NATIONAL
NO-GUNS REGISTRY:
ONE-STOP BACKGROUND-CHECK
SYNOPSIS:
The traditional method of making a background-check
involved looking for names on several different lists,
which were assembled by different agencies of government
for a wide variety of reasons.
In the age of very fast computers,
it should be possible to gather all of the information
into one very secure computer,
which can be consulted by a wide variety of law-enforcement agencies
using safe passwords and careful authorization.
OUTLINE:
1. EXISTING LISTS OF PERSONS PROHIBITED FROM OWNING GUNS.
2. CORRECT IDENTIFICATION OF THE PERSON BEING CHECKED.
3. REASONS FOR BEING ON THE NO-GUNS LIST.
4. METHODS OF BEING REMOVED FROM THE NO-GUNS LIST.
5. RECOGNIZING GUN PERMITS AND LICENSES
BY STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
6. INTEGRATING THE NO-GUNS LIST WITH DIRECTORY USA.
7. EVERYDAY POLICE USE OF THE NO-GUNS LIST.
RESULT:
If
this essay carries the day, then everyone in positions
to make the National No-Guns Registry a reality
will take the necessary steps within his or her power
to move closer to having a comprehensive list
of all persons in the USA who should not have guns.
NATIONAL
NO-GUNS REGISTRY:
ONE-STOP
BACKGROUND-CHECK
by James Leonard Park
The United States of American could create the first in-the-world
National No-Guns Registry,
which would be a computerized list of all persons living in the USA
who have lost the right
to own or possess firearms,
either temporarily or permanently.
This No-Guns Registry will list about one million
people.
The total population of the USA is about 330 million people.
So the total number of people prohibited from possessing guns
would be about 1/3 of 1% of all people living in America.
Only the most dangerous persons will be included,
with special emphasis on those persons
who have already proven themselves unfit to own or possess
guns.
1. EXISTING LISTS OF PERSONS
PROHIBITED FROM OWNING GUNS.
{this section not yet written.
Perhaps someone knows of the list of lists that are now consulted
for background checks.}
2.
CORRECT IDENTIFICATION OF THE PERSON BEING CHECKED.
Any no-guns list will only be as good as the data it
contains.
First, there must be fool-proof ways of identifying the person
who is being checked for the right to possess guns.
Name and address and other identifying details must
be included,
to make certain that this person will not be confused with anyone else.
The easiest way beyond the name and address
would be a recent picture
of the person being registered.
Because people can easily make up fake names and
addresses,
the Files of the National No-Guns Registry
must make certain that each person with a File is a specific human
being,
who really is the individual corresponding to the data in that File.
In many cases, this will require creating a new File
for that person.
The mere ABSENCE of a name from the No-Guns List
should not be taken as permission to possess guns.
The ultimate solution to the problem of missing
names
would be a comprehensive Directory of all persons living in the
USA.
Once Directory
USA has been established,
then any individual being checked will already be listed.
And the No-Guns List will be transferred to Directory USA.
But in the meantime, while the national directory is
being created,
newly-registered persons will have their fingerprints taken,
be photographed, and have all
other identifying details recorded.
Best efforts will be made to discover if this person
is already listed on any existing guns-prohibited list.
If not, the National No-Guns Registry
will remain open for any such discovery in the future.
Any person who should not have a gun
will remain on the No-Guns Registry
with the notation that gun-possession
is prohibited.
If this individual is already registered or
licensed to own a gun
by any state or local agency of government,
including local police departments, county sheriffs, or state police,
then that fact will also be included in the File for that person.
Obviously, any changes in such authorizations by local agencies
will be immediately communicated to the National No-Guns Registry.
3.
REASONS FOR BEING ON THE NO-GUNS LIST.
A. EX-CONVICTS MAY NOT
POSSESS GUNS.
One of the most likely ways to be prohibited from
possessing guns
is a conviction for
any crime that includes in the sentence
a prohibition of ever possessing guns again.
And because of the creation of the No-Guns
List,
lawmakers will be more careful about specifying gun-rights
after release from prison.
After convicts have completed their terms in prison,
they will have been better identified
than many other people on the No-Guns List.
Their pictures, fingerprints, biometric data, etc.
will all be well recorded from their time in the correction system.
