#Gun Crime

Since it was brought up earlier, I feel a need to adequately explain my views.  This isn't an effortpost but a summary so I'm not going to be including sources.  Warning for consequentialists: this includes discussion of rights.  I believe that a shared basis of society and government is what allows for our society and democracy to exist and thrive and without a shared view there is only dysfunction.

-----------------

*Basis of Gun Ownership*

The most basic right is the right to life, and the right to defend one's life from is a natural corollary to the right to life.  I believe that this includes the right for people to arm themselves in order to defend their life and community from those who threaten it.  This right is both individual and collective and independent of any government.  Indeed, it is the basis of government, but it also exists independently and people have the right to defend their lives from the government if it abuses its power and violates their basic human rights.  This is also US foreign policy.

I firmly believe deprivation of the right to own and carry firearm must be subject to due process.  The reasons for deprivation must be clear, consistent, and predictable.  For these reasons I oppose denying firearm ownership/purchase to people on the "Do Not Fly" list (an illiberal institution ungoverned by due process) and "may issue" carry licenses (which are often given to those who are politically connected while being denied to those in non-specific need).

-----------------------

*Gun Crime and Gun Deaths*

These terms are often conflated by restrictionists.  Gun crime includes intentional violent use of a firearm towards others (including brandishing, shooting, and killing) and gun deaths include suicide and accidental deaths.  These are important categorical distinctions because each category requires a different approach.  Criminal gun violence can be further broken down into gang violence, intimate partner violence, and mass violence.  Each of these categories also requires its own approach.  Suicide and violence are complex issues with myriad causes, and reducing the level of suicide and violence in society requires a more holistic approach.

Looking only at murders: if one were to assume completely banning firearms would reduce eliminate all gun murder and that gun murder wouldn't be replaced with murder through other implements, the US would still have a higher murder rate than most European countries.  It is clear that the US murder rate is not high solely because of firearm ownership.  I believe the murder rate is high for cultural reasons, concentrated poverty, and a lack of care for the most desperate in society.  In order to reduce violence in our society, we must care for our fellow man.  This includes making sure everyone has adequate mental and physical healthcare, is adequately fed, housed, educated, represented, and paid; and that everyone has adequate time to raise their children and instill this sense of responsibility both for themselves and for their fellows.  These problems are difficult to solve and merely relying on them to reduce violence through the creation of a more just and inclusive society is not sufficient for addressing the issue of violent gun crime and suicide in the US.  Immediate action should be taken.

---------------------------

*Weapons*

First, in order to effectively direct policy, one must understand what types of weapons are typically used in criminal activity.  The vast majority of murders and shootings in the US are committed with handguns.  They are used because they are easy to conceal, easy to traffic, easy to use, and easy to hide.  About 6,000 murders each year are committed with handguns, and about 800 are committed with shotguns.  Rifles, including semi-automatic rifles often (but not always) used in mass shootings account for about 400 murders each year.  Despite the media attention and 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, they should not be the prime target for legislative energy.

Though a lot of focus is put on civilian arms approximating military arms, this has always been the case.  Military and civilian designs have typically been intermingled.  Civilian arms approximate military arms because military arms often introduce new technologies which take time to disseminate to the civilian firearm market.  Even the ubiquitous "Mauser molt action hunting rifle" started out as a military design and was adapted to civilian use because the advantages were clear (many were converted directly from military guns).  Similarly, innovations from the civilian sector are integrated into military usage when they prove beneficial.  This happens in both ways today.  Sport shooters optimize their firearms for their sports and those optimizations are adopted by military forces and civilian sporting design concepts and equipment make their way into military usage.  This synergy allows for both the civilian and military to have the best products available.

----------------------

#Policies

As I mentioned earlier, each *cause* of gun crime requires an appropriate *solution*.  Merely targeting weapons themselves, especially on the basis of preventing mass shootings, is unlikely to be effective.

*Suicide*

I start with suicide first because most people dying at the barrel of a gun do so by their own hand.  I am not ideologically opposed to suicide, but believe it should be a personal, rational, and sincere choice rather than a momentary impulse that the person would regret if given the opportunity.  Firearms are particularly relevant to suicide because they are effective.  Owning a firearm doesn't make one more likely to attempt suicide, but it makes success more likely.  Reducing the number of people desiring to commit suicide is a complicated topic that I don't know much about (but I still blame neoliberal atomization because it confirms my priors).

Public and accessible mental health care would would help people to address their problems, but I believe it should be combined with temporary voluntary gun surrender.  In this scheme, gun owners could voluntarily store their firearms with their town government for however long they needed.  While stored, the owners would be denied a background check or rental if they sought access to a gun through other means.  They would have a short waiting period (perhaps 7 days) before they could retrieve their guns from the state after they requested them back.  Ideally, at an owner's request, police would be able to check guns in.  Combining voluntary surrender with therapy and the suicide hotline would allow at-risk individuals to increase the barrier to suicide.  Often, a small barrier will prevent someone from going through with killing themselves.  This storage is useful because people that suicidal and at risk know that they're at risk and generally don't want to go through with it.  Burdening someone else with storing your guns is a barrier to exercising personal responsibility over your own mental health.  People may not have someone they trust to store their guns.  Even if they do, prior gun owners are less intimidated by purchasing a firearm.

