OPINION: My Critique of Michael Moore’s “28th Amendment”
Earlier this week, I wrote a little about filmmaker Michael Moore’s proposed 28th Amendment. I noted that he’s crazy and gave a summary of his proposal.
Here is my summary in case you missed it:
Section 1: People have the right to be kept safe from gun violence and this Amendment repeals and replaces the 2nd Amendment.
Section 2: Congress will make a mandatory gun registration database. You can only have guns if you are a licensed hunter, licensed for shooting ranges, or can demonstrate that you need it for personal protection (but they’ll probably refuse to grant you permission).
You will have a thorough background check and they’ll interview your family, friends, co-workers, and neighbors to make sure that they all approve of you having one. You also have to wait a month.
Section 3: If you are approved, you must take a yearly firearm safety class and written test to keep it.
Section 4: Firearm license renewal is on a yearly basis and you must be at least 25 years old.
Section 5: Congress decides what guns are permitted, but all automatic and semi-automatic weapons are banned. Guns and magazines that hold more than 6 bullets are also banned. Plastic guns or guns made with homemade equipment are also banned.
Section 6: Congress regulates the entire gun industry and all that comes with it including gun locks, sights, and sales.
Section 7: Trained police will undergo continual monitoring and any racist or violent behavior will result in the officer being dismissed.
Section 8: You aren’t grandfathered into this Amendment. You have one month to get things in order and turn in your illegal guns.
But now, I want to take a moment to actually critique his proposal.
Section 1: He claims that we have a right to be kept safe from gun violence. This is false. When your “rights” depend on somebody else actively doing something in order for you to benefit, then it’s not a right, it’s a privilege.
Section 2: This gun registration will just create more hunters and more target shooters. This won’t actually stop people from owning guns, it just gives them more paperwork to do.
Your ability to acquire a firearm being dependent upon people who you don’t know and people who might not like you, such as ex-spouses, should not be the criteria that determines whether or not you’re fit to receive a firearm.
On the other hand, I am supportive of a mental health check. I’m not sure how that would be conducted, but I don’t think I’d be opposed to evaluating mental health.
Section 3: I’m all for a firearm safety course. I think far too many people don’t know how to use firearms properly and safely. It’s a bit of an inconvenience to do it yearly, but if it could add a little more safety to the public by re-evaluating people to make sure they’re still mentally stable, I might could get on board with that, because people aren’t mentally unstable until they are.
Section 4: I don’t know why the age of 25 was chosen. It seems a bit arbitrary, but I would be inclined to look at what age most mass shooters are and if it’s normally in the early 20s and lower, then I might could get on board with this as well. I know it may not be a popular opinion, but it’s not the worst. The downside would be that you can’t defend yourself and your property with a firearm until you’re 25 years old which puts younger people at a disadvantage.
Section 5: I’m not fond of the government deciding what we can have and can’t have. Banning homemade guns is not going to work because people are still just going to do it.
Section 6: This one is just stupid. How is it going to be determined that a weapon going to be designated as one which has the sole intention on premeditated elimination of human life? I mean, maybe you could put a hand grenade or a land mine in this category I guess.
Congress does not have the right to create future restrictions to an Amendment. That is only for the people of the United States to decide.
Section 7: I agree that police need more accountability.
Section 8: This is an impossible timeline. There is no way that a hundred million + gun owners will be able to do all of this in one month from the time the Amendment is ratified.