The terms of parole might include a provision
of a certain number of years with no further convictions
before this ex-convict could be permitted to possess a gun once again.
For example, we might prohibit the convicted criminal
from ever owning or possessing a gun
(or being in a vehicle or dwelling with a gun owned by someone else)
for a period of ten years after release from prison.
This period of 'going straight' might include
10 years of employment in a legitimate occupation
as proof that the ex-convict has really abandoned the criminal
life-style.
Losing the right to possess a gun
might be one of the most long-lasting results of a criminal conviction.
If the former life-style almost required possessing a gun,
then the felon might have to take
up a new way of life
that does not require owning or possessing guns.
Losing the right to own or possess guns
as the result of a criminal conviction
will also result in the requirement to change companions after prison.
Usually parole already requires no associations with criminals.
Thus, having no guns would reinforce this change of life-style after
jail.
The police would need no further probable cause
for searching for firearms in a vehicle or dwelling unit
than the fact that this person is listed by the National No-Guns
Registry.
B. VIOLENT DOMESTIC
ABUSERS MAY NOT POSSESS GUNS.
Domestic abuse is usually tried as a violation of
state laws.
Thus different standards might be used
for trying and possibly convicting
someone who might have abused a domestic partner.
The National No-Guns Registry
will examine the domestic-abuse statutes of each state
to see which ones are specific enough about the kinds of abuse
to be used as a standard for denial of gun-possession.
Was a gun used (or was a threat made with a gun)
in any part of the behavior under review?
Does the victim of the abuse
know of any guns in the possession of the abuser?
What level of danger-from-guns should be required
in order to ban the perpetrator from possessing guns in the future?
Should this gun-ban last for the perpetrator's whole life?
Or should there be some time-limit on this part of the punishment?
Sometimes police officers have been convicted of
domestic abuse.
They also should lose the right to possess firearms,
even if their former occupation included carrying guns.
Some might have to find other kinds of work.
And some might seek employment within the police department
that will allow them to keep
their badges but not their guns.
Could they become civilian (unarmed) employees of law-enforcement?
And there might also be some time-limit
for keeping even ex-police-officers on the No-Guns List.
After a certain number of years without further domestic abuse,
the officer might be permitted once again to carry a deadly weapon.
C. SUSPECTED TERRORISTS
MAY NOT POSSESS GUNS.
Being on a watch-list as a possible terror suspect
will be one of the more controversial reasons
for being put on the National No-Guns Registry.
No-fly
lists already identify individuals
who are considered too dangerous to be permitted to get on airplanes.
If they have already lost the right to fly,
would it be reasonable to take away the right to possess
guns?
Probably the same standards could be used
for putting individuals on both lists.
And the same rights of appeal
could be used
in order to be removed from either list.
At present the FBI has about 1,000 open cases
of persons under suspicion for having terrorist connections.
As long as such cases remain open,
it would not be unreasonable to keep these individuals
from flying on airplanes or from possessing guns.
When we think of these two rights together
—the
right to possess firearms and the right to fly on airplanes—
we note that the USA has been more casual about the right-to-fly
than about the right-to-bear-arms.
Being put on the no-fly list has not been subject to the same critique
as the right-to-bear-arms.
Is this because airplanes are not mentioned in the Constitution?
There has been little or no public debate
about how one gets on a no-fly list
—or
how to be removed from such a list.
Congressional attempts to convert the no-fly list
to a no-guns list
have failed for the reasons mentioned:
Mere suspicion of being sympathetic to terrorism
can get someone added to the no-fly list.
And the USA already has several hundred thousand
individuals on lists of people who are not permitted
to buy tickets or to fly on commercial airliners.
And there are no established ways of having one's
name
removed from the no-fly list.
Any no-guns list would only be valid
if the legislation creating it permits some reasonable methods
for appealing being listed as a person not permitted to own a gun.
In other words, the "due process of law" would apply to gun-ownership.
No one would lose the right to own a gun
without due process of law.
And, as said above, there should be reasonable procedures
for having one's gun-rights restored
if and when the original reasons for the prohibition disappear.
D. POTENTIAL MASS-MURDERERS MAY NOT
POSSESS GUNS.
Every year there are more examples of angry young
men
going on rampages of killing random people in public places.
