Martin: Actual, Effective Steps That Will Reduce Gun Violence in America

do something protest

Bigstock

The quote of the day is presented by Guns.com.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure a well regulated — which is to say, well supplied and well prepared — militia.

We’re falling down on that responsibility. While there are more than 300 million privately owned guns in the United States there are also millions and millions of members of the militia who are not armed. In certain rogue cities and states, it’s legally difficult for members of the militia to be properly armed. And as a result, those rogue cities and states have massive gun violence problems.

This has to stop. I’m proposing that we campaign to reduce gun violence, and to meet our constitutional duty, by requiring that every member of the militia — which, of course,  we’ll redefine to eliminate the obvious sexism and make it all adults — must own at least one long gun, one handgun, and 1000 rounds of ammunition for each, or pay an annual $1000 tax for failing to do so. As I pointed out the last time I brought this up, the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare makes it clear that it’s constitutional to require people to buy a product, so that shouldn’t be a problem. And, federal law would override the local laws in rogue cities like Chicago that prevent members of the militia from fulfilling their Constitutional duty.

Charlie Martin in To Reduce Gun Violence, Arm All Americans

comments

  1. avatar Gregory Peter DuPont says:

    A proposal that I can get behind 100%

    1. avatar SGT Preston says:

      Sign me up on that list of those who could get behind such a proposal

  2. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

    America should no more fine people for not owning guns than she should fine them for not voting.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      Either vote or pay a fine? I like this idea!

      But only a small fine, I don’t want to get all crazy about it. Start at $5.

      The important point is where the money from the non-voters would go. It would be shared equally with those who did vote.

      I Love This Plan! I’m Excited to be a part of it!

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        That would have two effects.

        1) Uninformed people voting. This generally means more votes for Democrats/Socialists.

        2) Stupid laws that cost more to enforce than is justifiable. This breeds disrespect for laws generally.

        Maybe think stuff through before you support the government expanding its power.

        1. avatar enuf says:

          Nope, not going to happen. My share of a small fine for not voting will support my pizza and beer budget. Maybe even buy a brick of .22LR ammo once a year. Possibly squeeze in some imported dark chocolate for the missus from time to time.

          This is gonna’ beat the snot out of wasting a buck on the lottery each week!!!

        2. avatar Hush says:

          Well, increase the fine to say $25 or $50. Have increased fines for multiple offenders. Donate the proceeds to pro gun groups i.e. groups who offer gen safety classes etc

        3. avatar George Washington says:

          He has a well thought out plan…..a lot more thought out than what you propose….. Which is NOTHING

        4. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          @George Washington

          Lol “well thought out plan” 😂 His plan is literally fine people $5 for not voting so he can buy beer and pizza. In other words, his stomach is dictating his politics.

        5. avatar enuf says:

          OmnivorousBeorn – Please do not forget the imported dark chocolate for the lady of the house.

          And it’s not just my pizza and beer budget, it’s your’s too. I mean, if you are a voter that is!

        6. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          @enuf I’m sure your lady will be proud of you for relying on the government for her gifts.

        7. avatar SeaMore says:

          Wow. Just wow. And how do think forcing everyone to own several guns-or be fined- would get enforced? A little more gov’mt oversight, which seems to make you SO antsy. Hmmm.
          The sheer stupidity of your idea is mind-boggling. Just proves you don’t have to have a wit of intelligence to get a forum to spread really bad ideas to the mass of small-minded people in this country who are entertained by spreading ill-will toward anyone who disagrees with them.
          Can someone explain to me how “conservatives” (usually ‘outwardly’ religious) belie their faith by publicly reveling in the hate they have for anyone that has a different opinion then them? Ps: I know it’s hard to actually imagine, but I wonder how any of you “Patriots” would REALLY feel if one of YOUR loved ones was murdered during the course of an average day simply because they crossed paths with a stranger who had a grudge and a gun, and -they never had a chance because they never saw it coming (lest you want to respond-oh, he’d\she’d save the day and kill the shooter because they were carrying!).

        8. avatar Geoff "Hurry-up and *die*, Ruthie" PR says:

          “Ps: I know it’s hard to actually imagine, but I wonder how any of you “Patriots” would REALLY feel if one of YOUR loved ones was murdered during the course of an average day simply because they crossed paths with a stranger who had a grudge and a gun,…”

          Atheist here, I’ll be happy to tell someone, (even as narrow-minded as you are) just how that works –

          It requires accepting that evil people exist. Bad things happen. Life is fragile.

          A quote outline the basic idea –

          “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” –

          Thomas Jefferson

      2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        When I don’t vote and refuse to pay the fine what are going to do?