This is to be used in conjunction with the current standard for involuntary firearm seizure and background check denial (being adjudicated mentally defective).

*Intimate partner homicide*

Many homicides that occur are between intimate partners.  Often, this form of homicide occurs abusive relationships.  The current standard (denying sale to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence) is good, but could be better.  Temporarily seizing a person's guns as they go through the criminal process seems warranted.  Similarly, seizing guns from people not currently capable of passing the required background check could reduce this type of violence.  This includes the subject of restraining orders.  There must be due process in granting and appealing the restraining order to meet due process requirements.

*Organized crime/gang homicide*

Trafficking and safe storage will be covered shortly, but I believe that the right to firearm ownership should be revoked for people found guilty of misdemeanor violent crimes at the discretion of a judge.  People who have lost their firearm rights through this process have a quick court process through which to regain their rights if they can show they are a non-violent member of society.

Community policing initiatives such as Operation Ceasefire are more effective at reducing homicide than additional restrictions on gun ownership.  These programs identify youths most at risk for killing and being killed and work on reintegrating them into society.  Despite the proven effectiveness of these programs, they still lack funding across a lot of the US.  Organized crime is a systemic issue and more likely to be solved by social programs to alleviate poverty and despair than gun control.

*Mass violence*

I did not separate terrorism from mass shootings because I believe they are caused by similar root causes, those being withdrawal into communities that glorify violence and social disconnection.  I believe the most effective way to confront mass violence is to monitor these communities, reach out to the individuals, and make attempts at reintegration and deradicalization.  Perpetrators of mass violence use the most effective means available and even banning all semi-automatic weapons would be insufficient to stop scenes of slaughter.  Perpetrators have effectively made use of trucks, double-barreled shotguns, pump shotguns, bolt action rifles, grenades, and bombs.  Despite the headlines, this is a relatively uncommon type of violence and basing firearms laws around it is not efficient.  Agreeing with major newspapers to not obsess over the details of shooters would be a good step, but I question how effective it would be in today's environment of free flow of information.

*Trafficking*

I completely support universal background checks for all purchases, but prefer if individuals were able to carry out background checks without going to a store and paying a fee, but that's unfortunately unlikely.  Universal background checks are more or less equivalent to registration.  This makes ownership an acknowledgement rather than a request for permission.  I'd prefer that the government build a database on background checks rather than registration because it puts less burden on the individual.  Requiring owners to report lost or stolen guns could close a loophole in the system.  The law should hold gun owners who fail to report missing or stolen guns responsible if they're used in a crime.  The federal government should devote more effort to stopping the interstate flow of firearms.  Having more information would allow them to accurately determine who exhibits suspicious purchase patterns.

*Accidental death*

The $250 tax rebate for purchasing a gun safe should be provided at the point of sale rather than year-end taxes.  All guns purchases currently include a locking system to prevent children from firing a gun they find, but these cable locks don't prevent a gun from being stolen.  Increasing gun safe ownership could reduce the number of stolen guns.  Also parents negligently allow their children to gain access to a firearm should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  Prosecuting parents may seem cruel, but ensuring a culture of responsible ownership requires legal consequences for those that are irresponsible.

*Pistol Permits*

Federal pistol permits shall be issued to individuals upon completion of an approved permit class.  They must be provided within 10 business days from the date of request if no legitimate reason for denial exists.  Only through due process may a person be denied their right to own a pistol.  The class includes an overview of carry laws, firearm safety, justified self defense law and appropriate action after a defensive situation, and a live-fire qualification.  For individuals with urgent need, this permitting process shall be expedited.  Individuals without a permit may rent pistols to practice.  A federal license guarantees the holder the right to carry a weapon concealed in every state.

#Relaxing Existing Regulations

Some restrictions introduced in the National Firearms Act were included to fix problems that no longer exist.  Notably, the NFA was originally designed to include pistols and a number of legally restricted categories are designed to close loopholes and ban concealable weapons.  Restrictions on short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and "Any Other Weapon"s are made arbitrary and pointless because pistols were not regulated by the act.  These should be unrestricted to pistol permit holders.  Suppressors, originally added as an anti-poaching measure in the great depression, are a safety device and protect shooter's hearing.  They're considerate to neighbors and beneficial to shooters and shouldn't be regulated.  I believe there should be a special license for the acquisition of fully automatic firearms for collectors of curios and relics.  This may include a high tax, club-membership restrictions, or anything else.  Additionally, non-violent felonies unrelated to organized crime should not restrict an individuals right to bear arms.

#Conclusion

Taken together, I believe these policies can greatly reduce firearm homicide in the US in a way that avoids arbitrary or blanket restrictions.  Rights are only denied through due process.  Personal responsibility is encouraged and irresponsibility is discouraged.  Issues are targeted at their cause rather than focusing on the symptoms.  Arbitrary restrictions are lifted and gun owners have less restrictions on what they can own.