Yes, We Can Do Something (Part 2)

Continuing the conversation on things we could do about mass shootings, regardless of where they occur, based on years of discussion with friends and family, and information we've shared from our research on the topic. 

As a reminder, a couple of over-arching principles.

We need to change how we talk about the goal. It is not to prevent mass shootings from happening. The goal is to make it harder for someone to commit mass carnage, and to reduce the number of deaths should such an event occur. 

And, gun safety legislation must stand alone, with no unrelated amendments or attachments. Any attempts to attach anything that is not directly related to gun safety shall be considered a bribe. 

Part 1 addressed gun and ammunition purchases, background checks and data reporting. It also includes the definition of 'gun' we're using for this series.

Here are recommendations related to penalties for crimes involving guns and background checks. 

• Ensure a speedy trial - and sentencing - for mass shooting defendants. The person who was convicted of the Colorado movie theater shooting was sentenced just over three years after killing twelve and injuring dozens more. This is an absurdly - and unacceptable - delay in justice being served.

• Require mandatory prosecution for using a gun in the commission of a crime. Anyone convicted of using a gun in a crime will face a mandatory minimum sentence. 

• Require mandatory prosecution for attempting to purchase a gun when a failed background check is certain. Anyone who knows they will fail a background check for a legal gun purchase, but attempts to do so anyway, will face a mandatory minimum sentence upon conviction. Credit is not given for trying to do the right thing.

• Require mandatory prosecution for attempting to bypass a background check, in any manner, with a mandatory minimum sentence upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution for providing false or incomplete information during the background check process. A mandatory minimum sentence will be served upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution for holding or hiding a gun in order to protect another person from being charged with a gun crime. A mandatory minimum sentence will be served upon conviction.

• Require mandatory prosecution when guns are found improperly secured or transported, such as during TSA checks, law enforcement stops, etc., with a mandatory minimum sentence to be served upon conviction.

• Categorize all crimes in which a gun was used as 'non-bailable' federal offenses, and carve gun legislation out of the filibuster. These charges cannot be plea-bargained; and sentences upon conviction must be served consecutively with any other sentences, and must be served in full.

I can picture someone looking at these recommendations and wondering what's the tie-in to making it harder for someone to commit a mass shooting, and I get that - but remember, we are trying to pull together, in an 'all of the above' type of response, to get something accomplished.

One of the many arguments from the 'we don't need to do anything about guns' crowd is that we already have plenty of gun laws on the books, and they need to be enforced. They're right, at least about having them on the books; I don't know about the enforcement part, but I'll accept at face value that the folks who draw this line in the sand know what they're talking about.

Elevating gun crimes from a state-level felony to a federal-level felony will add some teeth (at least in theory) and (again, at least in theory) limit the possibility that some gang leader, organized crime guy, gun runner, a drug dealer or other criminal mastermind will be able to buy themselves some cops, prosecutors and/or judges who can make things disappear. 

It also put the onus on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to get more involved, and stay more involved, in helping trace, track and interdict illegal guns, gun runners and the like. 

And, using federal funds for this effort makes sense, as it's hard for states and municipalities to focus on this at the same time they're focusing on identifying and mitigating the social, economic, medical, psychological, cultural, and educational issues that play so heavily into gun crimes, whether we're talking about mass shootings or, as the politicians like to say, "just another weekend in Chicago."

And, the final benefit of pushing this all up to the federal level? US Senators and members of the House can no longer push responsibility to someone else. The policy-making, the regulations, the funding -- it all sits squarely in their laps.

And, in my eyes, that's the only way many of them will do anything other than offer up thoughts and prayers.