        1. avatar enuf says:

          Oh that’s an easy one. Teams of volunteer citizen drone operator militia will watch for when a not voter leaves ther house, goes to work or the store. While you are away the drones will swoop in and take your stuff. Then it all gets sold off on Ebay.

      3. avatar Billy says:

        You have it backwards: to vote you must pay taxes. Pay no tax, get no vote.

        1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          Still, do you really want everyone voting?

      4. avatar My $0.02 says:

        Voting via our current corrupt venue of government is like betting on a rigged horse race, you’re going to lose no matter the winner unless you’re in on the take.

        Show me in the Constitution where it says anything about political parties being necessary to elect our government servants.

        “However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.” — George Washington

        It’s too late people. Wake up. We need to rip the party system. Down with all parties. They only ever serve their own interests in the end, never ours.

        My only vote is a vote of no confidence of the system, it’s broken and has divorced itself from our foundational documents and the literal and spiritual declaration of their purpose.

    2. avatar Cliff H says:

      I am not liking the stick of a federal fine for non-compliance, although I think the general concept has merit. I would prefer to go with the carrot than the stick – a tax deduction for a household that has the requisite arms.

      But then I am stymied by the fact that the federal government now has a list, voluntarily provided, of armed Americans. A de facto registration of firearms.

      And will the BATFE be sending people around to verify your possession of the required equipment and that it is in good working order?

      1. avatar Ing says:

        The biggest problems with registration are the tendency of government to use onerous registry requirements to discourage the free exercise of rights and the possibility that it turns into a list of undesirables who then become targets.

        Not such a big deal when the list is literally every adult between the ages of 18 and 46.

      2. avatar MarkPA says:

        No, no no! You have it all wrong!

        Many tax cheats will claim the deduction when they do NOT have firearms in their homes. Well, no system is perfect.

        I would augment this program by having the IRS publish a list by ZIP code listing the names of taxpayers who claim the deduction. Then, if any tax cheats are known by their fastidious neighbors to be NOT gun owners, such neighbors will turn-in the tax cheats.

        Armed IRS agents will no-knock raid the homes of the tax cheats looking for arms – for which tax deductions have been taken – but are not to be found.

        A tragic side-effect of my proposal is that home invaders will also be able to work-out which homes have not claimed the deduction and which are less dangerous to target. But no system is perfect.

        Perhaps some gun owners (who don’t want to reveal to the IRS that they are upholding their militia duty) will be targeted by home invaders. Won’t these criminals be surprised!

        You critics must think these programs through thoroughly. The effects are not always obvious.

    3. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

      You mean like Australia does…if I recall correctly….

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        Keywords: “America” and “should”

    4. avatar Icabod says:

      I’m for a $100 tax credit for voting. Given, we’ll need a national voter ID, but how can a reasonable, common sense thing like that be a problem?

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        This must be the hundredth time this morning I’ve seen the term “common sense” in gun related articles. It’s getting to be so overused that it’s now just white noise.

        1. avatar billy-bob says:

          Kind of like “racist”.

    5. avatar Southern Cross says:

      In my part of world with compulsory voting, not voting in an election can get you fined $65. Only received the notice once because a local election was a week before a federal election and I didn’t know about it. I replied with that on the form and wasn’t fined.

  3. avatar Achmed says:

    So …. I like it if course but it is obviously silly. By the way, Texas got a lot of guns. It is not exactly the disarmed shithole Chicago is. We can start with more education, more efforts to use media smartly, more shooting competitions in more places, fewer $6.5 million mansions for executives.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      It is not exactly the disarmed shithole Chicago is.

      Here we go again, NYC (you know CITY that has a lower murder rate that the whole of Texas) is disarmed

      There is no real restrictions on hand guns and the state is SHALL ISSUE. There are “local” restrictions on long guns, but they are a joke.

      There is a FOID card, but the state police makes is as easy as they can for you to apply for it online, it costs almost nothing and if you can legally own a gun (no criminal record) you can get one for a whole $10. The gangs like them as they can pre-screen members and associates before they go to the store.

      1. avatar former water walker says:

        Yep…it doesn’t help when Boch repeats this ignorance! And we need less gubmint intrusion-not more.

  4. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    This was the law in many places 200+ years ago, although there was always a conscientious objector provision for the Quakers.

  5. avatar Geoff "Hurry-up and *die*, Ruthie" PR says:

    A small town in Georgia years back had something similar, a requirement for every household to have at least 1 gun.

    The law specified there was no penalty for not complying.

    Those that passed it just wanted the word to get out that their citizens were armed…

    1. avatar Gman says:

      And their crime rate fell.
      My neighbor put up bunches of blue signs for dems in 2016. I put up one red sign:
      I support the 2nd Amendment >>>> them, not so much.

