Everyday Carry
By Robb Manning
A Practical Gun Solution
Few would argue there is a real problem in American with violence. It’s in the streets of the cities, it’s in the suburbs and rural areas. When someone thinks it’s expectable to go into an elementary school and shoot small children, barely out of the toddler stage - we have a problem.
The problem isn’t with guns, the problem isn’t TV, or movies, or video games. The problem runs much deeper than that. There is a plethora of reasons, and they are complicated. I can name a few that are obvious, but would only be guessing at the rest. My intent is not to get into the debate of the problem -- that is for another time. But instead, I want to offer a possible solution. As a adamant supporter of the 2nd Amendment, I want to make sure it doesn’t infringe, but as a human, I want to help prevent unnecessary blood-shed. Current policy changes that are being debated and offered up would do nothing to help the problem. My solution is not perfect, and details need to be ironed out, but it would help prevent sales to “bad guys” and to those that should not own firearms, due to mental illness. As I said, it’s not perfect, but it’s better than what’s being offered.
A national “no buy” database, which is only populated with the names and social security numbers (and perhaps address) of those who cannot buy firearms. This would include those that are legally not allowed -- felons, and those that are deemed mentally ill or mentally incapable of owning a firearm. This way, those that are legally allowed to buy firearms are not tracked, and they and the firearms are not registered -- a big concern amongst pro-second amendment groups. However, any person who is selling a firearm can go to the website, or call the toll-free number, and enter the persons name and social security number, and find out if the person can purchase the firearm. The only information that is available to the person entering the information is “YES” or “NO.” If the person cannot buy, it simply says, “NO,” with no explanation given, no private information given out.
It’s simple for those that are legally not allowed, such as felons, but with mental health issues it becomes a little more complicated, as it always does. Licensed mental health professionals (MDs, PhDs, etc) as well as law enforcement departments and agencies will be able to submit to the database, the information of those that are not mentally competent enough to purchase firearms. In some cases, it could be a temporary issue. In this instance, the healthcare professional or law enforcement would submit a “temporary hold” on the person for a given time period, at which at the end of the time period the person’s name and information disappears off the list. An example of this could be someone going through a particularly hard divorce, and he is seeing a health care professional to help him get through it. He has never been a threat before, or had a problem, but is now. The professional could place a 6 month, or 1 year hold on him, entering his name into the database temporarily. Persons subject to restraining orders are automatically entered into the database for the period that the restraining order is good for.
There should also be a challenge process for people that feel they have been erroneously or wrongly entered. This wouldn’t be open to those that are on the list for legal reasons (felons, restraining orders (for the given time period)) or for those with long term or permanent mental health issues. For those challenging, they would submit paperwork to the database agency, and they are required to give a verdict within a given time period (i.e. 30 days.)
This database is too important to be run by the government, who has a long history of mucking things up. It should be run by a private firm, who would not be subject to the whims of anti-gun administration or legislatures. To satisfy everyone, the board of the firm should consist of 1/2 pro-2nd amendment members, to include a representative of the NRA, and the GOA, and 1/2 opposition members. I feel this is necessary to: 1. keep it democratic and transparent, and 2. if it is just pro-2nd Amendment members, they will be subjected to hate and bullying from anti-gun groups and administrations. If everyone is represented, there will be less finger pointing at the firm. Law enforcement should be represented by a member, and possibly one legislative member from each party -- elected by their party.
Also, when a person is added to the list for reasons of mental illness, the caregiver (or family) has X-number of days (depending on the graveness of the person’s illness -- 30 days, to 24 hours) to relieve the individual of their firearms and secure them.
This is a complicated subject, and this is just a baseline start. It is not perfect, but better than what is being proposed, which will do nothing to fix the real problem. The details of the database and it’s management should be ironed out by the above mentioned board. And of course, I am willing to give my input.