Another week, another shooting, and more useless suggestions that will never, ever, happen. May I offer one more? Of course you can, Ken! Are you sure? Sure, but no one will listen, everyone will poo poo it. That’s OK. OK? Yes, OK. OK
Aren’t you glad we (?) settled that?
Registrations not going to happen. Confiscation certainly won’t happen. Increased mental health care won’t happen, if for no other reason than a lot of people against gun regulations are also against any public spending, usually decorated with the frequent “socialist, nanny state, we can’t afford this but we can do endless war,” stink cake frosting.
Certainly you’ve heard the suggestion we have gun and bullet insurance?
I actually think there’s something to this. Every time a gun is sold a little is tacked on to each regular purchase. If no fee was charged because it was sold out the back door, out of a car, then once that’s found out a retroactive fee is charged: double what the going rate is. The going rate is determined by the number of murders in your state, your county, your region. I’m thinking the more local, the better, or maybe two fees: state and county.
This rate is to be listed in all newspapers, mentioned on news programs, by law, and how much it has been raised, or lowered in recent years.
Close relatives of those who commit crimes with guns get charged a bigger fee. This is an incentive for them to watch over their relatives. Schools go to, or where they work, may get charged fees. Same reason: incentive. Keeping an eye on those closest to us, or who work with us, who we think may become a problem is so important.
All this is available in public records, and to be broadcasted as a PSA: “public service announcement.”
Fees collected go to survivors who were around when the crimes were committed, the justice system, law enforcement and mental health services.
The NRA is either charged a fee, or receives part of the fees. Depends on how they react. If they publicly go out of their way to start programs to work towards lowering the perception that guns are to be used out of anger: receive. If they do nothing but claim more there should be more guns, fees apply.
I admit: this is just a framework and a lot of tweaking would probably be required. I just think this could be an innovative approach many could get behind. It bans nothing, it provides incentive and it could reward behavior to lessen this hideous trend.
Feel free to offer your own ideas. But, please, if more guns is your answer: don’t bother. It’s not worth the argument. Hell, even the “wild west” was not that “wild,” and had gun check ins at saloons in some places. And if your answer is registration or banning, well, I’d say, “Good luck with that,” but we know that won’t happen, right?
Inspection is a column that has been written by Ken Carman for over 30 years. Inspection is dedicated to looking at odd angles, under all the rocks and into the unseen cracks and crevasses that constitute the issues and philosophical constructs of our day: places few think, or even dare, to venture.
Ken Carman and Cartenual Productions
all right reserved