Gun Law Screening In U S A And Elsewhere.

[GTR-N1]

How do people feel about Psych Tests being used to screen whether or not a person should hold a gun licence in the US (and elsewhere).

Such tests (as used in the admissions process of the armed services) need to carry good reliability and also validity so that applicants cannot 'trick' the inventory.

Thoughts?

[Trex]

Werent they petitioning for background checks for gun sales over a year ago? That didn't go down well according to the last leg.

[Sinista32]

I agree with Psych tests as one measure to reduce the number of nutters who are able to hold a gun license & procure a weapon.

It should be part of many measures / restrictions.

I also believe the U.S. is beyond the point of implementing measures.

Unfortunately even the ACT has tripled over the last several years in gun ownership (6,000 to 18,000).

Although a lot of the gun owners have multiple weapons.

Were not a farming community controlling vermin. Most of these owners go to the range when they first get their license and weapon.

I am not sure of the law in regards to regularity at ranges etc... to retain your license/rifle/hand gun.

I'm of the belief if you have one then it will be your first thought to defend/attack and not your last.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Sinista32

[Trex]

my mate has his license and a few rifles. you need to go to the range a certain amount each year to maintain your license and guns. Same laws as nsw from my understanding.

[Trozzle]

Father has a couple of rifles. From what I understand you need to have written permission to use someone's property for pest control or target shooting, and/or be a member of a local gun club as well as attending regular meets in order to have your firearms* registered, though I don't believe this is required to have your licence. I mean you can't use your licence without a firearm, and in theory that firearm MUST be registered to someone.

In the US at least, I'm not sure any kind of psych evaluation will help too much; far too many firearms in circulation already. Too easy to get hold of one without going through the proper legal channels... But that's merely based on my personal presumptions.

Personally, I quite enjoyed hunting for the purpose of pest control (feral goats and PIGS...f**king wordfilter). Target shooting was fun too, but I wasn't up for something competitive so it gets boring very quickly.

*I use the word firearm, because it's not a weapon until in the hands of someone intending to inflict harm or death upon another living creature... And even then, personally I consider a "weapon" as something used to inflict this upon another human being. Similarly a knife is a tool until used as a weapon.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Trozzle

[-FIGJAM-]

Its always a weapon Troy. No matter which way you try to turn it around its a weapon.

I enjoy a target shooting. Used to hunt but got bored of it because it was becoming less and less of a challenge. Would like to go on an actual hunt, track the animals, minimal gear to get by and no scope on the rifle.

As for the psych testing, I don't think it will solve all of their problems. If someone really wants a gun they will be able to buy one. Especially in the states where a lot of the street gangs are walking around with semi and fully automatic weapons.

To me their problems are a lot more deep seeded. there are other countries in the world with more guns per capita then amercia without the same level of shootings.

[Trozzle]

Good to know my kitchen is literally full of weapons then.

[GTR-N1]

How would you differentiate between the definition of implement/tool from weapon?

[-FIGJAM-]

Good to know my kitchen is literally full of weapons then.

Literally is.

But there are fundamental differences in their designs.

[Scooby]

Minimising harm to the community is the bigger issue that should guide this type of discussion. When objectively comparing the harm done to the community by licensed shooters, to that caused by criminals, it's statistically insignificant. To go further compare it to the harm done by motor vehicle accidents and it doesn't even register. Remove the media obsession with dramatising incidents involving firearms and they'd hardly rate a mention.

To answer your question Terry, legal firearm ownership is at an all time high and violence related to legal ownership is at an all time low so I don't think psych testing is either effective or necessary.

IIRC 30 or so people die during Xmas / New Year every year but no government has suggested psych testing to determine a person's susceptibility to drink driving temptation during the festive season. Or maybe testing inclination towards to risk taking behaviour before being allowed to possess a performance vehicle.

