, and we still aren’t to be trusted with ‘military grade weapons’? What gives?
The 2nd Amendment is about insuring our liberty; shouldn’t we be allowed to own firearms equivalent to what the government could use against us?
Bob S.
Hi Bob S.
Thanks for commenting.
Point by point off the top of my head:
1. ‘hundreds of thousands’ does not equal ‘a couple hundred thousand’. I didn’t have hard figs at the time of writing, but felt it best to understate.
2. Safety courses: Like I said, we mandate them for vehicles. Firearms are a similarly powerful machine/item. Makes sense a new driver/new gun owner should be taught their rights and responsibilities, and how to safely handle the item. Besides, I can’t hide an F-150 under my jacket.
2A. I submit one of the reasons accident stats are so low is due to current safety and training regimen. Arguing against safety and education is a no-win situation.
3. Background Checks: While my little post isn’t the place to hammer out specifics, background checks are light years better than no check at all. I’m not proposing taking away anyone’s rights; merely an initial check to determine if a buyer has a criminal/violent history. Common sense here. Once passed, the buying/check process should be same-day.
Of course no system is fail safe; people are involved.
4. Military Weapons: Just my opinion here.
Want to drive Formula One cars? Train to be a NASCAR driver. Want to shoot military weapons? Join the military.
As I understand it, certain curio/period full auto firearms are available to collectors with proper licenses. I’m not proposing that be rescinded. However, I don’t think weapons like M249 SAW or RPG-16 should be available to the general public.
End of the day, CRGO is a fictional organization. There are plenty of good, active Gun Rights Organizations already. No need for me to pile on.
I just want free stuff. 😉
Have a great day. Enjoy your range time.
CCGlazier,
2. Safety courses: Like I said, we mandate them for vehicles.
Except that isn’t entirely accurate. We don’t require safety courses for drivers after a certain age – only young new drivers. Never mind the fact we should be discussing governmental over-reach.
We also don’t require training, licensing, anything if vehicles stay on private property. Millions of people race cars, build them, drive vehicles around all the time without any state mandated training.
I can buy any car I want without a background check, I can drive anyone I want. Only when we go on public roads do we have to deal with such issues.
http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2007/04/we-license-cars-yackyackyack.html
I strongly suggest you read that. Lawdog tears apart this argument better than I could ever do.
2A. I submit one of the reasons accident stats are so low is due to current safety and training regimen.
Seems like you are the one trying to have it both ways. Most states do not mandate any training for ownership — states are reducing their training for carrying.
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Vermont
Wyoming (for residents)
Oklahoma (residents of constitutional carry states)
6 States that require no training, no permit, no license to carry a firearm. Care to guess their accident rate compared to the others.
I’m not proposing taking away anyone’s rights; merely an initial check to determine if a buyer has a criminal/violent history. Common sense here. Once passed, the buying/check process should be same-day.
Except as you add administrative burden and hassles you infringe on the right. Who was it that said “A right delayed is a right denied”?
Universal background checks Twitter summary: Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration and an easy gun transfer process
Criminals obtain their firearms through straw purchase 47 % of the time and steal another 26% of the time……the Memo from the National Institute of Justice continues:
These figures indicate informal transfers dominate the crime gun market. A perfect universal background check system can address the gun shows and might deter many unregulated private sellers. However, this does not address the largest sources (straw purchasers and theft), which would most likely become larger if background checks at gun shows and private sellers were addressed. The secondary market is the primary source of crime guns. Ludwig and Cook (2000) compared states that introduced Brady checks to those states that already had background checks and found no effect of the new background checks. They hypothesized that the background checks simply shifted to the secondary market those offenders who normally purchased in the primary market.
So unless we implement registration (Ask Canada and New York how’s that going) and basically go door to door, background checks will do nothing. There are already 300,000,000 firearms in the country. A decent garage workshop can turn out semi-automatic pistols all day long. Heck…we can’t stop MILLIONS of pounds of Drugs from being smuggled into the country. Just how are we gonna stop if they turn to running guns?
