"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."
To the rest of the civilized world, we look like insane idiots concerning gun laws. The US has more annual fire arm
related fatalities than Canada, Australia, England, Germany, Japan, Great Britian, Poland, Italy, Spain, France,
Greece, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan and India combined. All the nations that are comparable or
worse than us are war zones of one kind or another so can't really be counted as civilized.
Gun advocates try to justify the carnage by claiming our founding fathers wrote the 2nd amendment to insure tyranny
could not take root. Whether true or not, the plain fact is that guns are a severe detriment to society,
certainly not a benefit.
The only real life 2nd Amendment freedom fighters are drug merchants shooting at cops while trying to escape.
They WILL lose their freedom if they get caught! In their minds, they are only trying to conduct free trade and
the Guberment is overstepping, violating their rights!
And seriously, the only time gun advocates rise up in protest is when they fear their 'gun rights' are under
consideration for even the mildest new regulation. They do not utter a peep on any other issue that involves the
limits of the government, let alone show up en masse armed for war.
Even if they did, the idea that a bunch of guys with pistols and rifles would scare Uncle Sam into changing his mind
about a new law or that they could prevail if The Military decided to take over is ludicrous.
Whatever the founding fathers had in mind, (it is rather vague and contradictory) they had no idea of the coming
technological advancements. They weren't crazy, so if they'd been given a hint, I'm sure they would have emphisized
the part about well regulated and put a few stipulations on shall not be infringed.
The main factor driving the gun problem is proliferation. Too many guns everywhere. Anybody who wants one can get
one quickly and cheaply. Guns are left in easy reach of toddlers. Depressed teenagers can take the easy way out
using the 'emergency self defense' device their parents bought to protect the family. Burglars cheerfully add
them to the bounty, supplying their fellow bad boys with the prefered tool of their trade.
America is at a level of saturation that makes it impossible for a city or even a state to effectively restrict them.
The violence in Chicago is proof of that, not that the laws themselves are bad.
During fierce debates in The Skeptic's Society and Marylin Vos Savant Forums (see below) I realized that guns are
not an essential component of our society, unlike cars, which gun proponents often compare them to due to the
similar annual fatality numbers. Every gun in the country could dissappear tonite and tomorrow morning the rest
of the economy would roll right along as usual.
What I realized on July 20th 2012 is that guns are effectively a HOBBY! And everybody in America, even those of us
who are against guns, are subsidizing the major cost of that hobby. Some estimates put the cost of fire arm
fatalities, injuries, property damage and law enforsement at over 250 billion dollars, dwarfing the value of the
entire industry, which is around 15 billion.
Since its extreemly difficult to amend the Constitution, even if the National Rifle Association allowed their pet
senators and congressmen touch the 2nd Amendment, some way of balancing it out is needed.
In a nut shell, the GIT moves the entire monetary cost of fire arms to the owners, lobbying organizations and
manufacturers - anybody and everybody with a stake in the hobby of private citizens owning guns gets to help pay
for all the resulting death, injury and destruction. No more freeloading!
Adding a function to an existing agency, or even starting a whole new one is a much lower hurdle to clear than
amending the Constitution. In addition, framing it as a matter of not freeloading will make it harder for the
supposedly self sufficient quazi-Libertarian minded Republicans to object.
The GIT would work alot like insurance. All legal gun owners, manufacturers and proponent organizations would
recieve a quarterly bill that would reflect the cost incurred during the preceding period caused by guns. The more
deaths, robberies, injuries and property damage, the higher their bill will be. Because proliferation is the
problem being addressed, the more guns and gun related stuff someone owns, the bigger their bill. Manufacturers and
proponent organizations would be billed relative to their size.
Most of the money would be used to pay for the expenses created by gun incidents. Families of the deceased would be
compensated something like 5,000,000$, (with adjustments for the circumstances of each case, of course) and
similarly hefty payments to injured victims on top of paying their medical expenses.
All emergency medical servicers would be paid by the GIT system. Police and fire departments would be paid for their
time and expenses.
People who's property is damaged by a gun would not have to worry about finding the perpetrator. For example, simply
report the bullet hole in your windshield to the police and the repair will be covered by the GIT system.
No need to try to track down where the bullet came from.
Keep in mind that this is not an alternative to the existing legal system. Crimes will still be prosecuted in the
courts. Murderers will still go to prison. Assailants can still be sued by the victims. Additionally, there will
be legal penalties for attempts to scam the system. It would obviously be very tempting for terminally ill
patients to give their families a parting gift.
One of the claims made by advocates is that guns deter crime. So to help pass the GIT, it will include compensation
for when that actually happens. Somebody chases away a crook, the value of whatever he would have gotten away
with is credited to the system. Prevent a murder or scare off a rapist and a big standard credit is added. Maybe
some bonus could also be payed to the gun wielding 'good guy' in the incident. Now how could the NRA possibly be
against the GIT if guns are doing so much crime prevention? From what they say, The government will actually
have to tax us to help pay all the good guys with guns!
The practical effect on the gun lobby will be that they will do a 180 and favor laws that tend to reduce gun
proliferation and usage. This reveals one of the fundamental problems with the current situation - there is no such
motivation! The more mayhem there is, the more guns they sell!
To speed up the reduction in proliferation a generous buy back program could be instituted. Full retail, with a 100$
minimum paid for voluntary turn ins. No questions asked! This will work particularly well for illegal guns.
The 2nd amendment may have been a good idea when the nation was young and guns were relatively weak, but the
many advances of technology, radical differences in the structures of society and the realities of the relation
between the government and the citizenry and America's position in the world, it serves no purpose. And, thanks
mostly to the efforts of the NRA and other lobbying organizations, it is a severe detriment.
The fundamental function of government is to create and enforce laws that benefit the citizens. To increase the
level of civilization. Our government is failing miserably in this case, for the 2nd Amendment and all the laws
dependent on it are doing the opposite.
The NRA will see this as an existential threat, so will fight like never before. It will take the power of the
office I am running for to defeat them.
Who is JO 753?
Here are links to my presence on the web:
Forums & Blogs