You can drop the weapons catalog requirement that Israel has, and you would still add significant guardrails against misuse.
Even without Israeli style gun cataloging, the rest of the Israeli gun control requirements should be able to pass the "objective criteria" test from Buren while also reducing the risk of misuse by tying license ownership with criterias such as mental health, training, and access to safe storage.
Oh, I entirely agree. It just seems absolutely nuts that the US government (or rather the state governments, because ultimately they'd be dealing with it) cannot attribute a gun to a purchase because they've specifically made it illegal to do so.
When you're dealing with that mindset, no wonder gun control measures as unremarkable as mandatory safes and training are anathema.
The basic problem is that a list of guns is the holy grail of the gun banners. Is it any wonder that the pro gun crowd is afraid of it?
And the reality is that legally purchased guns account for a tiny fraction of gun crime. Stopping every gun purchase by even a would-be criminal is going to do very little except to the suicide rate.
And the "unremarkable" measures often have nasty hidden details. Mandatory safes? Just exactly what do you count as a safe? Doesn't take much of a requirement on a safe before it becomes something that can only rest upon a proper foundation--thus completely prohibiting many apartment and condo dwellers. Put a bolt-down requirement on it and you have disallowed all renters.
Training is looking at it backwards. We have a perfect model of how it should be handled: just look at driving. You pass a test of knowledge and a test of proficiency.
The federal statute only prohibits the AG from promulgating a rule that would require the feds or the states from maintaining a registry. While unconstitutional, many states already have one such as CA, CT, DC, HI, MD, MI, NJ, NY.
As a former legislative assistant during the Aurora shooting, it's because gun abolitionists and gun fundamentalists are extremely organized interest groups, and risk your chances during a primary.
There is a silent majority that feels the 2nd amendment and gun control can co-exist, but they are not represented by any type of organized lobbying group so that voice is not heard.
It's also become a culture war signifier, so if you are a D who is fine with controlled gun ownership instead of abolition, you will face severe lobbying from Everytown, and if you are a R who is fine with controlled permitting instead of maximalist shall-issue licensing, you will face severe lobbying from the NRA.
And herein lies a clear demonstration of the problem.
A firing pin is designed to slam metal into metal. Do you really think a detailed pattern on the end of the pin will not soon become too blurred to be useful? Even if somebody doesn't take an abrasive to it.
And it's not like a firing pin is somehow unique to the gun. They are wear items, in time they get replaced. And you have to be able to take the moving parts of a gun apart for cleaning, there's no way to ensure a given pin doesn't get swapped to another gun.
And this once again comes back to at best only being useful in the cases where the gun was legally purchased, which is a very small part of gun crime.
Testing has demonstrated that microstamping remains readable on casings after thousands of rounds with a SEM.
Moreover, even if it wasn't, who cares? It would still be an improvement over what currently exists (unintentional microstamping) given a fair number of guns that are used in crimes have barely been fired.
Nor does it matter if someone switches the firing pin since criminals aren't likely to do that. They don't even file down serial numbers most of the time.
The fact that it isn't absolutely 100% perfect doesn't mean it isn't better.
This still comes down to the basic problem that the vast majority of crime guns were not obtained by legal means. Yes, criminals don't file down serial numbers because there's no reason to as the serial number isn't connected to them.
While the vast majority aren't obtained through legal means, a surprisingly large percentage can be connected to the individual who committed a crime with one.
According to the BJS, of those in prison in 2016 who had a firearm during the offense they were in for, 7.5% purchased it legally under their own name and 25.3% obtained it from family or friends. An older 2004 Survey of Inmates of State Correctional Facilities showed 12% obtaining them from retail and 41% from family/friends.
Criminals don't file down serial numbers not because there's no reason, but criminals don't think they'll be caught. Most simply don't think very far ahead.
Micro-stamping isn't perfect, but again, it is better. If it can lead to arrests in even a small percentage of the thousands of unsolved murders ever year, it would be a huge win with little downside.
I don't believe the study asked how many family/friends obtained the firearm legally. It seems unlikely that it would be 0%.
Overall, 6.7% of prisoners reported gone through a background check when obtaining a firearm at a retail source (that's not 6.7% of the 7.5%, but rather 6.7% of all prisoners).
A "retail source" includes the 7.5% number above which is just licensed firearm dealers, but there were other retail sources I didn't include (pawn shops: 1.6, flea markets: 0.4%, gun shows: 0.8%).
Of course, the background checks doesn't really matter given that those 7.5% reported giving their actual name to a licensed firearm dealer which is what one would need to track them down.
You should reread Bruen there is not an "Objective Criteria" test for gun laws. There is a text history and tradition one which ownership licensing completely fails.
https://www.thetrace.org/2016/08/atf-non-searchable-database...