As a sort of spin off to this thread, I thought I’d ask the same questions here without hijacking that other thread. I’ve always been curious about the practical aspects of how the anti-gun folks think this would play out in reality.
So, from that other thread:
So, to the anti-gun folks…how do you see this playing out? What would your expectations be, realistically? Would you expect the US to go from the current levels of weapons to, say, comparable levels (wrt percentage of population) in other countries? And would you expect this to lower crime in the US? By how much? Also, how would you get past the attitudes of the majority of US citizens towards personal firearms, or, in this case, handguns? What would your expectations be for the average gun owner today in this new environment? Would you expect the majority of them to go along and voluntarily give up their weapons? Turn them in? Or would you expect some sort of ban on new sales/grandfathering sort of scenario?
This debate is all about banning handguns, and the realities and logistics of doing so. That’s the premise here, though feel free to describe things in your own terms of how it would happen. Thanks in advance.
Can we assume for the sake of argument that the Second Amendment has been revised to read “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, except no handguns.”
Not anti-2nd Amendment myself, but it take a massive PR campaign a couple of years just to prep fro such an action, coupled with a massive attack from all sides(including the IRS) on the manufacturers going on behind the scenes.
I don’t necessarily think we should ban handguns, but if I were King Dingaling of Earth I probably would.
For us in the US, I’d go about it thusly:
[ul]
[li]Immediately make it a federal crime to sell or possess them.[/li][li]Any store backstock can be purchased back by the government.[/li][li]Offer a 25k reward to anyone who leads to the prosecution of anyone who sells or possesses a handgun. [/li][li]Offer an amnesty for one year, where any handgun can be turned into the government for destruction for $1000.[/li][li]Handgun ammo would be made illegal, except for government use.[/li][/ul]
I’m sure you’d get the numbers down pretty fast. A lot of people would buy shotguns or rifles, which is probably a good thing.
ISTM that any measures that are effective are going to be too draconian to be sustainable.
For instance, the government could subpoena the sales records of every gun shop in the US for the last twenty years or so, and then send people around to demand that they fork over the guns. I suspect even the ACLU would have problems with that. Or they could make it more illegal to use a handgun in a robbery. Then it could turn out like laws against crack vs. powder cocaine - minorities are going to be disproportionately impacted, since they are more likely to use a cheap handgun rather than an expensive rifle.
I suspect there will be a lot of rhetoric about “use a gun, go to prison for five years, no exceptions and no parole” until the prison bills come due. Or until the ones dealing out the rhetoric need to shoot someone.
Who was that reporter several years ago who talked the same line - 'use a gun, go to jail", and then got caught pointing an illegal handgun at some teenagers who were trying to swim in his pool?
The first thing you are gonna want to do is increase police and military force by 100x. And create a new reality channel on TV for all the Waco like incidents. Most importantly fashion a new prybar to efficiently get the guns out of folks cold dead hands.
Play up the accuracy and reliablity of rifles over handguns.
Spread rumors about handguns falling apart and/or misfiring at an increasing rate.
Olympic rifle champions promoted as sports heroes.
I’d just make it a crime to buy or sell one, but leave it legal to own one or give it away. Meanwhile, set up a government program where the government will pay you a small amount to take it off your hands and destroy it, and confiscate any gun used in a crime. In time, between that and them gradually wearing out (or getting lost or whatever), they’d go away.
There would surely be some smuggling of guns across the borders, but that would lead to a far lower equilibrium level than what we have now, given that now it mostly goes the other way.
Even if the Second Amendment were reversed (I don’t think just a repeal would cover it) I wouldn’t favor a general prohibition of handguns or other firearms. I’d look for about the same level of scrutiny we give driving licenses. My general principle would be that you’d be allowed to own a firearm unless there was some specific reason for that privilege to be denied or revoked.
Have there a serious fine for owning one, and a reward for turning them in. Any found are confiscated. They are all melted down, not just locked away somewhere.
And while no doubt a great many gun nuts will bury theirs somewhere, that’s fine; a gun hidden under a plank in the basement isn’t being used to shoot anyone.
I doubt it would lower crime much, just make it somewhat less lethal. At least the types of crime where it’s impractical to just substitute a rifle or shotgun for the pistol. Banning handguns alone isn’t much of a gun ban.
This scenario pretty much requires that such attitudes have already been gotten past.
No; Americans are insane on the subject of guns. I expect you’d see quite a few people killing & getting killed by police, probably even a fair number of “family annihilator” style murder-suicides as gun owners kill their families to save them because a government coming to take their guns must be an organization of Satanic evil.
(Lifetime non-gun owner here. That could change, though-- someone tried to break
into my apartment a couple of months ago, while I was in)
You are pissing in the wind.
There may be more handguns in the country than there are people. There is no way
of enforcing a ban on such numbers.
Furthermore, it is a dead solid obvious truth than few to none of the criminals who
own guns are going to give them up, so the law-abiding are going to be at a much
greater relative disadvantage than they are now.
Finally, literally 10s of millions of the legal owners who would never shoot at another
person exept in self-defence would disobey the law and keep their guns, thereby
forming a huge new class of victimless criminal.
Handguns are here to stay. Concentrate on keeping them out of criminal hands and
leave everyone else alone.
I think there might be a problem with that… gang bangers probably don’t use their guns enough to wear them out in any reasonable time frame, as opposed to private (currently law-abiding) citizens who take them to the range and practice once in a while.