That doesn't mean we should ignore it but I'd rather have my tax $ spent on road safety to see if we can actually save some people each year. Or maybe stemming the flow of illegal firearms. Unfortunately the response to firearms violence in this country is to make it harder for legal shooters ie those who aren't causing the problem, and who are already legislatively controlled beyond that of any other sport, to continue pursuing that sport. To ensure consistency of approach, maybe whenever the number of tragedies each festive season reaches a certain level everyone who has all of their demerit points should be fined.

Unfortunately most gun control measures are ineffective, applied to the wrong part sector of the community, and for the wrong reasons.

As for psych testing in the US, ditto. I don't have the stats to prove it but I'd wager that the same applies re legal and illegal ownership. I've been in several open carry communities and no one cares - the ones openly carrying aren't the ones you have to worry about.

[Trozzle]

How would you differentiate between the definition of implement/tool from weapon?

The possessor's intended use for it, or a device that has absolutely no other use but to end life and/or inflict harm.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Trozzle

[Scooby]

The possessor's intended use for it, or a device that has absolutely no other use but to end life and/or inflict harm.

The discussion of what constitutes a weapon usually becomes circular because the intended use of pretty much anything is in the eye of the beholder. I think Troy hit on the issue up front; 'the possessor's intended use...'.

[Birds]

Some mumblings and (hopefully) food for thought in no particular order:

- I think ye olde studded belt case would shed some light on what the law considers a weapon; personal opinion of what constitutes a weapon is kind of irrelevant if we're talking law and crime. Not that the law always has it right, but they do have a habit of controlling/impacting your future.

- Speaking of weapons (lol Troy umad), my firearms licence in Victoria - only needs a renewal every 5 years; I must also be a member of a firearms club, which only translates to an extra $70 a year. It's just a course and money. I don't need to have contact with anyone to maintain it.

- In Vic i can possess and store longarms and ammunition and I do not have to do any competition shooting or hunting. Set and forget as long as I pay my dollars. The police may visit occasionally to routine check your gun safe. Pistols on the other hand - you need to attend 10 competitive meets a year to retain this licence. I guess the assumption there is, if you're not competitive shooting your pistol then you're using it for self defence or planning to kill someone. Longarms, on the otherhand, you may occasionally use to hunt or for pest control. No one is hunting foxes with pistols.

- There is nothing stopping a psychotic from doing all this, it really is easy...or nothing to stop someone who was once sane, from becoming insane (think PTSD etc). Background checks, fine. But psych evaluation? Come on, criminals often lie and make a career out of it. Sociopaths are great at pretending to be normal. It is easy to pass that shit. The reality is, if someone wants to kill people and they have half a brain, they can and will. The only way to curb that is to blanket ban guns, for everyone, and make possession alone a 20 year sentence - not saying I agree with doing this, but that is the only solution to cull the population of circulated guns, even unregistered (it would have an impact), with ridiculous penalties. Good luck with that in America! The kind of person who goes and massacres people doesn't care about waiting periods or whatever measures you want to throw at them. They are calculated attacks these massacres and they often happen with unregistered or stolen weapons. They will bide their time.

- On the other hand, one of the ranges I shoot at, people can attend who have never shot a rifle in their life. They can turn up, hand over a drivers licence and one of the range officers will teach them to shoot. I only got my firearms licence so that I wouldn't have to bother the range officer everytime I wanted some target practice. What stops this person from running out of the range and driving off with a gun on the day they want to massacre people or they snapped? (Besides the club rifles being .22s).

- I hear the arguments about registered and licensed firearms owners not being the culprits killing people and I agree with this for most part. BUT...guns get stolen, by randoms, by family members. You can lose your licence if your firearms go missing. But what happens to the missing firearm? Where are the non registered firearms coming from? Imported? Factory "seconds"? Proper questions, I don't know enough about the circulation of illegal firearms and their involvement in crime, though I do know it is high.

[Trozzle]

Not mad haha, don't have the time to get into it it's the kinda thing I'd jump on the chance to tag along with a mate on a hunt and use their stuff.

Otherwise I like all your other points.