Gun owners, would you be happy with this type of change instead of an all out gun ban?

I'm not fundamentally opposed.

I have seen a few scary things at gun ranges with people not handling weapons safely - clearly there is a segment of the population that could use more training.

The specifics of how this sort of change is implemented might make it unworkable, particularly if you start thinking about insurance: typically firearms are covered under homeowners'.

What I would rather see is a way of addressing a systemic problem -- guns are a tool here, not a cause.

For example, in Connecticut a guy shows up and kills people. More people show up and restore order, evacuate people treat the injured, etc. The both had guns, and in this specific case very similar ones. Clearly the guns themselves are not the problem.

Why didn't all the gun laws in Connecticut make any difference?

They have some of the most restrictive laws in the United States including an assault weapon ban that carries a manditory minimum one year sentence.

There is no "gun show" loophole as private sales are treated the same as gun store sales.

You need approval by your local chief of police and a course in gun safety to buy a gun. You also need to be fingerprinted and undergo both a state and federal background check. Then there is a fourteen day waiting period.

Why is the anti-gun lobby pushing for all the same laws in the rest of the country when they obviously didn't work in Connecticut?

Here in TEXAS that sounds already like our concealed carry requirements.

More gun laws are not the answer. Criminals don't care about breaking laws.

If a guy is going to comment robbery and murder do you think he gives a rat's but about if his gun was purchased legally? Give me a break.

Some of it doesn't make any sense, but most of it ain't too bad. As has been pointed out, it won't prevent criminals from getting them. Mainly it will prevent the stupid from having them, which in my mind is a plus.

BUT, in exchange for proving how well trained and sound of mind I am, I want the right to carry it with me (concealed) anywhere I go, in any state.

Sounds reasonable.

Hated Crakker: You're a part of a well-regulated militia?

sounds like infringement to me. I'm sure that was addressed somewhere....now where was that?

hold on....oh yeah;

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

how would that help any? the mom would have been able to pass everything on that checklist, and still obtain all her guns. and the son would have still done the same thing

As completely reasonable as this is, the NRA will fight it every step of the way.

Now, if we can just get the criminals to agree.