I got an article from the NRA-ILA today discussing "voluntary waiver" bills that will allow individuals to put themselves on a list to prevent themselves from obtaining, owning, or using firearms. It discusses bills in California and Washington State that will allow someone to voluntarily put themselves on a list that prevents them from being sold a firearm, with various strictures and conditions to get themselves off of said list. For some people, that might actually not be a bad idea. Of course, the obvious ones would be those individuals who might be inclined due to psychological reasons to be more at risk for suicide or harming others; that would be a viable reason to have a list like this that someone could choose to put themselves on, by way of taking responsibility for their behavior and being preemptive.
The other big reason for voluntarily waiving your right to obtain a firearm would, I think, be a demonstration of an individual's principles, specifically if they are anti-firearm advocates or supporters. I really think that it would be something that such folk should strongly consider, especially since many such individuals have issues with projection of their own tendencies and impulse control problems on others. In such cases, it would allow such people the comfort and peace of mind that at the very least THEY wouldn't ever be a threat with a firearm to someone if for whatever reason they lost their cool. It's "common sense" after all, right?
What is more important, is something that I've posted previously, that that politicians who advocate for gun control measures should also be held to their principles and swear off the use of firearms, either by themselves or taxpayer funded security. I called it the Illinois State Public Servant Anti-Gun Violence Solidarity Program, and I will repost the text of the measure at the end of this topic post.
I really think that it would be a fantastic endeavor to have a concerted effort by as many people as possible to send this to their elected representatives, Republican, Democrat, third party, independent, what have you, and advocate as strongly as possible that such a measure be adopted for the state of Illinois. Actually, I think that it should also be adapted as a Federal proposed legislation and apply to Federal government representatives and officers, as well.
I am quite serious about this, and I will gladly work with drafting final versions for to send to both state and Federal representatives. As well, I would eagerly write up press releases and such to send out to various media outlets, along with lists of the elected representatives that are being sent the proposed legislation and asked to sponsor it. Especially highlighted will be legislators who advocate for gun control measures, and both we and the media can be able to publicize their support of this measure by leading by example, swearing off the use of firearms as a demonstration of their principles and commitment to ending the cycle of gun violence, which necessarily begins with the people who advocate gun control. I mean, doesn't common sense and reason dictate that?
We have seen how effective our collective efforts can be with getting our elected representatives to pass legislation like the concealed carry act, so why not this? I can't imagine that if something like this proposal comes up as an actual bill that we couldn't also muster thousands of witness slips and even written testimony advocating for it and praising our elected representatives for being so committed to the principles behind preventing gun violence.
So, let's do this! I think it would be a very eye-opening experience where all sides of the argument have no choice but to agree that our politicians should lead by example on this very important subject.
Proposed: A bill to submit to Illinois state legislators for encouraging consistency and accountability in politicians' public policy and personal conduct regarding anti-gun violence legislation. I am going to title the bill as written in the heading of this post.
What the bill will do is codify behaviors of all levels of politicians and public servants in Illinois as those relate to their support of anti-gun violence policy and legislation. For instance, anyone holding public office of any kind who introduces, sponsors, votes for, or publicly endorses any sort of legislation, ordinance, or policy (official or unofficial) will be required to willingly abide by the following conditions:
1. Be ineligible for the use of personal armed security paid for by taxpayer funds.
2. Be ineligible to personally participate in the state's FOID or FCCL programs.
3. Be required to post gun-free zone signage at their legislative offices.
4. Be required to post gun-free zone signage at any personal place of business.
5. Be required to post gun-free zone signage on any personal property they own as exclusive or as primary owner.
6. Be enjoined from privately employing armed security at any place of business or personal property that they have any interest or ownership, no matter how small.
7. Be required to register on a publicly available database as a supporter and participant in the to-be-created Illinois State Public Servant Anti-Gun Violence Solidarity Program, to set an example for constituents with regard to their public commitment to anti-gun violence.
8. Be required to inform the public on any official office-holder websites or electronic media of their participation in the above-mentioned anti-gun violence public policy notification program.
They would be acting in a manner consistent with their public position on the subject of gun ownership and anti-gun violence advocacy, so their public support would be taken as a willing choice to be unable to participate in a program that they are on record as expressing a need for.
This wouldn't be an infringement of the targeted civil servant/politician's rights, but rather since these individuals are of the persuasion that the free access and use of firearms are not a benefit to society or those who want to own/use them, it is legislation to ensure that they are consistent in their public policy with their behaviors and to allow them to make sure that they demonstrate solidarity that is consistent with what their legislative and policy decisions support for their constituents. Those who support anti-gun violence legislation should be helped to uphold those principles so that they provide shining examples of those principles to those they are publicly serving.
Who I expect on the pro-firearm ownership side to support this are legislators and public servants who value and support integrity among their peers. I expect anti-gun violence advocating legislators and public servants to support this to not only reduce the use and ownership of firearms on their own behalf, but to also lead by that example and in doing so prove that a reduction of the presence of firearms is of benefit to them and their constituents.
Essentially, it's an "opt out" initiative that legislators and public servants "qualify" for by their actions and public policies. The precedent that it sets is that they aren't being required to do anything other than what their public policy positions declare that they believe to be the right thing to do, and which they believe will create the most benefit.
What might also be included in the text of the bill is a mechanism by which they can request a reinstatement of being able to benefit from the possession, carry, and application of firearms, similar to how someone can use the mental health appeal to be once again allowed to get a FOID and such.
So, maybe the next point should be:
9. Individuals who qualify for the Illinois State Public Servant Anti-Gun Violence Solidarity Program can petition for removal from the program and opt in for the benefits of firearm ownership, carry, usage by paying the standard fee for the applicable FOID and/or CCL licenses from the State of Illinois, paying a reinstatement fee of $200 to cover administrative costs for removal from the Illinois State Public Servant Anti-Gun Violence Solidarity Program database and associated records, and completing a firearm familiarization and safety course of 16 hours costing $150. Alternately, upon leaving publicly held office, individuals who have qualified for the Illinois State Public Servant Anti-Gun Violence Solidarity Program will automatically be removed from the database with a requisite $200 fee being withheld from their final taxpayer-provided paycheck to cover the above-described administrative costs.
I think that's fair and equitable, given that their public policy decisions should only qualify them for this program while they are serving in a public capacity.
Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 13 February 2018 - 04:21 PM.
Corrected Topic Title