    2. avatar Pg2 says:

      Hank, guesty, Geoff, huntsman, the town was Kennesaw, GA, and it had one of the lowest crime rates in he state, if not the lowest.

      1. avatar Geoff "Hurry-up and *die*, Ruthie" PR says:

        “Hank, guesty, Geoff, huntsman, the town was Kennesaw, GA,…”

        That was *one* person, me.

        I have to know, how does it feel being the laughingstock of TTAG with your paranoid delusions that one person is posting using multiple screen names?

        Frank Zappa wrote a song for you :

        “Do the walls close in t’ suffocate ya
        You ain’t got no friends…
        An’ all the others: they hate ya?
        Does the life you been livin’ gotta go, hmmm?”

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          Aw….Geoff/guesty/hank/huntsman a little upset he’s so transparent? Play more songs. That’ll do it.

    3. avatar Big Bill says:

      While the law existed, it was specifically stated by the council that it would not be enforced in any way.
      Evidently, they didn’t know what a resolution was.

    4. avatar Randy Jones says:

      Kennesaw as I recall. Just north west of Atlanta. Been there, nice little community. Their crime dropped shortly after that law went into effect and their neighboring communities had their crime go up slightly.

      1. avatar Mike Davis says:

        I’m from there. In the nearly 38 years it has become law, there have been very few murders by firearms despite the liberal weenies screaming their heads off that we’d have blood flowing in the streets. The murders occurred in gun free zones as well.

        I’ve pointed this out to folks who have told me that, “Oh, that’s a little town in Georgia. That won’t work in the big city.” I then tell them that Cobb County has a population of around 1m and in good traffic on I75, (2am on a holiday) you can drive from downtown Atlanta to downtown Kennesaw in 25 minutes.

  6. avatar Gman says:

    Well, I think that 300 million number is about 200 million short. Obama sold well over 100 million alone. But, I propose mandatory military or civil service instead. Our problem is that our youth are being indoctrinated by leftist schooling. We need to open their eyes to both the righteous of our Constitutional Republic and the moral depravity of the left. The military can do that.

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      Earned citizenship including the earned right to vote, through civil or military service?

      Robert A. Heinlein would approve.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        We already do that.
        Military service can expedite the path to citizenship.

        1. avatar Dan W says:

          But we do it exactly wrong by offering it to foreigners.

          That’s one of the last things all empires do before they collapse.

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          Have a son in jarhead basic right now. Says the majority of his platoon is “hispanic”. Where infiltrators or legal unknown. We established that the Central American gangs have been placing “members” in combat arms MOS to get training for years.

          Recruiting environment now is very difficult. WASPs kiddies largely snowflakes and couch potatoes.

    2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

      The same government that runs those indoctrinating schools also runs the military. Hell they brainwashed all fo you vets into thinking you were doing good when you were in. What the heck do you think they are going to train the youth of today to do? Shoot older Americans who resist gun control, that’s what.

      If you like guns and/or value freedom the government is not your friend. None of it.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Kiss my ass numbnuts. That you didn’t have the balls is YOUR failure. Your belief/words repudiate your “membership” in the militia of the 2nd Amendment.

        1. avatar Joseph says:

          X100 “I was gonna join but…”

  7. avatar TweetyRex says:

    Tax credits for having a concealed weapon permit. Tax credits for firearms training. Tax credits for ammunition purchases. If you take the credit for a concealed weapon permit, and get pulled over and DON’T have your gun on, get a ticket. Crime will go down soon as we will run out of criminals.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      The Left keeps harping about “where was your good guy with a gun?”

      My answer is there isn’t enough good guys with guns. I guess we are probably at around 20 million permits now. That’s just over 6% of the population. When we get to 50% (and who actually carry), we’ll be doing better.

      1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

        For a long time, maybe ten years I looked for the 6 percent solution (a play on words with Sherlock Holmes). I was in hope that we would reach a tipping point of 3 percent of “good guys and girls” ACTUALLY trained and carrying on any given time and place . 3 percent was the percentage of Americans who actually took up arms against the British Parliament and Crown in the American Revolution. Unfortunately we have not reached the “tipping point” that Malcolm Gladwell talks about in the book of same name.

        Sonny Pizikus “The Instructor” (former Soviet Spetsnaz operator and now proud American) may have nailed it in his rant after El Paso when he stated we are a nation of gun owners, not fighters…

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          There CERTAINLY was NOT 3% carrying in 1776

      2. avatar Kendahl says:

        Ohio police officer Greg Ellifritz (activeresponsetraining.net) estimates that only one quarter of CCW permit holders actually carry regularly. Furthermore, many of them will not act unless they, or their families, are threatened personally. (Their reasoning is, “I’m not going to risk my future to protect someone who could, but won’t, protect himself.”)

