guns in america: will we ever get beyond knee jerk lawmaking?
by：QY Precision 2019-11-02
Despite this in the media, public safety is a universal social interest, and all have more in common than lobbyists and experts are willing to admit. For all citizens, when considering the proposed legislation, it is important that the solution developed by the legislator meets the real public needs while avoiding the negative impact. Every legislative season in every government jurisdiction begins with a nominal bill that lawmakers are trying to improve to pass the test of being a public law. Shortening this process often leads to bad laws, chaos, and sometimes rebellion. After years of public suffering, the court finally took action to negate the excesses. Overall, this is not the best way to deal with such important things. California is a state of concern in exploring gun legislation. This is where many legal concepts are tested. For example, all so- The law known as \"offensive weapons\" in the United States is to imitate 1989 robberty-Roos model. In the 25 years since becoming public law, California has continued to explore how to find a balance between the rights and control of such guns; Recently, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed additional restrictions in 2013 because the legislature was \"too far away \". California is also a model for the judiciary to control excessive gun control. In 2014, the Federal Court\'s ruling called on the state to over-widely limit and over-arbitrary waiting periods for hidden weapons licences, indicating the continued search for a legal balance in this area. With the end of another legislative season in California, another set of bills that survived the State Council arrived at Governor Brown\'s desk for deliberation. A subtle exploration to address mental health AB 1014 is a bill that seeks to answer a general protest of action against mentally unstable people who constitute public safety The bill specifically seeks to create a means for immediate family members and law enforcement officers to intercept people like Isla Vista shooter Elliot ger. If you read the text of AB 1014, you will find that this is a custom description that tries to include people like him. To be honest, it\'s refreshing to finally see some action taken in preventing the mental health of violence, because people have long ignored this and they are more inclined to vent their temper to gun owners, instead of dealing with the real problem is crazy criminals. The bill has been submitted to Governor Brown\'s desk, but I\'m a little worried about its current form. The reason is that it is weak in a key area. Law with reasonable design In particular, the supplement to the criminal law Limits the scope of the law. Specifically, they should pay close attention to preventing accidental abuse of the act. AB 1014 appreciates concerns that relatives may try to falsely accuse someone or persuade relatives to do so. Doing so causes punishment for misdemeanor, but it is a punishment without teeth. There are no prescribed penalties. In fact, a police officer who has been wrongly charged may be found guilty, which will end their career. The prosecutor has full discretion to ignore the abuse of power, and the judge can\'t do anything but dictate to you. This tells me that there are too few ideas for it to be put there. The sparse paragraph highlights a legislation that was originally very detailed, designed to facilitate rapid, clean-up confusion, and to act if a person with mental illness speaks nonsense at a turning point in positive violence. This is the law of arrogance. This kind of law will certainly have false positives, and cases of harassment of others in domestic quarrels will certainly constitute a considerable part. Given that people tend to be stingy, we may be working on a law designed to save lives at the expense of piling up malicious abuse on tens of thousands of people in every situation that might be helpful. This is a fairly high social cost. My suggestion to Governor Brown in this regard is to seriously think about whether this bill is really ready to become public law in California, or whether it will be sent back to the legislature to strengthen how the bill can prevent the misuse of malicious acts. When it comes to the law of arrogance, my intuition tells me that getting something important like this is always better than starting a chain reaction, A chain reaction could undermine future attempts to deal constructively with delicate things like mental illness. Technology is improving. . . Strangely, another bill on Governor Brown\'s desk is SB 808. It\'s a very interesting bill because it involves homemade guns. According to federal law, people can make guns for personal use from scratch; This is one thing along the way of the American Revolution. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives nationwide (BATFE) Control the commercial manufacture of firearms and require the serial number of these weapons to facilitate tracking and collectionlet\'s be real -taxes. The federal government does not need tax tickets for guns made by individuals. With SB 808, California wants to set up a tax system for guns made by these individuals. It\'s $20. According to the bill text, each tax ticket is 00, aka the serial number. The reason this interest me is because of the emergence of computerized manufacturing. Desktop computer-sized CNC machines and 3D printers are difficult to make guns from scratch before they arrive; It\'s not hard now. The first-class mechanical equipment in the cottage industry has reached a new level. In fact, it seems to me that the proliferation of such mechanisms is likely to make the United StatesS. Bring back some of the manufacturing capabilities lost by outsourcing in the past few decades. The reality is that we want more advanced manufacturing machines to be in the hands of people, and one of the consequences is that certain complex objects that used to require commercial manufacturers at the Aerospace level can now be in apartments There are many other problems, not just guns. We will deal with design, patent and process issues at least by mid term Let these machines fit into our lives. Back at SB 808, I guess the question asked here is, is this tax plan a privilege for California or a legal territory for BATFE? The answer is I\'m not sure if SB 808 is as shown in writing (a) Not involved in the federal tax field and (b) In a larger sense, this is the excessive expansion of government tax power. When I read the text, my main problem with this bill is that it is not just about wanting to tax guns made in the future; It wants a retroactive tax on homemade guns made before the law is enacted. This is a problem because you should not do so. This can be said to be shocking, as the text of SB 808 wishes to impose a retroactive tax on 1968 and at the beginning of the pistol. This is what federal law interestingly calls the point of time for gun control in 1968, which states that a gun without a serial number at that time does not need a serial number. This is clearly the recognition of the federal privileged state and an example of the federal government that it has no right to impose or retroactively levy taxes on personal property. The bill seems to be doing things that shouldn\'t be done, and in a larger sense this is a problem because such a law is the gateway for California to impose arbitrary retroactive taxes on other things. Tax aside, this is not a really weird part of the consequences that SB 808 could have. California will impose sanctions by enacting the bill as law. I dare to encourage. Never seen the proliferation of homemade guns of scale before. Contrary to the sponsor\'s intent, SB 808 is more likely to create an expanded market for a rather novel project in the gun industry so far. What exactly does this mean? I remember being AR- This is a novel project in the California gun market. Then robberty. Roos has put it on the path to becoming America\'s most popular gun. Billions of dollars in industry have paid a lot of taxes to BATFE. You know, be careful with what you want. Governor Brown\'s competent legislative analysis team should think about these things and then put it on the record on whether to sign or not, because this year\'s legislature is \"going too far \".