IT IS PUT FORTH THAT:

A great number of Americans are law abiding gun owners whose handguns, long guns, and tactical rifles have never been used in crimes. 

The majority of Americans do not want the 2nd amendment rights of law abiding citizens to acquire, possess, and use firearms for hunting, recreation, and self-defense to be infringed or diminished in any way.

The majority of Americans also do not want anyone’s unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to be infringed or destroyed by those who misuse that 2nd amendment right to do harm. 

All rights are a balancing act with each other and none are absolute when they trample on another. When mass shootings become common place and some people are shut-ins in their homes because of rampant gun violence in their community it is time to restore some balance between the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and gun rights under the 2nd amendment.

For far too long extreme and uncompromising voices on the far right and far left have dominated the firearms violence discussion and have held America hostage by preventing any action on this issue when poll after poll shows the American public overwhelming supports certain actions such as universal background checks and extreme risk protection orders (also known as Red or Yellow Flag laws) and does not support bans.  While these extreme and uncompromising voices have prevented any action from taking place, mass shootings have become more frequent and more deadly. 

Extreme gun rights advocates would have you believe that any new gun legislation is a step down the slippery slope to government gun registration and confiscation while more guns make us safer.  If it were as simple as more guns make us safer the U.S. should be the safest country on the planet because there are far more guns per capita in the U.S. than any other country. It is a lack of adequate firearms regulation that allows the wrong people access to firearms that results in the U.S. often ranking among the top 10 countries with the highest total and per capita firearms related homicides, suicides and violent crime.  The assertion that any firearms laws are a step to government confiscation is purposeful distraction and fear mongering. It is not legally or physically possible for the Federal Government to ban and collect everyone’s firearms.

Extreme gun control advocates would have you believe that all guns are bad and banning assault weapons is where to start when in reality the 1994 Federal assault weapons ban simply caused the gun industry to lawfully engineer around the law by modifying banned cosmetic features and then mass producing the exact same assault weapons but with new features like the thumb-hole stock to replace pistol grips. Assault weapons never went away. Bans don’t work and they punish the responsible whole for the mis-deeds of a small few.  Guns are not inherently bad.  An enormous number of Americans own an equally enormous number of firearms which are never used in crimes. It is a lack of adequate firearms regulation that allows the wrong people access to firearms that is the problem. The Federal assault weapons ban sunset in September 2004 and it is probable that passage of a new assault weapons ban would be found un-constitutional based on the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. 

THEREFORE IT IS PETITIONED THAT THE U.S. CONGRESS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING:

No law or laws is going to prevent all mass shootings and other forms of gun violence however there are some common sense laws that could be enacted that respect the 2nd amendment while better protecting Americans right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  There are certainly larger societal issues related to absentee parenting, bullying, the impact of violent video games on young children, and resources to address mental health that are factors in Americas gun violence - but this is where to start. Congress needs to pass a Federal Act with compromising bi-partisan appeal that includes all of the following;

1)    Universal Background Checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System (NICS):  Resurrect and pass the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013, also known as the Manchin-Toomey bill.  This was an excellent bill that was defeated in the Senate by a very slim margin on April 17, 2013.  It would require universal background checks on all gun transfers with limited exceptions for transfers and inheritances between family members and friends. Not only does a universal background check system help prevent the 9 categories of prohibited persons listed in Title 18, U.S.C. § 922(g) from acquiring firearms, it also helps law enforcement stop illegal firearms trafficking.  Under current Federal laws the private sale of firearms from one person to another may or may not be illegal depending on a number of factors.  It takes a lot of time and work to establish the elements of proof for violations used in firearms trafficking investigations and distinguish those sales from a lawful transfer.  However, if there were universal background checks, anyone transferring firearms in a private sale on the street would be in violation of a universal background checks law and this would give law enforcement another tool to stop illegal firearms trafficking.  Law abiding citizens would go get the background check done while criminals intent on trafficking firearms would not and those illegal transaction would be more readily identifiable to law enforcement. There would be no ambiguous grey area – this law would help prevent gun crime before it happens.  While enforcement of existing gun laws is very important, many gun laws are reactive laws that allow law enforcement to arrest people AFTER a gun crime against a victim has taken place. Universal background checks is a proactive step to preventing the gun crime by preventing the wrong people from accessing guns.     