      3. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        I read that here in Texas only about 8% of the population have permits. Most of us are waiting for Constitutional Carry because we do not believe in getting mug shots and fingerprints like a convicted criminal, the send in money to beg for permission to use a constitutional right that we already have. You can legally carry in your auto without a permit here.

  8. avatar CLarson says:

    Socialized gun ownership? Worth a shot. At least this proposal won’t impact government debt, unlike Obamacare. States should try it first, any State who does could have a big advantage as balkanization continues.

  9. avatar Someone says:

    There’s no such animal as “gun violence”. No “hammer violence” or “fist violence” either. Stop using leftist newspeak. He, who controls the language, controls human minds.

    1. avatar Notorious says:

      Yea, and stop calling it daycare. They don’t take care of days, they take care of children. Until you get that straight nothing will change because we are just victims of words (even though technically a victim is dead)

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        This is gold.

  10. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    The idea of every citizen being a solider first is a good one, but until we start raising kids be fit (mentally and physically) for conscription, this won’t work. Merely owning a gun doesn’t make you anymore prepared for war than owning boxing gloves makes you prepared to go 15 rounds…

    And I don’t like the “fine” aspect. We need less gov’t intervention, not more it.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Less government but we should raise our kids to be fit for conscription? A conscript is a slave to the government. That’s about as much government intervention as possible.

      1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        The founders were able to do it…

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          No they didn’t.

      2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        We finally agree on something.

        In my interviews of WWII Veterans (not the glazed eyed talking heads on TV) most said that war was only the Filthy Rich becoming more Wealthy and the working man sending his sons to have their heads blown off. History certainly would substantiate that statement “add infinitum”.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          You’re a liar, plain and simple.
          That’s certainly not what the vast majority of WWII vets ever said.
          But then, this particular Vlad Tepid only lies.

        2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          To Big Bill Smartypants

          “That’s certainly not what the vast majority of WWII vets ever said.”

          Ha, I gotcha! I interviewed plenty of video game players who played lots of WWII video games. Who would want to talk to a bunch of scary old men anyway?

        3. avatar George Washington says:

          Wtf is wrong with you??????
          How many times have I told you to GET THE FK OUT OF MY COUNTRY YOU ILLEGAL TURD…

        4. avatar Kendahl says:

          Vlad: Do you mean filthy rich fathers like Joseph Kennedy who lost his first son, Joe Jr, in the war and nearly lost his second son, John? There are things I don’t like about the Kennedy family but three of Joe Sr’s sons died in the service of their country.

      3. avatar Pg2 says:

        While I agree with you in this, you’re a blatant hypocrite.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          I’m a hippocrite for not believing in your pseudo science? I oppose conscription and I oppose government coerced vaccinations. How is that hippocritical?

        2. avatar Pg2 says:

          Conscription is slavery, but the government having the authority to force pharmaceuticals on the population is ok? Can’t make this shit up.

        3. avatar Pg2 says:

          Just reread your post. What pseudoscience have I ever presented here? None. And I stand corrected about your position, if you’re telling the truth.

        4. avatar Geoff "Hurry-up and *die*, Ruthie" PR says:

          “What pseudoscience have I ever presented here? None.”

          Lie. Your paranoid fantasies about inoculation with near-*ZERO* peer-reviewed evidence…

        5. avatar Pg2 says:

          The Geoff/hank/guesty/huntsman profile user steps up to plate and whiffs……again.

  11. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    This guy needs to get the “stupid award” of the year.

    From the Desk of Robert Reich former Secretary of Labor and Professor of Economics

    MORE GUNS DO NOT MAKE US SAFER

    Thirty studies show that more guns led to an increase in violence and homicides

    According to the Gallup poles
    96% of the American People want universal back ground checks

    75% of the American People want a 3 day wait on the purchase of firearms

    70% of the American People want all guns registered with the Police.

    GUN BANS SAVE LIVES

    After the 1994 Assault Rifle ban gun massacres fell by 37%
    and Mass shootings fell by 43% but when the Gangster Criminal Republicans let the ban expire in 2004 mass shootings more than doubled.

    When Australia banned and confiscated guns thereby reducing their numbers mass shootings dropped by 43 per cent in the 7 years that followed the confiscations and bans.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      If the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to deter tyrants, the United States is one of the safest places in the world.

      Gun control proponents frequently point to Europe as support for strict gun control while forgetting all of the death and destruction in Europe in the 20th Century due to tyrants. How many died in WWI & WWII? The Holocaust?

      It was the American soldiers and riflemen that saved Europe from themselves twice in the 20th Century.

