Here it is:
Issues & Premise:
-
Several states are strongly in support of AR bans while several are adamantly opposed. Neither wants the other state populations overpowering their positions. People should ultimately have the laws they want.
-
Private party transactions of firearms are generally poorly regulated and may not even contian background checks.
-
Proponents of AR bans are concerned that merely banning on the state level will not stop firearms from being brought across state borders.
-
The 2nd ammendment clearly outlines it’s purpose as one of maintaining state independence from the potential of federal tyranny.
Solution:
By passing the AR or perhaps even stricter bans on the state level, the intent of the constitution would be upheld by maintaining control of the regulated inflow of firearms at the discretion of the state. Therefore, it would be free of influence from the federal level and would allow legislative modification in the event that a state felt it were being oppressed by a federal government. I believe this maintains the spirit and letter of the consitution and nullify’s issue #4. It also adderesses issue #1 and would do a better job of making everybody content. As a result, the laws / bans would be more easily passed at the state level as we’ve already seen and would allow even stricter bans at each state’s discretion. At the same time, private party firearm transactions should be made illegal by federal law, thus illiminating issue #2, improving registration and tracking, as well as background checks. Firearms must be sold to or from a licensed dealer. Failure to do so should be treated as gun trafficking, a major federal offense. This leaves issue #3. Currently, most dealers in other states will not allow someone with an out of state ID to buy a firearm there directly, instead, it is shipped to a dealer within that persons state to be delivered with a fee. By stepping up enforcement of this and perhaps tightening this legislation a bit, individuals will be unable to purchase firearms out of state from a dealer that do not comply with the state’s laws in which they live. Furthermore, they will not be able to transact via private party at all. Transporting firearms across state lines that are not in compliance with a state’s current level of gun control should also be treated as gun trafficking with a similar heavy federal punishment. By doing so, we could illiminate the lions share of cross state boarder gun movement and allow state’s to be regulated at the levels they desire. Yes, gun trafficking would still exist, but at the same level it would have existed with federal laws in place anyways. Problem solved.