196

I'm kinda like you, but I believe it should be tiered. Kinda like how someone with a normal driver's license can't (or at least, isn't supposed to) drive a big rig. If you want a belt-fed machine gun then you gotta get the license that lets you own a belt-fed machine gun, but the requirements are gonna be a lot heavier than the license that lets you own a typical break-action double-barrel shotgun.

I also think there need to be legal requirements for storage, a legal definition for what constitutes a gun box/safe (because many containers advertised for "gun storage" are extremely flimsy), and automatic charges against the gun owner in the event their firearm is used in a crime. It's your job to make sure your kid doesn't get your gun and shoot a school. If it happens, your ass is on the line and you'd better have a really good excuse, like your kid knocked you out, tied you up, got a blowtorch and cut through your safe.

Why not just restrict magazines and call it a day? Because my thought is that proper gun control can allow the enthusiasts still have fun with their brownings, AKs and tommyguns while still ensuring the weapons don't fall into the wrong hands. I'm certain it's possible to walk that line, I've heard Finland already has a similar system in place, where you have to be a registered collector or museum to own anything other than a basic hunting rifle (which, iirc, requires a license to begin with), yet it seems like Finland doesn't have anywhere near the same problems as the US.