      How about the Stalinst Soviet Union? Maoist China? Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge?

      All of the deaths by use of firearms in the United States since it’s founding are dwarfed by those caused by tyrannical governments in the 20th Century by the hundreds of millions.

      1. avatar Vlad the Inhaler says:

        You don’t understand these people’s genuine concern: they don’t worry about how many people get killed, they worry about how many people one individual is capable of killing. Every one of them would trade one mass shooter who kills 50 people for 10000 single shooters each killing one. Because 50 is not fair. The ideal situation of course is when the government does all the killing. That’s why they focus on the tool (means production).

      2. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        American soldiers caused WWI to drag out long after it should have ended when the European powers ran out of money, men, supplies, and will power. American intervention caused the Germans to send Lenin back to Russia to take Russia out of the war thus giving us the Russian revolution, the USSR, the gulags, and all of the other bad things that came from that. The American intervention caused the financiers of the German war effort to pull funding which allowed a defeat so severe that the treaty of Versailles was able to be imposed on Germany crushing the German’s pride, burdening them under horrific debts and blaming them exclusively for the war. This also caused the Kaiser to abdicate and be replaced with a cowardly government willing to do anything to appease the conquerors further disgusting the German people and filling them with resentment. As most of those financiers were Jewish that resentment turned against Jews leading to antisemitism and the holocaust. Americas intervention in WWI caused the Nazis, the Communists, the Holocaust, and WWII. And we haven’t even gotten to America goading the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor full of leftover outdated WWI ships while the new modern carriers were out on maneuvers thereby generating an excuse and changing public opinion to support going to war with Japan, and to buy more new ships.

        Thanks guys. Great fucking job. With friends like these we never will run out of enemies.

        1. avatar George Washington says:

          ALL WRONG….
          Come back AFTER you learn something about American history

        2. avatar LifeSavor says:

          Struggling with your American-centric interpretations. I read a lot about that period…too many variables to say so much was primarily caused by us. That being said, I support your sense that we use our military in ways and places ot should not be used.

      3. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        To the Mad one

        quote———————-It was the American soldiers and riflemen that saved Europe from themselves twice in the 20th Century.—————quote

        This is one of my favorites. The real facts are the U.S. did not save the world from Nazi Germany in WWII, rather it was the Russians who did. They needed no help from the U.S. as the outproduced the Nazi’s in both equipment and manpower. By the time the U,S. invaded France on “D” Day the Nazi Germany was already defeated. The U.S. fought largely worn out shell shocked German Units that were sent from the Russian front for recuperation. Large numbers of Nazi Troopers were not even German which is almost unknown in the U.S. and for a very good reason. After the war the European countries that had thousands of troops that volunteered to fight for Hitler were now an embarrassment to them. Hitlers “forgotten legions” were indeed people from all of the conquered countries who hated Jews and hated Russian Communists. As a matter of fact most of the U.S. soldiers that stormed the beaches on “D” Day were actually shot by concentration camp Russians who volunteered to fight for Hitler to escape the Death Camps. The soldiers that fought outside of Hitlers Bunker were actually French Foreign Legion Soldiers in of course German Uniforms , something the French quietly swept under the rug at the end of the war and to this very day.

        1. avatar OBOB says:

          you know nothing about history….so you left out the US bombing the crap out of factories “that make tanks and other stuff!” then add the US and UK pressing the shipping lanes of the Atlantic…so moron if you leave the US out and the UK defeated=====Germany wipes out USSR in a few short years, maybe in 1950 or beyond? but USSR still looses and you forget Japan taking a wack at the back door of the bear if the US stays out fully!

          But they would and Germany would have an atom bomb by 1955 at the latest….keep trying JR

        2. avatar OBOB says:

          test —–Blaa the impotent

          What caused WW2 in reality….

    2. avatar Phil says:

      Per the FBI, the violent crime rate rose throughout the 1970s and 1980s, peaked in 1991 and has fallen ever since, except for a recent spike in democrat run hell-holes like Baltimore and others. All the while, gun ownership has been increasing. Concealed carry got a big boost in Florida starting in 1986 and has since increased dramatically nationwide. Annual FBI background checks went from 9 million in 1999 to 27 million last year.

      Based on those simple facts, we cannot say that more guns equal less crime (the two could be casual statistical relations), we can say conclusively that more legal guns does not equal more crime.

    3. avatar Will says:

      There is blatant falsehoods in what you spew.

      The ’94 ban, when studies were completed by the government did not prove any such thing. They didn’t prove that the ban made things better or worse. Those who ran the studies determined the ban needed to last longer to have any conclusive results.

    4. avatar neiowa says:

      ANY moron that would quote the despicable midget Robert Reicccccccch is certifiable.

