Just a Thought

The original draft of this post was written months ago, before the recent Parkland tragedy. As often happens with my writing, something had triggered a reaction. Then, I don't finish the article, don't go back to rewrite and edit it, or just don't publish it. Writing is one of my main ways to organize and flesh out my thoughts. Publishing is not the main objective. The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting and subsequent reactions brought this draft to the forefront. Just a thought that still seems valid.

What if we came up with a graduated gun approval background check? Various levels of approval for various levels of weapons. Sort of like drivers licenses. We have learner permits, regular auto vehicle licenses, motorcycle designation, commercial designation, etc.

Maybe a novice gets to have a .22 pistol or rifle, a .410 shotgun or some other smaller, less powerful weapon. Or, a musket since that is actually the arms being referred to in the Second Amendment. You could upgrade to a standard level or license, with training, to a more powerful handgun and rifle or shotgun. Then there would be various levels of advanced approval that allowed very powerful handguns and maybe semi-automatic rifles. Maybe a more stringent and comprehensive background check. Maybe a mental health examination for the higher levels. I would hope that the more advanced levels required both extensive training and a reason to have powerful weapons. Most states already require at least classroom courses to obtain a permit to carry. Those classes could be expanded to include the various levels of licenses. I would hope that some actual shooting range training would also be included, especially for the levels past novice.  

Yes, I know a .22 pistol or rifle can kill people. The difference is that it can't kill dozens in a short time or injure hundreds from a 32nd-floor hotel suite. It would take a long time to kill over 20 church members, enough time for many to escape and/or overcome the shooter. Better odds that the victims would survive being shot. 

You would only be able to purchase a weapon or ammunition that matched your license or rating in the background check database.

To be effective, the criteria and the licensing would have to be somewhat uniform across the country. Otherwise, people would get certified and buy weapons in a lenient state. That doesn't mean that the states couldn't control the licensing, it just means that certain minimum criteria would have to be met. 

This is by no means a fully fleshed out idea or solution. There would be many details to work out. It is just an idea, a starting point. 

I'm sure the NRA and most right-wing people will object to this because they think the second amendment is absolute, it's not. Some anti-gun and left-wing folks will object too because it doesn't eliminate guns.

Well, the second amendment was written when muskets and single shot pistols were the modern weapons of the day. Those on the left must realize that guns are part of the American culture and are part of our Constitution. Even if we banned all guns today, there are still about 300 million weapons in the population. For most of them, the government has no idea where they are. 

I know this will probably never come to pass, at least in my lifetime. Still, it's a different idea. It is obvious that what we are doing now is not working. While we debate about gun control, mental health, hardening of sites, etc., more people die. We seem to be at an impasse. We seem to now accept mass shootings and 30,000 gun related deaths a year as normal. It has become the price many are willing to accept for the almost unabated right of some to possess a gun. 

I happen to think almost every problem has a solution. It may not be easy to achieve. Not everyone, maybe no one, will be completely happy, but solutions are possible.  

Just a thought.

wjh