Thread by @Johnny_Joey

Thread.

As an EOD (Bonn) technician the United States government trained me extensively on our history of combating explosive threats at home and abroad. In the heat of this debate I’d like to add some perspective on the subject from my perspective.

Background:

we banned these types of guns for 10 years (94-04).

During that time we had: Oklahoma City, Olympic park, Eric Rudolph, and 9/11. Every major study (federal, independent and interest groups) showed little to no change in gun violence during that time.

What’s changed since then?

We now have about 600 million guns in circulation. Innovation makes its cheap and easy to build the parts they’d ban in your garage with tools from Home Depot

The internet has brought information on how to build bombs and guns to our hands

In the 1980s we banned new production of fully automatic guns. Meaning, the roughly 100,000 in circulation at the time could be registered under and updated NFA

NFA is national firearms act. 1920s era legislation mandating a class 3 license issued to own a silencer or short barreled rifle (barrels under 16”). the NFA was a specific law aimed at making “tommy guns” unobtainable by the mob.

Today, you can own a fully automatic gun. Yet they’re never/(rarely?)used in mass shootings. It has to be one of those 100,000 guns registered and you have to pass a 3-9 month long enhanced background check process and abide by various rules of possession and usage.

The law itself is outdated, it still costs the same $200 to obtain and the original premise (short barreled rifles and suppressors) were in reference to “tommy guns” used by gangsters. Neither of those things make a gun silent or more accurate.

Take away the fact that NFA is a registry and takes months to approve, it also prices these guns out of range for most Americans. The law itself creates a singular class of Americans who can afford to out arm the rest.

What does all this mean? Changing laws and banning certain weapons is not an answer. What would happen if semi automatic weapons or high capacity magazines were banned? How do we fully understand the effect, what evidence do we have to look back on and what factors are different?

When we banned these rifles in the 90’s and 00’s we saw the most horrific instances of mass murder on American soil we’ve ever seen. Today, information on making bombs is infinitely more readily available.

So, then what’s the solution? My gun friends (of which I am one) would say incorporating semiautomatic rifles and magazines into NFA would infringe upon their rights, the process takes entirely too long, costs would soar, and it would create a de facto registry
.

But is there a way to apply a similar extensive background checking system to purchasing these items and restricting how we posses and exchange them without adding the burdens of NFA? Honestly, I don’t know.

I think it’s a start to a compromise. BUT ONLY if those attempting to ban our guns educate themselves on the issue, come in good faith, and allow the process to be geared towards both guaranteeing constitutional right to bare arms and ensuring these guns aren’t in the wrong hands

Likewise, there has to be a grandfathering of existing weapons and magazines... (the registry problem). This both safeguards those of us who responsibly own guns of this nature, but also subjects us to new government regulations, potentially opening our lives to govt malpractice

A rework of NFA should also include revisiting the inclusion of Suppressors and rifles with barrels under 16”s. Suppressors do not silence guns, they do not effect how fast they shoot and they have little to no effect on accuracy. Suppressors make shooting guns safer.

The point here is, there is no trust between gun owners and the government. In places like DC and New York even the Supreme Court has been snubbed on this issue. NFA is an arduous process, costs too much and takes way too long for a fully vetted, law-abiding citizen... but

The vetting process works to the extent NFA items are handled with added care and responsibility and are rarely used carelessly (almost never) with ill intent. If people want new guns laws, they need to be open to laws they are reflective of 2019.

This means acknowledge ban is irresponsible and, by proof of past laws, will certainly do little to curtail gun violence and mass killings, and ultimately will come at the cost of law-abiding citizens. It also means anyone calling for new gun laws needs to understand current laws

What do gun owners like me want?
-NFA shouldn’t be so expensive.
-NFA process shouldn’t take 9<mos
-Supressors shouldn’t be NFA
-entire household should be on one application.
-continue manufacturing and purchasing of semi auto/mags

What do Gun control proponents want?
-bam/restrict purchase and manufacturing of semi auto and high capacity mags
-registry of who owns these guns
-extensive background check of owners
**-reduce/eliminate use of these weapons to kill innocent people

Let me say, Gun owners also want to eliminate the use of these weapons to kill innocent people as well.

So there is the background, the current laws, the truth abount these guns and the points of contention. If you are going to be active in this debate read it, learn it, and come to the table with and understanding.