      1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        I am not only certifiable I am certified besides I do not bother to read the garbage I copy and paste who has time for that? I simply want to get paid.

    5. avatar bastiches says:

      “According to the Gallup poles”

      Is illiteracy supposed to be part of the fake troll act, Flappy?

    6. avatar Dani in WA says:

      As usual, everything you posted is factually incorrect.

  12. avatar S.Crock says:

    What absolute garbage. I hope this is satirical. We can not claim to be pro limited government if we support taxing people $1,000 for not buying something that the government requires. Also, how would this be enforced? Oh thats right a defacto registration to show that you have complied in order to avoid the fine. Cringie and foolish even if this is a joke.

    1. avatar LifeSavor says:

      I think it is satirical, S.Crock. Just blowing off steam and having fun, talking about turning the table on the left. This is a patriotic, Constitution-supporting crowd and some are pretty funny. There are a few trolls…

    2. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      It’s a provocative thought experiment: What if we were trying to have a militia of the people as a whole, a government as subordinate convenience handling particular collective concerns, an epiphenomena emerging from people pursuing their individual paths.

      Martin has enough computer savvy to know there are anonymous tokenized ID schemes, if that’s needed.

  13. avatar Randy Jones says:

    I think the Federal Government should get to supply the weapons and ammo. And money for range time and practice ammo. Actually, there should be more state and federal parks that have pistol and rifle ranges as well. If Native Americans can push to get their slot in congress (rightfully so in my eyes), why can’t we the militia push for this.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      Do the predecessors of your “native Americans” also get a quota? They were killed by your “native Americans” and their land stolen. Stop whining

  14. avatar Dan W says:

    Just repatriate the poor oppressed minorities that are the ones commiting all the violence.

  15. avatar rt66paul says:

    Many of these spree shooters have guns that are legal. We will not stop these by handing out guns or by banning them. We do need mental health hospitals and outpatient clinics. We also need to follow up on those that are allowed back into society if they take their meds.
    We need laws that allow for follow up(like parole) for those that need to take the meds to be in society. Living on the street, doing petty crimes for daily drugs and alcohol should be enough reason to get them a 10 day observation hold in a mental health hospital.
    Yes, it is expensive, but we throw the money down a rathole the way we are “handling” it now. The jails are no place for these people and hospitalization and mandatory med checks would free up some of the wasted money to help pay for better care.

  16. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

    Here’s a thought; how about we just remove restrictions on owning and carrying guns and only penalize their misuse? Let’s try that for a while and see how that goes.

    1. avatar George Washington says:

      +2!

  17. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

    Most to all of you guys here support the Second Amendment and limited government.

    Yet many of you seem to think you can use Big Brother to make people either a) be armed or b) buy your ammo/guns.

    This logic, discernment, and realism is what you’d expect of the Left.

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      Ive been making the same observation here for years about the hypocritical segment of the gun community that somehow supports government control over personal health care decisions.

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        I’ve been encouraged that some folk on this blog have stated they are NOT in favor of specific government mandated health treatments such as forced vaccinations. The word is out: the people who want to force medical treatments also want to take away our guns.

        I am putting my time and money into preserving our Second Amendment right AND into preserving and expanding medical freedom. I’ve spent two decades studying the medical freedom question, but only 3 years learning about firearms. That is why this blog is so important to me.

    2. avatar LifeSavor says:

      I interpreted the above conversation about requiring people to have guns and penalizing them if they do not as hyperbolic fun-talk. Imagination, exaggeration about turning the tables on the left. I don’t think this patriotic crowd really supports more government. Of course, maybe I misunderstood the above intentions.

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        Yeah I hope so. I want to be wrong about them.

    3. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      See my above comment … it’s a provocative thought experiment.

      FWIW, I’ve said nearly the same thing, with different emphasis to account for willful “misunderstanding.”

  18. avatar Kyle says:

    lol…good one.

  19. avatar MyName says:

    Every time a high-profile shooting occurs people start opining about the steps to take to solve the “gun-violence” problem in America and I am that guy who chimes in saying that we don’t actually have a problem that needs solving.

    Pursuant thereto: We don’t have a significant “gun-violence” problem! There are approximately 330 million people in the U.S. Around 11,000 per year suffer death due to a non-self-inflicted gunshot wound. That is 0.0033% of the population. Each year, 99.9967% of the population IS NOT KILLED because someone else shot them. Very, very few people are killed in this fashion each year – statistically speaking, no one is. Even fewer – much, much fewer – are killed in so-called mass shooting events. Broad, sweeping changes to the laws and culture of the U.S. are not likely to have any impact at all on events and circumstances that involve a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.

