(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
 . . . . . . . . . .



Missing Link for Gun Control ? [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']

Date: 2023-04-28  

Six Pack of Flight Indicators

Let’s start with this premise. If you are a private pilot and can fly a single engine prop plane it would probably be a bad idea to try and fly a Boeing 777. Oh sure, you would recognize some of the instruments. The so called “six pack” of basic instruments: airspeed indicator, attitude indicator, altimeter, turn coordinator, heading indicator and vertical speed indicator. But most current airliners and many general aviation aircraft now use a “Glass Cockpit.” Meaning the instruments are on flat screen displays. So in addition to adjusting to the speed and handling characteristic of a B-777 versus a light plane, there is a maze of other indicators to deal with. Exhaust Gas Temperature for example. If the EGT warning sounds, what would you do? What does it mean?

Or step down a notch and put our private pilot into a Regional Jet. You know, one of those flying cigar tubes used by feeder airlines. A CRJ -700 for example. They only seat about sixty, cruise at around 450 knots and fly up to 40,000 feet. How hard can it be? Even if our pilot could get the CRJ off the ground, let’s see about landing. A CRJ700 landing speed is about 125 to 130 knots (a little over 140 mph). Things happen way faster close to the ground at 125 knots verses the 60 knots landing speed for a C-172.

Boeing 777 Cockpit.

There are several levels of pilot licensing for a reason. Likewise, a one size fits all gun permit doesn't mean a person who uses a pistol can handle a magazine fed, semi-automatic, gas-operated shoulder weapon.



See where I’m going with this? Every night on any given news report on gun safety and mass shootings there is a graphic showing suggested solutions to the problem. The talking head experts explain “Red flag” laws, advocate for smaller magazines and gun buyback programs. A recent PBS poll listed eight items that American’s might support to reduce mass shootings. In all the polling questions and all the panel discussions one thing remains missing: TRAINING.

The example of a private pilot trying to fly a commercial jet sounds preposterous to most reasonable people. “That’s ridiculous,” they say. “Of course you would need more training to fly a bigger more complex plane.” That’s right. You need jet training, multi-engine training, instrument training and more. So if that feels obvious. Why isn’t the notion of requiring more training to obtain a permit for a larger more powerful weapon? First thing I asked an acquaintance who was so excited with his AR-15 purchase was: “What’s the first step in clearing a malfunction with an AR-15?” He stammered a bit trying to answer. Clearly he did not know. Now he is a danger to himself and anyone on the range.

Create a tiered system of permits. Start with a baseline hand gun. Let’s say a six round revolver or a magazine fed hand gun with no more than nine rounds. Make a special training requirement / endorsement for handguns with muzzle velocity over 1,300 fps (think Dirty Harry) or larger magazines. For long guns start with target firearms. Typically target shooting with a .22 caliber round and a muzzle velocity less than 1,300 fps.

Next set up another for hunting long guns. Specify shotguns and hunting rifles with a magazine limit of nine rounds and a muzzle velocity of less than 2,500 feet per second and less than 1,600 fps at 200 yards. Over that? More training.

Continue from there and create other permit / licensing tiers as appropriate. This is only a rough idea.

Oh. Muzzle velocity? Another factor the talking heads won’t bring up. I once watched a video of a citizen in a public meeting disingenuously trying to explain that an AR-15 round at .223 caliber is only a little bigger than a .22 round. Wait. What? The diameter of the round has nothing to do with how much power is behind it. He argued that the AR-15 was not a "military grade" weapon because it was not fully automatic.

A .22 long has a muzzle velocity of 1,400 to 1,800 feet per second. A .223 round fired from an AR-15 with a 16 inch barrel has a muzzle velocity of 2,784 feet per second. The ballistic damage from that in a classroom is a hell of a lot more than a .22 long. Clearly the man never had a close personal relationship with an AR15, an M4 or an M16A1.

.22 long next to a .223 round

Legislation to require limits on muzzle velocity is highly unlikely. Limits on magazine size is also unlikely in the short term. But the establishment of permit requirements for weapons with higher than the basic licensing velocity and magazine capacity is reachable.



Gun owners at all levels should go through a training program for each class of weapons. Federal legislation might specify the requirements for training and the agencies certified by each state to offer the training. Who would do the training? Could be local police, YMCA, colleges, gun ranges. Might even be through an NRA training program. Most gun owners have seen too many close calls with careless handling or poor range discipline. Many NRA members might get behind such a plan. Might even reduce the mass shootings that give gun owners a bad name.

Training ? What would training do? A couple of things. Increase safe handling. Heighten understanding of the capabilities of each weapon class. It would require a potential mass shooter to invest more time and commitment to obtain a license for his weapon of choice.

Importantly, training gives the trainers a chance to look at the potential owner . An early stage in a “Red Flag” program. FAA approved flight schools for commercial certificates do this already to screen for potential hijackers or unstable students.

Would assault weapons still be obtained illegally? Yes. Would it stop someone from stealing a gun to go shoot up a night club? No. And neither would any of the other proposals for more mental health services, limits on magazine capacity, waiting periods or background checks at gun shows.

Does training infringe on the Second Amendment? Assuming one reads the whole thing? No. I argue that training falls under “well regulated.” Is this a call to take guns away? No. Is it a call for a national data base of gun owners? No.

Will this idea ever get serious discussion by gun control / safety advocates?

On the other hand; I could be wrong.

###

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/4/28/2166453/-Missing-Link-for-Gun-Control

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/