New Gun Regulations In The US Would Be Really, Really Stupid

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

1.  A 30 day waiting period to purchase any type of firearm.

What is the significance of 30 days? How would this differ from the 4-5 day waiting period some have to wait already? Why not 90 days? or 180? Or 10? Where are you getting the number 30 from? Who would enforce this? Or would businesses be forced to delay sales for 30 days?

2.  Better background checks, including interviews with family, neighbours, and co-workers (if applicable).

So, my cousin who's been jealous of me my entire life might be able to stop me from getting a gun? Or my coworker who resents me because I've been in the company half the time they have but make double the pay? Who would conduct these interviews and where would this funding come from? Can one person who says "He/she is unstable" stop someone from getting a gun?

3.  Licensing of all gun holders.

What agency would manage these licenses? Who would enforce this? What would licensing gun holders accomplish?

4.  Initial safety training with recertification every two years.

Once again, who enforces this? Who pays for it?

5.  Annual fees to keep license active.

Who does this money go to?

6.  Suspension of license for varying length of time, depending on infraction.

Which infractions? Could getting a parking ticket disqualify someone from having a gun?

7.  Eliminate the gun show/private sales loophole.

Gun show vendors still run background checks on you. The point is that people can meet other people at gun shows and buy guns "privately" from other individuals, not vendors. Even then, you're suggesting I cannot sell a gun to my brother or father?

My main point is, you guys say all of this stuff but I'm not very convinced you've thought much of it through.

1.  30 would allow more time for background checks.  It would reduce the number of purchasers who 'fall through the cracks' by allowing for more thorough investigations.  It would be enforced by whichever agencies enforce the current 2-7 day wait.  Yes, businesses could delay sales for 30 days.

2.  No, one disgruntled interviewee would not stop you from getting a gun, as a negative report would be further investigated.  The interviews would be conducted by local police.

3.  Licensing could be managed by any agency which already manages government-issued licenses (hunting, fishing, driving).  It would allow law enforcement to more easily identify suspects in a gun crime.

4.  The safety classes would be offered either by local law enforcement or by accredited private providers.  It would be paid for by the license holders.

5.  Into general revenue.  If you prefer, it could be tagged specifically to help meet the operating costs of the issuing agencies.

6.  Fair point, I should have been clearer.  Infractions would need to be gun-related in order to affect your licensing privileges - having an unsecured firearm, transporting a loaded firearm, failure to meet ongoing safety requirements, shooting the bloke who cut you off in traffic, that sort of thing.

7.  Of course you can sell a gun to your brother or you father.  You could even sell one to your old granny.  It would just take a little longer.

My main point is, you guys say all of this stuff but I'm not very convinced you've thought much of it through.

With a few exceptions, the above are largely the state of gun control measures where I live. A few (such as recertification every two years) are  things I think would be an improvement.  I also left out a few which I think are needlessly intrusive. 

So yes, it has been thought through.  And it works.  Based on population, New Zealand has a quarter as many privately owned firearms as the US, and a twelfth as many firearm-related deaths (barring the recent massacre).

Boru

edit:  I found this, referencing your reply to point 7:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRI3ujxOa6Y

Boru