    If you want to spend your money/time/energy saving lives, focus on something like preventing the spread of hepatitis – you’ll get a much bigger bang for your buck/hour/joule.

    1. avatar John Bryan says:

      Over 3,000 a year from food borne illness ALONE! Add the possible 1.2 MILLION from complications caused by obesity and Big Food has a lot to answer for – I blame the proliferation of cheap, Saturday Night specials. Or maybe those high capacity (a)salt shakers. I mean, come on, who really NEEDS that much arugula? If limiting people to one meal out a month saved just ONE life, wouldn’t it be worth it? I’m only asking for common sense portion controls – nobody wants to take your Big Macs away…

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        @John Bryan: funny!! And sadly much truth to it. But I like arugula, a lot, and will lobby Congress for freedom of choice in arugula consumption. LOL!!

    2. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      This.

      I love it when the anti-people threaten to treat “gun violence” as a public health issue.

      Yes, let’s.

  20. avatar Anymouse says:

    Terrible idea. Putting hardware in someone’s house isn’t going to help. They need the knowledge, skills, and aptitude to make use of them properly. Granny may be able to scare off an intruder with the .38 snub nosed revolver she keeps in her underwear drawer, but would she actually be able to hit her target outside of contact range if she only takes it out in emergencies and doesn’t train with it? Add irresponsibility to ignorance, and you’ll have issues with improper storage, accidents and theft. I’ve said it before, responsible people own gun – guns don’t make people responsible. It works in Switzerland because it trains its citizens that keep a machine gun and ammo in their home, and there’s a long standing culture of marksmanship with festivals for contests, etc.
    A more effective method would be to offer tax credits for training and storage methods, discounted govt approved guns for those who could show competence (like the old DCM before the CMP reforms), free ammo at organized training and competitions, etc.

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      Stop repeating progtard mythology. And then parroted by those Johnnie Rambos SELLING “training”.

  21. avatar 24and7 says:

    The only things that are going to stop crime..
    1) concealed and open carriers actually stopping mass shootings (and crime) before they get out of hand.. too many cowards that were on those scenes never fired their weapon.. they had multiple opportunities to take this novice shooter out… (it was reported on the news)..ONLY CARRY A GUN IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO USE IT..
    2) A quick death penalty for anything over a life sentence.. no more life without parole or 99 years sentences… execute the scum quickly after their appeals are exhausted..clean out the Prisons of the violent and unresponsive prisoners..
    3) bring back the police and deputy sheriff reserves and Constables again.. people that are willing to volunteer and train to get out there and make sure Law and Order is uphelp.. make all neighborhoods and cities safe to walk the streets for a change..

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      3) bring back the police and deputy sheriff reserves and Constables again.. people that are willing to volunteer and train to get out there and make sure Law and Order is uphelp.. make all neighborhoods and cities safe to walk the streets for a change.

      Likely unworkable. Over the last 20-30yr Vol Fire and EMS nationwide are unable to attract (and train) the # of members needed. Would vol popo work better? The fulltime force is of questionable reliability and usefulness. Hanging a badge on Porky the Mall Cop, and making him into Barney Fife with unlimited power of law/”authority”, is of doubtful utility.

      1. avatar 24and7 says:

        The main reason they done away with constables is jealousy from most Sheriff’s.. constables can keep most of the money for serving the papers.. Sheriff’s make about 30 cents on the dollar.. but a lot of retired law enforcement and Military would do the job with the proper support.. but it’s all about money and power.. law enforcement needs all the help they can get due to the fact that a lot of officers are now detecting and swerving due to political concerns ..the same with volunteer fire departments.. the reason a lot of them are discouraged and get cut out is because they make so much money on ambulance runs.. some cities can’t even have private ambulance services..

  22. avatar enuf says:

    Not liking the idea of requiring everyone to be armed. Too many people lack the mindset.

    Support the need of an armed citizenry, but do not force it.

  23. avatar 2aguy says:

    This is how you reduce 95% of gun crime……

    I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime….. and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

    This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders…..and those who do will be gone forever……

    Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants……which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years…they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

    You implement this with two other things…

    1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge………it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal….this stops.

    2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in…they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole….when they are released from custody…the same will be read to them again….when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again…..the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable……

    That is how you stop gun crime over night.

    Mass shooters are different….. but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

    The value in my plan……it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people….

    It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns…

    By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection…..

    Also….a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal…..that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals…..and criminals who use guns for actual crime…robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder…..life without parole…

    This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws…we can already do this…..