Sometimes there were warning signs beforehand.
And in retrospect, we can all say that these murderers
should never have been permitted to have guns.
As we better understand the thinking behind mass
killings,
we will be able to expand our methods
of putting people onto the National No-Guns Registry.
And every time there is a new such case of mass
murder,
we can ask why this individual (or these individuals)
were not already on
the National No-Guns Registry.
Pre-emptive registration will be one of the most
difficult elements
of the National No-Guns Registry.
But as more massacres are prevented,
the public will come to trust the methods
for putting potential mass-killers onto the list
as a way to protect the public.
4.
METHODS OF BEING REMOVED FROM THE NO-GUNS LIST.
Because the United States of American
is based on the rule of LAW rather than control by a RULING CLASS,
there must be specific methods by which persons
incorrectly included on the No-Guns List
can have themselves removed
and their right-to-bear-arms restored.
One strong form of evidence would be
that this individual has been issued a license or permit to own a gun
by some local or state agency that issues such licenses or permits.
If some other level of government
has found that this individual has a valid right to own a gun
and has been properly trained in its use,
then the reasons for prohibiting this individual from possessing guns
will have to be more powerful than the reasons used in most cases.
Mistaken
identify will be an easy reason for being removed:
If the person who was correctly put on the No-Guns List
is not the person who has in fact been put on the List,
then that is reason for correctly identifying these two individuals
and affirming that one
has a right to possess guns
and the other does
not.
This kind of error has frequently occurred in no-fly
lists:
People with similar names (or even the same names)
have been prevented from flying
because someone else
was supposed to be kept off the plane.
The legislation establishing the National No-Guns
Registry
must contain provisions for
judicial appeal.
A neutral judge will hear all sides of the case
and then decide whether the individual
should remain on the No-Guns List or be removed.
Any such judicial determination will remain open for
future changes.
If this individual commits and is convicted of a crime
that includes the additional punishment of losing gun-rights,
then that person will be put onto the No-Guns List
for the appropriate period of time
—including
possibly the rest of his or her natural life.
5. RECOGNIZING GUN PERMITS AND
LICENSES
BY STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
The National No-Guns Registry must be carefully
coordinated
with all local, state, & national authorities
already giving licenses and permits to own and possess firearms.
Some of these agencies might be more careful than
others.
So their methods of checking applicants must be examined carefully.
This will probably include using test-buyers
who are listed in the National No-Guns Registry.
The dummy-buyers would have false identity documents, etc.
to see if the local agency notices the attempted fraud.
Agencies that fail a meaningful number of such tests
of their abilities
will not be counted as listing agencies
that can keep people off the National No-Guns List.
But most local police departments and sheriff
offices
do a good job of examining the identities of applicants for
gun-licenses
and checking the validity of their reasons for owning guns.
And when the National No-Guns Registry puts a name
on its List,
then that person must be removed
from all local lists authorizing gun-ownership.
Disagreements that have some substance
will be settled by the judicial appeal process in place
—precisely
to protect the legitimate right to possess firearms.
6.
INTEGRATING THE NO-GUNS LIST WITH DIRECTORY USA.
Directory USA will be a comprehensive list of every
man, woman, & child
living anywhere in the United States or its territories.
It will take several years for the National Identity Bureau
to create the complete list of everyone living in America,
but once everyone is listed,
then the facts about gun-permission and gun-ownership
should be included in each File.
Does this person have permission to own or possess guns?
Is this person the registered owner of specific weapons?
Has this person ever been on the No-Guns Registry?
With this ultimate goal in mind,
the No-Guns Registry itself should be created
in formats that can easily be integrated by the National Identity
Bureau
into the Identity File for each person.
Because of the immediate need for a no-gun list,
the National No-Guns Registry might emerge before Directory
USA.
And each time anyone is checked for gun-permission,
that will create a File in the No-Guns Registry,
even if that person is permitted to own a gun
or might even have a local license or permit for a gun.
Non-gun-owners will also be listed in both directories
whenever there was a background-check.
Thus the process of doing background-checks
will be one additional way to gather names, addresses, & pictures
for the National Identity Bureau.
Everyone who has ever been checked for gun-authorization
(no matter what the result of that check)
will automatically have a File created in Directory USA.