4. Military Weapons: Just my opinion here.
Want to drive Formula One cars? Train to be a NASCAR driver. Want to shoot military weapons? Join the military.
Or I can buy the car and drive it on my own property, Rent one at many different events and drive one. I don’t have to train to be a NASCAR driver in order to drive like one. Try Dallas traffic some day — you’ll see what I mean.
As for the military — I ALREADY DID. I’m a veteran. But more importantly my rights don’t depend on serving. That is a choice that each person should make. But if you want to go there; how about ALL rights listed in the Bill of Rights being dependent on military service?
Want to speak in public – blog – print – Join the Military. Attend Church or Not — Join the Military.
However, I don’t think weapons like M249 SAW or RPG-16 should be available to the general public.
Why not?
If I gave one to you, would you use it for evil?
Or just recreational?
Why do you think bad about anyone else then?
And do you really think that criminals can’t get those weapons if they wanted them?
More importantly think about what you are implying — Criminals can kill people at X rate per minute but not 10X rate per minute because that is wrong. Either you say “no one should have the means to commit murder” or it doesn’t matter how fast people can kill.
But once again we have to look at the facts — out of all the gun owners; how many are really causing the problem – 11,000 homicides a year? 46,000,000 gun owners – that is 0.024% of the gun owners. Let’s say firearm related violent crime – Bureau of Justice Statistics says 500,000 per year so that would be 1.08% IF every firearm related crime was committed by a different gun owner. We know that isn’t true.
Let’s turn it around — sorry but the analogy is designed to be repugnant — I think that chlid porn (deliberate misspelling to save your blog ) is horrendous (I’m sure you do to) but because you own a camera and a computer — you are guilty by association.
I think it is common sense to have everyone like you register with the government, submit finger prints, photographs, list your equipment. Take a test, Get letters of Reference, etc — Are you willing to do that to save the children?
Bob S.
Capability isn’t culpability with weapons or computers. And ‘guilt by association’ is a flaccid logic and a waste of time. However, the discussion here is my personal opinion regarding rights, responsibilities and respect for firearms, gun ownership, and our society.
Here in MA. after my initial safety course and license process, I can walk into any gun shop and purchase a firearm same day/same hour. My Class A, LTC (Hi-Cap. Concealed Carry Permit) needs to be renewed every six years. When I speak of ‘background checks’, that is the procedure that comes to mind. The specifics of the licensing process are subject to the constituents and elected officials in their respective regions. however, I believe we should simplify the process, then apply it consistently across the board. Doing so would *reduce* the administrative burden on the local and federal bureaucracy.
A right delayed isn’t automatically a right denied. In our larger, more complex and confusing society, additional time and administration are a tedious necessity. I have to wait in line for lots of things.
Again regarding military weapons, the question isn’t what I would do with a M249 or RPG-16; it is widespread commercial availability to the general public. I may act responsibly, the next guy recklessly. Increased lethality on the street-level is akin to taking the Formula One vehicle or APC on the morning commute. It’s not the proper venue. Bring it to the Race Track/Military Firing Range.
Last, no one is suggesting rights require military service. That is a ridiculous claim. Also, equating the ‘necessity’ of a Squad Automatic Weapon with the entire Second Amendment, or even the rest of the BoR, is a straw man, and reduces the entire discussion.
Take Care.
Sorry but you are suggesting that rights require military service.
Want to shoot military weapons? Join the military.
I just suggested that if it applies to one right, why not apply it to all.
No I didn’t and I’m not. You’re applying a logical fallacy.
A SAW M249 is a weapon but not all weapons are SAW M249s. Reasonable restrictions can and do apply. Military weapons (not ‘military looking’ weapons) are the domain of trained professionals – just like NASCAR or heavy machinery. It’s not a denial of rights – It’s a common sense boundary.
Freedom of Speech doesn’t extend to shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater.
Have a nice day.
Apples and oranges and straw men. Your train of thought has derailed.
I see I should have focused more on the ‘well-regulated’ part of the Amendment.
Good luck.