    1. avatar Gales says:

      I don’t agree with the 30 years for not using a gun just the possession of it….I think they should go to jail depending on the circumstance for number of years. Now once they get out of jail, that’s effectively serving their debt to society, so I believe they should get all their rights back until the next crime, but everything should be circumstantial

  24. avatar strych9 says:

    I noted the other day that Progressives love the concept that any safety produced by firearms is a “public good” which is therefore, under Social Democratic thinking, something that the State should regulate heavily or control the means of production/distribution for.

    Since we know that cops cannot be everywhere to provide this safety it’s time to use Progressive thinking against the Progressives. A Private-Public Partnership is required here in terms of producing and delivering safety. As such, a portion of all tax proceeds should go to train and equip the militia. Every adult gets a rifle, pistol, shotgun, ammo for them, a proper safe and training. All provided or heavily subsidized by tax money.

    There. Now safety is “regulated by the state”. The state knows (and supplies) the bare minimum that everyone has (though if you wish you can go farther and we don’t need any further regulation/registration because you’re already trained and equipped by the all-knowing State, so who cares if you go buy another rifle when we gave you a full auto murdermachine and 30 rounds mags anyway? There is no deadlier weapon, I’ve been told, so if you’re gonna go all mass-shooty-McFuckFace it’s gonna be with the registered murdermachine anyway). We have a public-private partnership to warm the cockles of the Progs and that “mandatory training” they keep braying about is provided to everyone to reduce accidents. “Safe storage” is no longer an issue because everyone gets a nice safe too.

    Safety enhanced, “public good” provided, Progs crying… I’m gonna call that at least a trifecta.

  25. avatar Donttreadonme says:

    I have a better idea. Rather than make people spend their own money, the gov should provide this equipment to everyone. Then, require people to show proof of training annually, any cost associated with training is tax deductible.

  26. avatar Mark says:

    What a fucking idiot. Trash like the author are opponents of liberty.

    1. It’s the right of *the people*, not the militia.
    2. It’s the *right* to keep and bear arms. Not *compulsion* to keep and bear arms.

  27. avatar LifeSavor says:

    Interesting breakfast with some extended family today. The conversation turned to firearms. A few were stunned to know I carry. A niece said “I actually feel safer knowing there are armed citizens out there”.

    This, in an extended family in which no one except me carries.

  28. avatar UpInArms says:

    Bad idea. I know quite a few people who should not be around guns, most of them liberals who pee their pants at the mere sight of one. The idea of mandating that they own them is way too scary, and the idea that they might actually pull the trigger even scarier.

    The right to keep and bear arms is a choice, not an obligation. This whole idea reeks too much of the “collective good” that’s causing all the 2A troubles.

  29. avatar Comrade Maoberg says:

    Gun Grabber: “We need ‘gun violence’ numbers to be big, be sure to include the suicides. Whenever addressing ‘gun violence,’ ignore the suicides.”

    War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, and Ignorance Is Strength

  30. avatar TickTalk says:

    This little rant lost me with the first sentence. ‘well regulated’ was a common term in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s.. you can find it in many newspapers and essays.. it basically just meant ‘well behaved’ or what we would say now as law-abiding. And of course we all know the original definition of the militia.. basically everyone with a few age and occupation exemptions..
    That’s something that has always bugged me.. the constant need for re-interpreting the 2nd when all that is needed is translating.. changing definitions of words does not change the intent.

  31. avatar John in Ohio says:

    Yet POTG get their manties in a wad at the thought of people carrying a long gun day to day. Hell, some even whine about open carry.

    I’ve got news for y’all… If you only carry your long gun when you’re planning to take on a tyrant, you are telegraphing your intent which puts you behind the eight ball right out of the gate. There should be plenty of people, here and there, openly bearing arms (including long guns) every day. That keeps the criminals, including tyrants, guessing as to when and where.

  32. avatar gp says:

    “requiring that every member of the militia — which, of course, we’ll redefine to eliminate the obvious sexism and make it all adults — must own at least one long gun, one handgun, and 1000 rounds of ammunition for each”

    I just don’t see how that reduces gun violence. I am armed with long guns, handguns, and way more than 1000 rounds of ammo for all. But gun violence still plagues my city despite my owning those arms. My mere ownership of an arsenal doesn’t stop the bad guys (and we all know who they are) from shooting up my city every day. Am I failing in my role as a militiaman somehow? Am I expected to patrol my city armed, and open fire on all the you-know-whos who are obviously doing it? Will I be expected to conduct investigations, serve warrants, maintain jails, etc? I don’t see how that works.

  33. avatar gp says:

    If you want to stop MOST gun violence in the USA, you’d have to send all the you-know-whos back to you-know-where, or put them all in prison forever. I suppose a militia COULD do that, if we tore up all our laws, and ignored due process. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. We can’t even figure out how to seal our borders!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email