This record-keeping of background checks
will be a reversal of earlier provisions,
which required the destruction
of all records
if the individual checked was not prohibited from owning guns.
Such provisions were inserted in gun-control legislation
to please the gun-lobby,
which is no longer a valid reason for destroying information
about gun ownership and checking for the right-to-bear-arms.
It will be an advantage for gun-owners
to preserve past records of background checks:
If they have been cleared to purchase guns in the past,
there might be less reason to check very deeply
when they wish to buy more guns.
7.
EVERYDAY POLICE USE OF THE NO-GUNS LIST.
Once the National No-Guns Registry has been put
on-line,
then local police can use it in all routine stops on the street.
When any individual has been stopped for reasonable
cause,
then the police can ask for proper identification.
Knowing the name and face of the person being questioned,
it will be possible to check instantly to see if this person
is on the National No-Guns Registry.
Because there were good reasons for being put on
that list,
the police now have a valid reason for looking more deeply
into the pockets, purses, cars, & luggage
then in possession of the person stopped.
Discovering that this prohibited person does indeed
possess a gun
will be sufficient cause for an instant arrest and detention.
Any existing laws about guns should be expanded
to clarify that it is a crime for a person on the No-Guns List
to be in possession of any firearm.
And this law will have to
prohibit being with someone else
who has a gun, for instance being in a motor vehicle
where someone else possesses a gun.
Persons on the No-Guns Registry
must not be able to
claim that the gun found within reach
really belongs to someone else.
In general this will make the streets of America
much safer
because people who have previously been arrested, tried, &
convicted
will no longer feel so free about possessing guns,
even if they do continue to take part in some criminal activity.
They will know that being found with a gun
will instantly put them back into jail
—probably
for a longer term this time.
When police plan to visit any place of residence,
they can check in advance to see if anyone living there
is on the No-Guns List.
If so, this will be sufficient cause to search the whole premises
to see if any firearms are present.
Perhaps further clarification of laws might be needed
to say that someone on the National No-Guns Registry
may not live in any dwelling
unit with another person who has a gun.
Otherwise, persons prohibited from possessing guns would simply say
that the gun belongs to someone else in that dwelling unit.
This will lead to some loss of rights
for persons who have not been convinced of any crimes
—such
as the spouses or domestic partners of convicted criminals.
But this additional loss of the right-to-bear-arms
seems a tolerable limitation
because it is the only way to enforce the no-guns rule
for the person who has been correctly put on the No-Guns List.
Obvious exceptions to this
no-guns-under-the-same-roof rule would be:
guns possessed by prison guards while on duty,
guns possessed by police officers,
guns held by any others who are licensed to own gun
such as security
guards when on duty
performing their legitimate guarding activities.
Additional reasonable exceptions can be added to the legislation.
The National No-Guns Registry
will prevent about one million people in the USA from having guns.
This will dramatically reduce violence of all kinds committed with
guns.
And when any new crime is committed with a gun,
then (when caught) that criminal will have all guns removed
from his or her places of residence and from all his or her motor
vehicles.
Putting more people on the No-Guns List will be a daily activity.
And with each person
disarmed, America will be that much safer.
And if America decides to prohibit gun-possession
for anyone who has served time in jail or prison,
then the number of people on the National No-Guns Registry
might rise to about two million individuals.
AUTHOR:
James Leonard Park is an advocate of reasonable
gun-control.
His views are entirely his own
and do not reflect the policy of any other individuals or groups.
Much more will be learned about him on his personal website:
James
Leonard Park—Free
Library
How has this essay changed
your thinking?
Did you previously believe that it would be impossible
to create a comprehensive list of everyone in America
who should not own or possess guns?
Would you now support the National No-Guns Registry?
Would such a list help to save lives in the USA?
How soon will all background-check information
be collected into one easy-to-access computer file?
Created
June 17, 2016; Revised 6-23-2016; 6-24-2016; 8-4-2016; 8-9-2016;
r 1-10-2017; 10-2-2017; 2-16-2018; 1-9-2018; 2-8-2019; 8-5-2021
Other Essays on Gun-Control:
Six
Ways to
Diminish Gun Violence
Universal
Gun
Registration:
Register all Gun-Owners and their Guns