2)    Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order (FERPO):  Twenty States and the District of Columbia currently have versions of ERPOs on the books.  The great State of Maine has an ERPO referred to as a Yellow Flag law and is found in Sec. 1 15 MRSA Chapter 16.  There are still 30 States with no ERPO and those that have ERPOs have different standards.  It is recommended that Congress establish a Federal ERPO that mirrors much of the Maine ERPO which allows household members and law enforcement to petition the court for issuance of an ERPO and the removal of firearms from a person deemed by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others.  This process could be handled in Federal Magistrate Court.  Federal magistrates already routinely make determinations concerning levels of danger to the community during bond and pre-trial detention hearings for Federal defendants having their initial appearance following arrest. If a FERPO is granted by a Federal Magistrate following a hearing the subject would have to relinquish their firearms while the FERPO is in effect, they would not be allowed to acquire new firearms while under the FERPO.  Issued FERPOs would expire after 2 years unless the court were petitioned and again found after a hearing that the person continued to present a danger.  

3)    Federal Concealed Firearms Permit (FCFP):  Law abiding citizens with concealed weapons permits are not the cause of gun violence or mass shootings in America. Currently most states allow some form of concealed firearms permitting or permit-less carry (also known as Constitutional Carry).  Many states have reciprocal carry agreements with other states. That said, the criteria for these concealed firearms permit varies from State to State and not all meet the standard to qualify for a NICs background check exemption.  It is recommend Congress consider establishing a FCFP.  The fee for any FCFP should cover the cost of processing and issuance of the permit. The FCFP would be for the applicant and would not collect or require any information on the firearm(s) a person owns. An FCFP would be useful for a number of reasons;

a.     Firearms Proficiency: Demonstrated firearms proficiency standards could be established to ensure those carrying concealed firearms know how to safely, effectively, and lawfully use them. Universal and consistent training on what to do if the permit holder is engaging an armed suspect and the police show up needs to be delivered.  Upon arrival at a shooting scene the police won’t know who the “good guy with a gun” is and permit holders need to know how to interact with law enforcement so they are not shot. Permit holders also need to know how to interact with other permit holders who also start to engage an active shooter because the permit holders need to determine who the bad guy is and who the other good guys are.  The National Rifle Associations (NRA) assertion that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” is not wrong but it is a dramatic over simplification of these situations. It takes common training to prevent the situation from becoming worse.  

b.     NICS Exemption: The background check and vetting process used for the FCFP would allow persons of any State who are issued a FCFP to become NICs check exempt while the FCFP is valid. Being able to get an FCFP would be a benefit to persons in those states where their current state issued concealed weapons permit is not NICs exempt.

c.     Armed Crime Prevention: Permitted law abiding persons with demonstrated firearms proficiency would be able to a carry a concealed firearm in any state potentially increasing the chances of having an armed person present who might be able to prevent a mass shooting or other armed crime. Being able to get an FCFP would be a benefit to persons in those states where their current state issued concealed weapons permit has limited reciprocity in other states.

d.     Security Business Expansion: Allow for expansion of armed private security by affording private companies the ability to employ armed security that can travel throughout the U.S. carrying concealed firearms without being limited by their State permit reciprocity agreement. 

4)    Licensed Gun Dealer Regulation Reform:  Currently ATFs options for dealing with licensed gun dealers who commit records keeping and NICS background check violations is either a warning or license revocation and often times neither is the right level of response to the violation. Warnings can be easily disregarded and revocations of someone’s livelihood may be far too punitive.  A law should be enacted allowing ATF to have options for addressing licensed gun dealer violations that falls in between a warning and license revocation to include the assessment of sliding fines or brief license suspensions. In 2013 such a provision was included in a bill introduced by Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and endorsed by NRA.

5)    Re-Affirmation of Existing Law; Include a statement of re-affirmation of existing law to demonstrate that there is no intent nor ability to go beyond government authority with this legislation.

a.     No Gun Confiscation:  The 2nd amendment to the US Constitution states that “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.” In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller  that the 2nd amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home.

b.     No Gun Bans:  In 2008 the US Supreme Court in held that the Federal government may regulate firearms but may not ban firearms as DC did when they banned handguns.   In 2010 in McDonald v City of Chicago the US Supreme Court held that state and local governments may regulate firearms but may not ban firearms as Chicago did when they made registration of handguns virtually impossible.  Federal, state, or local gun bans would not be upheld as Constitutional by the US Supreme Court.  

c.     No Gun Registration:  Federal gun registration, other than for machineguns, silencers, short-barreled rifles/shotguns, and destructive devices under the National Firearms Act of 1934, is already unlawful under current Federal law.  Title 18 U.S.C. § 926(a)(3) of  the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 states “ No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.”

It’s time for members of Congress to overcome those who are uncompromising partisans hiding behind false narratives on both sides of this issue. It's time to for Congress to act on the facts.  Congress can legislate this, the President can enforce this, and the Courts can review this and uphold it as Constitutional.  The American system established by the Founders still works but it takes action that starts in Congress.  Do your job and represent the will of the majority of Americans!